SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:#222;padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.sticky-sidebar{margin:auto;}@media (min-width: 980px){.main:has(.sticky-sidebar){overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.row:has(.sticky-sidebar){display:flex;overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.sticky-sidebar{position:-webkit-sticky;position:sticky;top:100px;transition:top .3s ease-in-out, position .3s ease-in-out;}}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
This extended window of opportunity gives Palestinian civil society at home and in exile, along with their allies, necessary time to reassert and gain support for their demands.
At the United Nations 77th Commemoration of the Nakba convened May 15 and 16 in New York, nothing was said about the upcoming Two-State Solution Conference planned at the U.N. from June 17-20, until, at the very end of the event, Riyad Mansour, the beleaguered permanent representative of the Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine lifted the shroud of avoidance by expressing support for the conference based on the framework laid out in France and Saudi Arabia's Two-State Solution Concept Note, intended to define the outcome of the conference. Nick Mottern, of the Weaponized Drone Ban Treaty Campaign, hearing his response, expressed apprehension that France and Saudi Arabia, the conveners of the conference, along with the Palestine Authority, were setting the Palestinian people up for "an ambush."
Also concerned that the Two-State Solution Conference would result in further concessions by the Fatah Party-led Palestinian leadership, 43 Palestinian civil society organizations issued a "Unified Call to Action" on June 13 demanding that the conference focus on 77 years of international law pertaining to the status and borders of Palestine, rather than a vague gathering at which the State of Palestine would not be even recognized.
Given the disastrous outcome of the Oslo Accords of 1993 and 1995, after which nearly half a million settlers flooded into the West Bank and East Jerusalem, there is trepidation that the Palestine Authority will walk away from the negotiations hoodwinked and empty-handed, with no resolution pertaining to the status of Jerusalem, right of return of refugees, or progress made in the payment of reparations as provided for by U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) Resolutions 181 (1947) and 194 (1948).
Moreover, what should be discerned is the viability of a Two-State Solution, given that Israel's settler colonial enterprise has rendered that possibility dead in the water.
On June 12, ahead of the conference planned for June 17-20—now postponed following Israel's unprovoked military attack on Iran—the Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy in Ramallah issued the clarion call reaffirming demands for a just and lawful resolution grounded in the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. French President Emmanuel Macron said that the conference was postponed due to the inability of the Palestinian Authority and Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to travel given the military escalation in the region. This extended window of opportunity gives Palestinian civil society at home and in exile, along with their allies, necessary time to reassert and gain support for their demands.
According to the Unified Call to Action:
The upcoming conference could serve as a turning point—but only if it is re-centered on its legal foundation: U.N. General Assembly Resolution ES-10/24, built on decades of existing international law obligations. This resolution welcomed the July 2024 International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion, which called on Israel to comply with international law, including ending its unlawful occupation, realizing the Palestinian people's rights to self-determination and return, and requiring third states to adopt concrete sanctions and accountability measures to uphold international law.
The Unified Call to Action implores all states, institution, and actors engaging with the Two-State Solution Conference to ground all solutions in the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people.
Within this context, the language of France and Saudi Arabia's Concept Note falls short in meeting Palestinian civil society demands. It refers to the conference as geared to implement "the" Two-State Solution, while actually framing negotiations as "a" Two-State Solution. This represents an unauthorized manipulation and flouting of international law pertaining to the established borders of the Occupied Palestinian Territories including East Jerusalem as enshrined in U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), and 2334 (2016).
Moreover, what should be discerned is the viability of a Two-State Solution, given that Israel's settler colonial enterprise has rendered that possibility dead in the water. Israel has usurped more than 80% of the historic land of Palestine; 21% of Israel is Palestinian; and thorny issues and U.N. Resolutions pertaining to the status of Jerusalem, the right of return of refugees, and reparations remain flouted by Israel and unaddressed for 77 years. In accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whether a two-state, one-state, or other configuration, the government(s) of the land between the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea must provide for the full human rights and dignity of all.
Further, the Concept Note is flawed pertaining to implementation, putting the onus of the conference's success or failure equally on the Palestinian Authority and Israel, where it states: "It is clear that the primary responsibility for solving the conflict lies with the parties." It continues, "The events of the last few years prove that without strong international resolve and involvement in ensuring they move towards the internationally recognized endgame, the conflict will escalate further and peace will be more elusive than ever." (Note: the words "conflict" and "endgame" are inappropriate in this context.) To state that the primary responsibility for solving the conflict lies with the parties, is to equate a battered woman as having the same power and agency as her brutal husband and his gang of weaponized thugs. If there is no peace in the home, she cannot be held responsible for that.
