Yacov Pedhatzur-Wiedhopf: How the Real Two State Plan Was Abandoned

The Oslo Accords were supposed to deliver peace, but instead they exposed the fatal flaw in the modern two‑state vision: the belief that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River could coexist with the Jewish state. After Oct 7th, even fewer Israelis believe this. It is time to revisit the original two‑state framework—Israel to the west, a Palestinian Arab state to the east—that was embedded in the region’s legal and historical foundations but never truly attempted.

---

 

For more than a century, diplomats have proposed every imaginable configuration to resolve the Israeli‑Palestinian conflict: partition, coexistence, federation, confederation. None have endured. The international community still clings to the idea of two states west of the Jordan River, as if repeating the formula will make it workable. But this vision rests on a misreading of history, geography, and human nature.

The only two‑state solution ever grounded in legal commitments and demographic reality was the original one: a Jewish state west of the Jordan, and a Palestinian Arab state to its east. That plan was embedded in the post‑Ottoman legal framework and then quietly abandoned.

Yacov Pedhatzur-Wiedhopf gave me permission to translate and re-organize the section of one of his essays outlining the rationale behind his proposal and the means by which to carry it out. He is a native Israeli whose family has lived in Eretz Yisrael [the Land of Israel], in the city of Tzfat, since 1550. Yacov is a retired executive who holds an M.Sc in Aeronautical Engineering from MIT and an MBA from Stanford University.

A Broken Promise and a Distorted Map

After World War I, the Allies redrew the Middle East. Arabs received vast territories. Jews were promised a national home in historic Palestine—on both sides of the Jordan River. These commitments were codified in the Balfour Declaration and the 1920 San Remo Resolution.

But in 1921, Britain severed 77% of Mandatory Palestine to create Transjordan for Emir Abdullah. The remaining 23%—the sliver left to the Jews—is today’s Israel.

Jordan is not an artificial creation. It is a majority‑Palestinian state. Over 70% of its population identifies as Palestinian, and its kings have repeatedly declared that “Jordan is Palestine.” Why, then, does the world insist on creating yet another Palestinian Arab state in the tiny remainder west of the river?

Why Partition West of the Jordan Always Fails

Every attempt to partition the land west of the Jordan has failed. The Peel Commission (1937), the UN Partition Plan (1947), Camp David (2000), the Clinton Parameters, and Olmert’s 2008 offer were all rejected by the Arab side.

Palestinian Authority maps erase Israel entirely. Schoolbooks glorify terrorists and deny Jewish history. As long as the Palestinian national movement sees Israel’s existence as illegitimate, coexistence is impossible.

Separation, Not Proximity, Ends Ethnic Conflict

History shows that entrenched ethnic conflicts are resolved through separation, not coexistence. The 1923 population exchange between Greece and Turkey, the 1947 India‑Pakistan partition, the post‑WWII expulsion of 12 million Germans, the 1974 Cyprus division, and the expulsion of 800,000 Jews from Arab countries all ended cycles of bloodshed.

Only the Palestinians have been kept in permanent refugee status, passed down through generations under UNRWA’s unique mandate.

The Israeli Arab Question

Yacov Pedhatzur‑Wiedhopf argues that Israel’s greatest long‑term strategic threat is not Iran or Hamas, but the Arab sector within Israel. The issue is identity, not numbers. Israeli Arabs overwhelmingly identify as Palestinians. They mourn Israel’s Independence Day as the Nakba. These narratives cannot be reconciled.

Economic integration has not produced loyalty. The May 2021 riots were a rehearsal, not an aberration. The Haifa Declaration, authored by leading Arab intellectuals, openly rejects Zionism, demands the right of return, and calls for transforming Israel from a Jewish state into a binational one.

The silence of many Israeli Arabs on Oct 7 was not a breakthrough. It was alignment. Hamas and Fatah differ in method, not in goal. Assimilation is not solving the conflict; it is masking it.

The Jordanian Option

Instead of fighting over the last 23% of the land west of the river, why not embrace the 77% already in Palestinian hands? Jordan is majority‑Palestinian, internationally recognized, and has functioning institutions. With international support, it could absorb the population of Judea and Samaria, grant them citizenship, and become the Palestinian state.

This would require a population transfer—peaceful, compensated, and internationally supervised. Painful, yes. Ethnic cleansing, no. It is a political separation designed to end an unsolvable conflict.

The Moral Imperative

Is it more ethical to preserve a conflict with no end, or to make a hard choice that gives both peoples a future? Endless war, radicalization, and generational trauma are the price of our current moral posture. Children are born into a struggle that persists because no one dares say the obvious: we cannot share this land. We must divide it—finally and irreversibly.

Partition along the Jordan River was the original plan. It remains the only one not yet tried.

 

You can read the full indepth Substack version of this article here.

👉 Subscribe to my Substack newsletter to follow my new essays and access all fulllength pieces, including extended interviews, analysis, and research: Israel Diaries – The Deep Dive