Two Stepping Two States

Netanyahu is trying to minimize his avoidance of the term "two-state solution." Dore Gold did it here in an LA Times op-ed:

"The reality is that although Netanyahu has not embraced this formula, he has stated that Israel does not want to rule over the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. He has added that he wants the Palestinians to have all the power necessary to rule themselves, but none of the power to undermine the security of Israel. What that means is that if a Palestinian state were to arise, it would have to be demilitarized and could not sign defense pacts with, say, Iran, allowing it to receive a contingent of Iranian Revolutionary Guards (as Lebanon did in 1982). Instead of waiting for such a situation to arise, Netanyahu is addressing this issue up front."

This argument might work for an audience that has not followed the conflict. It might sound similar enough to a two-state solution.

But those with longer memories are aware that Likud has long argued that the Palestinians in the West Bank should be able to govern themselves. This was presented as an *alternative* to two states. Palestinian autonomy, not Palestinian sovereignty.

Furthermore, the op-ed avoids the issue of territorial definition. A demilitarized Palestine in 96% of the West Bank is fundamentally different from a demilitarized Palestine in 60% of the West Bank. The non-use of the term "two-state solution" is a linguistic move with great meaning on the core issues of territory, Jerusalem, and refugees.