At last, fresh thinking on Gaza

Amid the howls of outrage that resounded around the globe after Donald Trump announced his plan to “take over” Gaza and create the “Riviera of the Middle East”, one statement was particularly revealing. It came from Anthony Albanese, the prime minister of Australia, who made clear to reporters that he continued to support the two-state solution. “Australia’s position is the same as it was this morning, as it was last year, as it was ten years ago,” he said.

To which the obvious response was: Yes, and that is precisely the problem. (As I explained on LBC this morning.)

Few people in the mainstream would argue against Palestinian self-determination on principle. It is true that Jewish history in the region is far older than that of the Palestinians, whose identity only emerged from the wider Arab nation in response to Zionism; nonetheless, the idea of supporting a Jewish homeland while denying that right to their Arab cousins seems a bit rich.

At the same time, we must face reality. Sanctifying that principle as unassailable, decade after decade, has resulted in nothing but blood and tears. Several core obstacles are embedded on the Palestinian side. Firstly, as can be seen by its popular songs, television programmes, newspapers and schooling, its national identity is built upon resistance, not self-determination. Turn Israel from an enemy to a friend and the heart goes out of the version of Palestinian selfhood that their leaders have long been peddling to their people. This explains why – as Bill Clinton recently reminded us – the sainted Yasser Arafat repeatedly turned down offers of a state that satisfied 100 per cent of his demands. It has only got worse since.