What carelessly? Two state solution is has to be on the expense of both Palestinians and Israel and not the Arab Neighbors. Unless the neighbors want to entertain Israel Right Wing demand to accept all Palestinians in their territory, out of the territory of what used to be call Palestine Territory during Ottoman and British era. So off course it has to be in both Israel and Palestinians expense, no one else.
So either accept Palestinians as part of one Nations or divide the Palestine land into two seperate fully sovereign nation. That's all back to this 75 years unresolved ongoing cycle.
Majority of those who support Palestinians are supporting Palestinians and not Hamas. No matter how some Western and Israel media and politicians try to put it. Hamas is product of this ongoing unresolved conflict that only brew hatred on both sides.
The normalization process, or the Abraham Accords, has largely been politically tied, by Arab nations, to Palestine. The recurring theme is grand demands, then appearance of some "concessions" on the Arab nations' part, then an agreement based on a purely symbolic gesture. The UAE, for example, demanded only that Israel does not annex the Jordan valley for 6 months after Israel announced it was planning to. 6 months after the normalization - nothing happened. No annexation, not even any talks about it. They faded as quickly as they appeared. In other words - every policy regarding Israel, requires them to first deconstruct the political connection to Palestine. So in the current state of things, this tie is a hindrance. It is particularly harmful when there is general anger in the Arab street toward Israel, as there is now.
What is currently at stake? The Israel-Saudi corridor for euroasian trade.
Generally, it is unhealthy for any nation to tie its policies to the state of another nation. The existence of NATO is one such example. The security of every member nation is tied in a way to the security of all other members. However, NATO is a well-thought and robust framework that frequently re-validates itself via new missions and reorganization, as well as the provision of sufficient autonomy to its members even within its core mission. That is, even if a member is called to action, it can decide the capacity in which it assists.
The Arab world's policy to tie Palestine to Israel can be explained in many ways. But it is arguable that this decision is obsolete. But instead of reversing it, it was neglected and allowed to grow.
I also believe the matter of a one state or two state solution for Palestine is a feint. There is no room to negotiate any political solution for Palestine when they're still a nation with no government or any form of representation. Yes, they have Hamas governing them in Gaza. And they have the PA in the Judea and Samaria region, and the PA is even internationally recognized. But is any of them a legitimate government that can express the will and vision of the Palestinian people? I highly doubt it. These entities have shown time and again that they care very little about their people, and are overly confrontational with any foreign government. They certainly aren't elected, and unlike dictatorships they haven't shown the capacity to exist on a day to day basis independently.
Therefore, for decades, the Arab world has demanded of Israel to negotiate something that it cannot really negotiate, with someone that is unable to negotiate - yet they haven't contributed to alleviating any of Palestine's issues, whether political or practical.
This eventually ties to the current state of affairs - Palestinians have none to govern them in the endgame of the current war. There were proposals to bring in the PA, but they're not going to bring a sustainable situation. If anything, their presence will only legitimize the persistence of a non-viable status quo.
That's statement on Biden X account is a very big 'if' promises if no solution on statehood status in table. Gaza is not sovereign land, even no Israel soldiers in Gaza ground. Israel has the right to block Gaza movement to their territory but not from Sea and Egypt. If Gaza is sovereign territory, then they should has free movement at least from the sea and Egypt, and not hindered by Israel will. They should have teritorial right on their waters. Without that, then all the argument saying Gaza already self govern entities that some Israel media and Politicians claim to International audiences, is moot.
There is no entitlement to territorial waters. It must come from agreements. Gaza may be a sovereign state in many ways, but Israel never forfeited its recognized rights to the waters around Gaza. It has voluntarily allowed Gaza to maintain high autonomy there, including fishing and drawing of water for desalination. But Israel is not obligated to give up its rights to maintain a security lock on these waters, as well as economical rights.
It is wrong to assume that the many privileges and aid Israel provided to Gaza are its obligation. They are not, and Israel is entitled to revoke them at any moment. For a fact, it doesn't.
Regarding Egypt, Israel doesn't actually prevent Egypt from doing anything by force. There are good security ties, and both listen to one another. Incidents occur, but overall they coordinate pretty much everything there.
@Big_Zucchini what is your take on this? Could it be that Israel possess intelligence implicating Russia in the 7. October terrorist attack?
Russia is complicit in many ways. I have no idea about the decision to launch the invasion operation, but there is indeed cooperation between the two.
My opinion? His words were blown out of proportion. He is a businessman but when it comes to politics - his influence is basically none. I also highly doubt he has any access to up-to-date intelligence.
Increasing number of Merkava with cages. Interesting that some of those western/pro ukrainian online defense pundits, even those under mainstream media stay silence when the cages now being used by Israel Mercava.
Remember months before constant ridicule by them, when Russian increase this cages in Ukrainian fronts. Then decreasing when Ukrainian also use them, and now silence. Perhaps when Israel used them, it is suddenly become make sense.
The ridicule was connected to the makeshift nature of early Russian cope cages, as well as baseless claims that they were either intended or effective against top attack munitions like the Javelin.
More modern, properly designed and built ones, are not ridiculed. Especially when their implementation is coupled to the more realistic threat they face - drones. That's my observation at least.