What is needed now, according to the Palestinian civil society organizations, is to "demand that the UNGA suspend Israel's membership for violating its membership conditions, including non-compliance with Resolution 194" of 1948. Israel is in flagrant violation of hundreds of U.N. General Assembly, Security Council, and Human Rights Council Resolutions, and the time has come for the GA to "support the mandate of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Israel, including by pressuring Israel to grant access to Palestine for independent investigations."
As stated in the demands of the Unified Call to Action, the conference should be based on UNGA Res. ES-10/23 of May 2024 pertaining to International Court of Justice advisory rulings, and UNGA Res. ES-10/24 of September 2024 calling for Israel to, within 12 months, completely withdraw its occupying forces from the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Res. ES-10/24 also opens the door for the possible invocation of Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter against Israel, which could lead to sanctions, suspension from the U.N., the creation of a U.N. peacekeeping mission to protect the Palestinians and ensure the flow of humanitarian aid, etc.
Furthermore, France and Saudi Arabia's Concept Note does not reference the genocide, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, crimes against humanity, starvation, etc. being suffered by the Palestinian people. It uses only generalized language such as, on Page 2: "Since the initial moments of the current wave of violence..." Also, on Page 2, Egypt and Qatar, along with the United States, are erroneously credited with having "a major role in negotiating a cease-fire in Gaza." Yet, on June 4, the U.S. used its veto power at the U.N. Security Council to block, for the fifth time, a resolution calling for a cease-fire.
At an emergency session of the U.N. General Assembly on June 12th, a resolution demanding an immediate, unconditional, and lasting cease-fire in Gaza was overwhelmingly adopted. Only 12 countries including the U.S. voted against it. Moreover, the few cease-fires that have occurred ended when the release of the designated number of hostages was secured. On June 11th, President Donald Trump slammed the Two-State Solution Conference warning of consequences for countries "that take anti-Israel actions."
Most concerning is that the conference does not set out to address the dire need to stop the imminent perishing by starvation of 2 million Gazans, nor the ongoing forced displacement and ethnic cleansing of the people of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In addition, it could potentially generate new U.N. resolutions that shrink Palestine's internationally recognized borders, effectively negating and overriding Security Council Res. 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) borders as well as General Assembly Res. 181 (1947) and 194 (1948) establishing Jerusalem as an international city and enshrining the Palestinian right of return and compensation.
In its press release of May 27, 2025, UNICEF addressed the elephant in the room:
Since the end of the cease-fire on 18 March, 1,309 children have reportedly been killed and 3,738 injured. In total, more than 50,000 children have reportedly been killed or injured since October 2023. How many more dead girls and boys will it take? What level of horror must be livestreamed before the international community fully steps up, uses its influence, and takes bold, decisive action to force the end of this ruthless killing of children?
In the words of Pulitzer Prize-winning Palestinian poet Mosab Abu Toha on X, "Only an international military intervention should stop this mass killing of starved people."
According to Leo Gabriel of the World Social Forum and representative of the Global Solidarity for Peace in Palestine Coalition, "What is needed now is for the U.N. Security Council to invoke Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter to send an emergency Blue Helmets peacekeeping mission to Gaza, as it has done in other parts of the world 72 times since 1948. As the Security Council will be deadlocked by the U.S. veto, it is incumbent upon the General Assembly to invoke GA Resolution 377, also known as the 'Uniting for Peace' option, to establish peace in in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and stop the genocide in Gaza." (The Uniting for Peace option was used by the General Assembly with the deployment of peacekeeping forces to the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip to end the1956 Suez Canal crisis.) "Stopping the imminent starvation to death of 2 million besieged Gazans by operationalizing 'Uniting for Peace' is the last gasp of life and hope in the utility of the U.N. to fulfill its mission," he added.
In addition to foundational problems with the U.N. Two-State Solution Conference, now touted as the "International Conference on the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine," France and Saudi Arabia have been criticized as lacking the credentials to convene the high-level negotiations. Saudi Arabia is well-known for its abysmal human rights record, decimating Yemen militarily and bringing it to the brink of famine, and violent suppression of dissent such as the assassination and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul. France, with its extensive legacy as a colonial and neocolonial power, is not an impartial arbiter. It has not recognized Palestine as a state, has implemented sweeping bans on pro-Palestinian protests, sells weapons to Israel, and continuously enables the delivery of military equipment to Israel by air and by sea.
Given the circumstances, postponement of the so-called U.N. Two-State Conference may be best, certainly in the eyes of Palestinian civil society.
Attempts to develop independent Palestinian economic growth through the Builders for Peace program 30 years ago were derailed by Israeli restrictions.
