Bästa lösning på Israel-Palestina-konflikten?

Men det spelar egentligen ingen roll eftersom hans dagar är räknade. Oavsett om Israels nästa regering blir mitten, höger eller vänster kvarstår problemet att den korrupta palestinska myndigheten vägrar förhandla överhuvudtaget.

But there is no simple answer to this question, as the Israeli government does not have a clearly formulated position on the matter.

Between 2009 and 2017, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu routinely declared his acceptance, in principle, of a demilitarized Palestinian state under certain conditions.

But since shortly after the election of US President Donald Trump, he has painstakingly avoided explicitly endorsing a two-state solution, while at the same time rejecting a one-state, binational solution and saying he wants the Palestinians to be able to govern themselves.

However, many ministers in his cabinet and most senior members of his ruling Likud party vehemently reject a two-state solution. Some hawkish MKs have repeatedly proposed legislation to annex all or portions of the West Bank to Israel — moves apparently designed to thwart the creation of a Palestinian state — but Netanyahu has so far blocked all such efforts.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/aipac-rekindles-old-debate-is-israel-in-favor-of-a-two-state-solution-or-not/

Israeli authorities operated under military and civilian legal codes in the occupied territories. Israeli military law applied to Palestinians in the West Bank, while Israeli civil law applied to Israeli settlers. Under Israeli military law, authorities can hold detainees for up to 90 days without access to a lawyer, with multiple 90-day extensions possible. Authorities frequently transferred detainees from the West Bank to Israel for detention or interrogation. The Israeli military courts had a conviction rate of more than 99 percent for Palestinians. Authorities informed detainees of the charges against them during detention, but the MCW reported authorities did not always inform minors and their families at the time of arrest. Israeli authorities stated their policy was to post notification of arrests within 48 hours, but senior officers may delay notification for up to 12 days, effectively holding detainees incommunicado during the interrogation process. A military commander may request that a judge extend this period. In accordance with law, Israeli authorities generally provided Palestinians held in Israeli military custody inside Israel access to a lawyer of their choice (and provided lawyers for the indigent), but detainees often obtained lawyers only after initial interrogations, and impediments to movement on West Bank roads or at crossings often made consultation difficult and delayed trials and hearings. According to the MCW, most detainees saw their lawyer for the first time when they appeared before a military court. Military courts denied bail in most cases, including for minors.

https://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2016/nea/265502.htm

Since the early 1980s, however, in open rejection of the principle of territoriality in the application of criminal law, Israeli nationals, residents and settlers have been prosecuted only under Israeli domestic law before Israeli courts. This policy of dual justice – established by explicit legislation of the Knesset[34] and upheld by the HCJ jurisprudence[35] – has installed a structure of legal and jurisdictional discrimination, based on nationality, under which military courts enforce military law against Palestinians, while Israeli civilian courts apply domestic law to Israelis and settlers irrespective of whether the offences were committed in the occupied Palestinian territory.
If an Israeli citizen commits an offense in the West Bank, in fact, it is the Israeli criminal legal system that is applicable. The accused will be tried according to the Israeli criminal code and rule of procedure, and will be entitled to the right of due process granted by Israeli constitutional Law. As synthetized by Justice Barak’s metaphor, while being in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Israeli citizens carry in their ‘backpack’ Israeli criminal law.[36] Hence, it can be argued that settlers act not only as ‘vectors’ of territorial control, but also of jurisdictional annexation, by projecting the domestic law of the occupying power into foreign territory it occupies, despite its absence of sovereignty.

http://www.qil-qdi.org/enforcing-illegality-israels-military-justice-in-the-west-bank/

Israel har inga förhandsvillkor. Det är PA som insisterar på förhandsvillkor angående byggfrys av bosättningarna.