Two-State versus One-State Solution
A two-state solution refers to the notion of establishing a sovereign Palestinian state alongside a sovereign Israeli state. Though the first two-state proposal was made in 1937 in the Peel Commission Report, the Two-State Solution became the most accepted framework in Palestinian-Israeli peace talks since the Oslo Process began in 1993. Key disputed issues for a two-state solution include: borders and control over them; the status of East Jerusalem; the type of economic relations between Palestine
and its neighbors; Palestinian refugees seeking repatriation to Israel and/or Palestine or compensation by Israel; access to natural resources; the contiguity of land; whether or not Palestine will be de-militarized, other defense matters and air space; access to and control over Jerusalem’s holy sites; Jewish Israeli settlements. Many who used to support the Two-State Solution now deem it to be impossible due to the expansion of settlements in the West Bank
and East Jerusalem and other examples of increased Israeli control of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. There is a common debate around a Two-State versus a One-State solution, and, if one state, what the nature of that state would be. There are proponents of a one-state Greater Israel, and proponents of a Palestinian and/or Islamist state on all of historic Palestine, but most of those who define themselves as "one-staters" speak of a state for all its citizens, with full equality between its Israeli and Palestinian citizens. See "Large Israeli and Palestinian Majorities Indicate Readiness for Two-State Solution Based on 1967 Borders
," WorldPublicOpinion.org, Dec 9, 2002; and "One- or two-state solution? The answer is both (or neither)
," Noam Sheizaf, +972mag, September 2, 2014.