When I first heard President Donald Trump’s “Gaza Riviera” scheme, it brought back memories of the hopes Palestinians had three decades ago during the heyday of the Oslo Accords. Back then, I was serving as co-chair of “Builders for Peace,” a project launched by then-Vice President Al Gore to encourage American businesses to invest in the Palestinian economy to support the fledgling peace process.
We had prepared for our mission by reading the exhaustive World Bank study on the pre-Oslo Palestinian economy. The observations and conclusions were sobering, and yet hopeful. It noted obstacles that stifled the development of a Palestinian economy—problems like: Israel’s control of Palestinian land, resources, and power; its refusal to allow Palestinians to independently import and export; and the impediments Israel had created to Palestinian travel and even to conducting commerce within the occupied lands. The bank, however, concluded that if these Israeli restrictions on Palestinian entrepreneurs were removed, external investment would provide opportunities for rapid growth and prosperity.
We also read Sara Roy’s brilliant study of the cruel measures Israel had implemented to “de-develop” Gaza so as to stifle the development of an independent economy, thereby creating a cheap pool of day laborers for Israeli businesses or a network of small workshops that produced items for export by Israeli companies.
When Yasser Arafat spoke to us of the future of Gaza, he would say that with investment and freedom from occupation it could become Singapore; if denied both, it could become Somalia.
We also made a few exploratory visits to the Occupied Palestinian Territories to meet with business and political leaders to assess the possibilities before us and the challenges we would confront. In short order, both became quite clear.
When the project was ready to launch, my fellow co-chair, Mel Levine, and I led the first of a number of delegations of American business leaders (which included both Arab Americans and American Jews) to the Palestinian lands. Our first exposure to the problems we would encounter came as we attempted to enter via the Allenby Bridge from Jordan. American Jews and others passed easily, while Arab Americans were separated from the group and forced to undergo humiliating screening.
We convened a session in Jerusalem for Palestinians to meet with the Americans interested in investment opportunities, only to discover that in order to enter the city Palestinians had to secure a pass from the occupation authority. Since the passes only permitted them a few hours in the city, the time they were able to devote to our discussions proved limited.
Entry into and exit from Gaza was equally problematic. One scene on leaving Gaza has stayed with me. Hundreds of Palestinian men filled what I can only describe as cattle chutes, waiting in the sun for permission to enter into Israel. Straddling these chutes were young Israeli soldiers shouting at the Palestinians below, ordering them to look down and hold their passes above their heads. It was deeply disturbing.
In both Gaza and the West Bank, our meetings with Palestinian business leaders were hopeful. They were eager to discuss possibilities with their American counterparts, and the Americans were impressed. A number of partnerships were discussed.
Two projects were notable. One sought to manufacture leather products and another to assemble furniture. Both sought to take advantage of Gaza’s proximity to Eastern Europe so as to export there. As both projects required that the Israelis permit import of raw material and export of finished products, both projects failed. It appeared that the Israelis might have been willing to entertain such projects but only if the Americans and Palestinians operated through an Israeli middleman, thereby reducing the profitability of the ventures.
Even opportunities that the U.S. government tried to implement failed. One day I received a call from an official in the Department of Agriculture who told me that they had provided 50,000 bulbs for Gazans to develop a flower export industry. These bulbs he told me had been sitting in an Israeli port for months and were rotting. He said that the department was able to send another 25,000 bulbs but could only do so if the Israelis ensured their entry. This too proved fruitless as Israelis wanted no competition with their flower export industry, and therefore wouldn’t allow a competing Palestinian industry to develop.
After a few frustrating years, I saw then-President Bill Clinton who asked me how the project was developing. I told him about the frustrations we were encountering due to the Israeli impediments on investment in independent Palestinian economic growth. He appeared troubled and asked that I write him a detailed memo. The letter I sent to the president both outlined the specific problems we were facing and my complaint that his peace team was not taking these challenges seriously, as they insisted that any U.S. challenge to the Israelis would impede efforts to promote negotiations for peace. I told the president that since Oslo: Palestinian unemployment had doubled, poverty had risen, and Palestinians hope for peace was evaporating. To my dismay, the response I received from the White House appeared to have been drafted by his peace team, and was no response at all. At the end of Clinton’s first term, Builders for Peace (BfP) was disbanded and with it the hopes for Palestinian independent economic growth.
Over the next decade, absent any U.S. pressure on the Israelis to change their behavior, negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians continued to falter, Palestinians became poorer, Israeli became more emboldened and oppressive, and Palestinian attitudes hardened, leading to renewed violence.
There are two other memories from that period that need to be recalled.
