LUIZ ANTONIO GOMES, MSc, MBA’s Post

António Guterres’s call for a renewed focus on the two-state solution, while laudable in its pursuit of peace, oversimplifies the profound complexities inherent in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The proposal of Israel and Palestine existing side-by-side with shared capital in Jerusalem, though idealistic, faces severe practical and geopolitical hurdles that merit a rigorous analysis. Firstly, the security challenges of a two-state solution are manifold. Israel’s security concerns stem from fears of encirclement by hostile forces, exacerbated by the close geographic proximity of a potential Palestinian state. The history of conflict, including rocket attacks and other forms of terrorism, feeds into the Israeli narrative that security cannot be compromised. For Palestinians, the security concerns are equally pressing, often citing the need for protection from military occupation and settler violence. Implementing a two-state solution would necessitate a security apparatus that addresses these fears while fostering trust—a monumental task given the current distrust. Moreover, the political landscapes in both Israel and Palestine are not conducive to the compromises required for a two-state solution. In Israel, the rise of right-wing parties who oppose the creation of a Palestinian state alongside a significant portion of the populace, complicates any move towards withdrawal from occupied territories. Conversely, the Palestinian leadership is fragmented, with the Palestinian Authority and Hamas holding divergent visions for statehood and governance, which further complicates cohesive negotiation efforts. Jerusalem remains a particularly contentious issue. The city holds deep religious and national significance for both Israelis and Palestinians, making any division of sovereignty a point of potential perpetual conflict. Proposals for shared capital status, while aiming for fairness, do not adequately account for the administrative and security complications such a scenario would entail. The international community's role, though well-intentioned, often overlooks the nuanced local dynamics and the internal pressures facing both parties' leaders. International resolutions and laws provide a framework, but they do not always align with the national interests and existential fears of those directly involved. In conclusion, while the moral obligation to pursue peace is undeniable, the methodology requires a more grounded and nuanced approach than the current idealistic advocacy of a two-state solution. A sustainable peace process necessitates not only international support but also a profound and genuine engagement with the complex realities on the ground, ensuring any resolution is both practicable and resilient. This approach demands innovative thinking, perhaps considering federal structures or confederations, as alternatives that might offer a more feasible path to enduring peace.

Clemente, your correct and well-articulated analysis is the best treatise I have read on this conflict because the issues are so complex for an easy resolution.

António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, in short: 1-For a lasting peace in the region, a lasting peace between #Palestine and #Israel is required, 2-For a lasting peace between the two, 2 state solution is necessary 3-International community has a responsibility to fulfill it. #freepalestine #palestinianstate #palestinestate #palestiniannation #palestinianland #stopgenocide

"Defusing Global Unrest: A Call to Action for Sustainable Peace". ----- Abdullah Al-Mahmud Jahangir Chairman Bangladesh 🇧🇩 Free Democratic Party BFDP Chairman Global 🌎 Human Rights & ☮️ Peace Restoration Consortium Ghrprc Administrator Democratic Party USA 🇺🇸 Author Editor Poet A Freelance Journalist & Columnist For National & International English News Dailies! In the wake of escalating tensions, exemplified by the recent emergency Security Council session on the Middle East, the urgency of preserving regional and global peace cannot be overstated. Antonio Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, and Sameh Elgebaly, the Permanent Representative of Egypt to the UN, have echoed a poignant truth: the world teeters on the brink of further conflict, and such turmoil is a luxury none can afford. The root causes of unrest are manifold, often stemming from geopolitical rivalries, socio-economic disparities, and unresolved grievances. Yet, regardless of their origins, the consequences are universally dire: displacement, suffering, and the erosion of human dignity. As nations engage in brinkmanship and proxy conflicts, the specter of all-out war looms large, threatening to engulf not only the immediate combatants but also innocent civilians caught in the crossfire. To defuse this ticking time bomb of global unrest, concerted action on multiple fronts is imperative. Diplomacy must be pursued with unwavering commitment, prioritizing dialogue and negotiation over saber-rattling and brinkmanship. International institutions, particularly the United Nations, must be empowered and reformed to effectively mediate disputes and enforce peace agreements. Moreover, addressing the underlying grievances fuelling conflicts is paramount. This requires addressing socio-economic inequalities, promoting inclusive governance, and fostering a culture of tolerance and mutual respect. Investment in education, healthcare, and infrastructure can serve as potent antidotes to extremism and violence. Crucially, the international community must reaffirm its collective commitment to upholding the principles of international law and respecting the sovereignty of nations. Unilateral actions and disregard for established norms only serve to exacerbate tensions and undermine the very foundations of global order. In the face of mounting crises, complacency is not an option. The time for action is now. Let us heed the sobering warnings of leaders like Guterres and Elgebaly, and redouble our efforts to build a world where peace is not just an aspiration, but a lived reality for all. The stakes are too high, and the cost of inaction too grave, to do otherwise.#

No, not practical or realistic... what is my recommeded course of action?... A feasible solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could involve a confederal model, allowing both Israel and Palestine to retain sovereignty while sharing certain governmental functions. This approach respects self-determination and encourages cooperation in areas such as security, trade, and environmental management. Key Points of the Confederal Model: Governance: Both states maintain their governments but delegate joint responsibilities to a council for shared concerns. Jerusalem: Operate as a shared capital under a special administrative regime, transitioning to joint management to maintain open access and mutual respect. Security: Implement joint patrols and shared intelligence with international oversight to ensure mutual safety and trust building. Economic Integration: Develop shared economic zones and infrastructure to boost economic growth and reduce disparities. Cultural and Religious Access: Guarantee access to key religious and cultural sites through constitutional protections in both states. International Support: Encourage balanced international involvement, providing diplomatic, economic, and security support to foster a sustainable peace. This confederal approach addresses critical issues pragmatically, proposing a structure that allows for gradual trust-building and a cooperative future. It leverages shared interests to form a more peaceful and integrated region.

