Postponing the UN 2-State Solution Conference Could Lead to a Better Outcome
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.