One of the more optimistic projects BfP endorsed was a proposal by a Virginia-based Palestinian-American company to build a Marriott resort on the Gaza beachfront. Securing initial investment, they began construction, starting with the foundation and a massive parking garage. Because of the risks involved, they sought risk insurance from OPIC, the U.S. agency created to guarantee investment against risk. The project was endorsed by then-Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown, a champion of our BfP, and supported by PLO head, Yasser Arafat—both of whom saw the resort hotel as laying the foundation for the future economic growth of a Palestinian state.
When Yasser Arafat spoke to us of the future of Gaza, he would say that with investment and freedom from occupation it could become Singapore; if denied both, it could become Somalia. Israel did everything it could to guarantee that Gaza would become Somalia—and they appear to have succeeded.
Against this backdrop, it was painful to hear of Trump’s insulting plan to build an American-owned Gaza Riviera. It reminded me of what might have been, but, three decades later, is being discussed without benefiting any Palestinians from its development.
"The Netanyahu government is operating on steroids to establish facts on the ground that will destroy the chance for peace and compromise," said one group.
Israeli authorities are planning to expand a Jewish-only settlement in the West Bank by nearly 1,000 homes, a Tel Aviv-based peace group said Sunday as Israeli soldiers and settlers escalated attacks on Palestinians in the illegally occupied territory.
Peace Now said Israel's Civil Administration has issued a new tender for the construction of 974 new housing units in Efrat, a Jewish-only colony located about 7.5 miles south of Jerusalem between Bethlehem and Hebron. The planned expansion will increase Efrat's population of approximately 11,800 residents by 40% and geographically isolate Palestinian communities in the southern West Bank.
Emboldened by U.S. President Donald Trump's return to power, far-right members of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Cabinet have vowed to annex the West Bank, which Israel has occupied since 1967 in violation of international law.
On Sunday, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said that "the goal for 2025 is to demolish more than the Palestinians build in the West Bank," according to Al Jazeera. This, following the largest Israeli seizure of Palestinian land in the West Bank in decades last year.
"The Netanyahu government is operating on steroids to establish facts on the ground that will destroy the chance for peace and compromise," said Peace Now, referring to the longtime Israeli practice of violating international law by colonizing and annexing Palestinian land to establish what one legal scholar has described as "de facto possession with the aim of attaining de jure possession."
Peace Now continued: "It is now clear that military action alone will not bring a solution to the conflict or security to Israel, and that ultimately we will have to reach an agreement with the Palestinians. The Netanyahu government is harming Israeli interests and torpedoing the only solution that can bring us security and peace."
In the United States, the Council on American-Islamic Relations said in a statement Monday that "the ongoing de facto annexation of the illegally occupied West Bank through the expansion of racially segregated illegal settlements is just one aspect of the far-right Israeli government's ethnic cleansing of the entirety of historic Palestine and of its relentless efforts to block justice for the Palestinian people."
Aviv Tatarsky, a researcher at the Israel-based peace group Ir Amim, told Al Jazeera that "since the start of 2025, Israeli authorities have demolished 27 structures in East Jerusalem, including 18 residential units, in what appears to be a systematic effort to remove Palestinians from their homes while simultaneously expanding Israeli settlements."
The Israeli settlement population has increased exponentially from around 1,500 colonists in 1970 to roughly 140,000 at the time of the Oslo Accords in 1993—under which Israel agreed to halt new settlement activity—to more than 500,000 today. Last July, the International Court of Justice, which is also weighing a genocide case concerning Israel's annihilation of the Gaza Strip, said that the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza is an illegal form of apartheid that must end "as rapidly as possible."
News of the Efrat expansion came as Israeli soldiers and settlers escalated attacks on Palestinians across the West Bank over the weekend. Occupation forces carried out raids in the towns of al-Issawiya and Salfit, near East Jerusalem, as well as the village of Nabi Saleh near Ramallah. Israeli troops also continued their siege and assault on Jenin and the Nur Shams refugee camp, where two young women, one of them pregnant, were shot dead last week.
Armed Israeli settlers from the Mikne Avraham colony also invaded al-Minya, south of Bethlehem, wounding 16 Palestinians including a pregnant woman who was attacked with clubs and rocks, according to Middle East Eye. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported Saturday that settlers sicced dogs on al-Minya residents, wounding two people.
According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Israeli soldiers and settlers have killed 876 Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem since the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel.
Since launching "Operation Iron Wall" on January 21, Israeli forces have killed at least 53 Palestinians across the West Bank. The Israeli offensive has forced around 40,000 people from their homes in what experts say is the largest displacement in the West Bank since more than 200,000 Palestinians were expelled during the 1967 conquest and occupation.