"Defusing Global Unrest: A Call to Action for Sustainable Peace". ----- Abdullah Al-Mahmud Jahangir Chairman Bangladesh 🇧🇩 Free Democratic Party BFDP Chairman Global 🌎 Human Rights & ☮️ Peace Restoration Consortium Ghrprc Administrator Democratic Party USA 🇺🇸 Author Editor Poet A Freelance Journalist & Columnist For National & International English News Dailies! In the wake of escalating tensions, exemplified by the recent emergency Security Council session on the Middle East, the urgency of preserving regional and global peace cannot be overstated. Antonio Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, and Sameh Elgebaly, the Permanent Representative of Egypt to the UN, have echoed a poignant truth: the world teeters on the brink of further conflict, and such turmoil is a luxury none can afford. The root causes of unrest are manifold, often stemming from geopolitical rivalries, socio-economic disparities, and unresolved grievances. Yet, regardless of their origins, the consequences are universally dire: displacement, suffering, and the erosion of human dignity. As nations engage in brinkmanship and proxy conflicts, the specter of all-out war looms large, threatening to engulf not only the immediate combatants but also innocent civilians caught in the crossfire. To defuse this ticking time bomb of global unrest, concerted action on multiple fronts is imperative. Diplomacy must be pursued with unwavering commitment, prioritizing dialogue and negotiation over saber-rattling and brinkmanship. International institutions, particularly the United Nations, must be empowered and reformed to effectively mediate disputes and enforce peace agreements. Moreover, addressing the underlying grievances fuelling conflicts is paramount. This requires addressing socio-economic inequalities, promoting inclusive governance, and fostering a culture of tolerance and mutual respect. Investment in education, healthcare, and infrastructure can serve as potent antidotes to extremism and violence. Crucially, the international community must reaffirm its collective commitment to upholding the principles of international law and respecting the sovereignty of nations. Unilateral actions and disregard for established norms only serve to exacerbate tensions and undermine the very foundations of global order. In the face of mounting crises, complacency is not an option. The time for action is now. Let us heed the sobering warnings of leaders like Guterres and Elgebaly, and redouble our efforts to build a world where peace is not just an aspiration, but a lived reality for all. The stakes are too high, and the cost of inaction too grave, to do otherwise.#

The international community has a responsibility and a moral obligation to help achieve a two-state solution for several reasons: Humanitarian concerns: The conflict has caused immense suffering, displacement, and human rights violations, affecting millions of people. The international community has a moral obligation to protect civilians and promote humanitarian law. International law and UN resolutions: The two-state solution is grounded in international law, UN resolutions, and previous agreements. The international community has a responsibility to uphold these principles and promote a peaceful resolution. Regional and global stability: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has far-reaching implications for regional and global stability. A peaceful resolution would contribute to a more secure and stable Middle East, benefiting the entire international community. Promoting peace and diplomacy: The international community has a responsibility to promote peaceful conflict resolution and diplomacy, rather than resorting to violence and military force. Supporting self-determination: Both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to self-determination, and the international community should support their aspirations for independence, sovereignty, and statehood. By recognizing these responsibilities and obligations, the international community can play a constructive role in facilitating a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine.

 ‘The international community has a responsibility and a moral obligation to help make this (two-state solution with sovereign Palestine & Israel ) happen.’ And then US goes and vetoes it. Seriously? We can speak about SDGs & development all we want, but if political leaders are entangled in their dances & low bows not even to their own citizens, but to their political campaign funders we will continue to witness protracted genocide, occupation, violence & suffering instead of solutions. And those protracted situations will cost more time, effort & money for citizens from all countries. I wonder if the US & Democratic Party leaders would to personally contribute to a damage fund - 50% of income to rebuild Palestine, how  would they vote? Because it’s so easy to transfer guns, but so hard to understand that those guns destroyed lives and livelihoods. That people had to leave behind everything they worked for throughout their lives, everything their parents & grandparents worked for.. everything they wanted to give to children & grandchildren. This is very hard under the occupation. Lithuanians & other people from post-Soviet countries know if too well. And Ukraine is a proof that one cannot build wealth and prosperity when there is unsanctioned power willing to get more of the territory & subjugate people once again. In this case, the US stands not with freedom & peace, but with occupational power, that proved to be capable of the worst crimes against humanity. And because of the US complicity this seems to still have a green light.  However, Europe is waking up. After the South African submission to the ICJ, new calls from Nicaragua situation  is shifting. People do realise how much sugar coating there was to make the unprecedented killing of children, parents & grandparents possible. They can relate. Especially in countries like mine.

Israel is a Zionist, racist, anti-Islamic entity in Palestine. It was created more than 70 years ago by the imperialist powers with the support of Sinonist-Jewish anti-Muslim organizations and the hypocritical West. This formation serves the fascist ideologies of Zionist Islamophobic organizations and also Western Islamophobic countries and their allies to intensify hegemony and terrorism in the Middle East. Israel, like a poisonous tumor, must disappear from the territory of terrorized Palestine. Those who like this “pirate education” should create it in Europe or America. #FREEPALESTINE #GAZA #Palestine #StopGenocideinGaza #GazaGenocide