Answer

Introduction

The recognition of Palestine by Britain, Australia, and Canada amid ongoing conflict has added a new dimension to the long struggle for Palestinian statehood. This reflects deeper historical legacies of colonialism, wars, displacement, and failed accords. The trajectory of this struggle frames current debates on the two-state solution.

Body

Historical processes shaping the formation of a Palestinian state

• Colonial-era commitments & British Mandate: The 1917 Balfour Declaration and subsequent British Mandate (1920–48) reconfigured sovereignty claims and demographics in Palestine.
  Eg: The Balfour Declaration under the Mandate set the stage for later statehood disputes.
• Partition & displacement (1947–48): UN Resolution 181 proposed partition, UN proposed terminating the Mandate and partitioning Palestine into two independent States, one Palestinian Arab and the other Jewish.
• Post-1967 occupation & settlements: The 1967 war placed West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza under Israeli control, catalysing settlement expansion and sharpening Palestinian demands for statehood.
  Eg: The 1967 war’s outcome gave rise to the two-state concept.
• PLO recognition & diplomacy (1970s–80s): The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO’s) rise as Palestinians’ representative (recognised in Arab/UN fora) internationalised the statehood claim.
• Oslo Accords & Palestinian Authority (PA) (1993–95): Mutual recognition and interim self-rule via the PA created a proto-governance framework for future statehood.
• 2012 UN status & continuing bids: In 2012, Palestine became a non-member observer state at the UN; subsequent membership efforts continue amid veto politics.

Viability of the two-state solution

• International recognition momentum: New recognitions aim to revive a two-state pathway and add diplomatic weight to Palestinian statehood.
• Legal-political anchoring in Oslo/UN process: The two-state idea remains the dominant international frame, though talks have stalled since 2014.
• Governance reform: Viability improves with a reformed, unified Palestinian governance able to negotiate and implement commitments.
  Eg: The Fatah–Hamas split has weakened governance and unity.
• India/BRICS stance for negotiated solution: India and BRICS reiterate support for a negotiated two-state solution, a key diplomatic anchor from the Global South.

Key challenges

• Settlement expansion & potential annexation: Physical fragmentation and de facto annexation erode prospects for a contiguous, sovereign Palestinian state.
• Entrenched political divides within Palestine: The Fatah–Hamas split weakens unified representation and implementation capacity.
• Stalled negotiations & veto politics at the UN: Diplomatic deadlock including US vetoes, blocks full UN membership and a binding process.
• Security doctrines & asymmetric power: Israeli security imperatives and asymmetric capabilities make reciprocal concessions difficult.
• Humanitarian devastation & institutional erosion: War-time destruction (especially in Gaza) degrades administrative and economic bases necessary for state-building.
  Eg: Destruction in Gaza has crippled governance and economic viability.

Conclusion

A viable two-state solution requires halting settlements, internal Palestinian reconciliation, and addressing Israel’s security concerns. Western recognition must aid institution-building and humanitarian relief. Durable peace depends on negotiated resolutions of borders, refugees, and Jerusalem.

DOWNLOAD PDF