What the 2-state solution needs is not "rebranding" it is positive momentum to rpove that it is still valid and can actually achieve some change on the ground.
The ever expanding settlements (with the side-show drama of the outposts removal and re-installatio and removal and re-installation and...), the hard reality of the Wall (and the suffering, dispossession, humiliation it creates) and the inhumane siege of Gaza (with the side-show of "rockets" in Sderot and "victims" of psychological trauma) are all making a joke of the "peace process". The "peace process" which from Oslo to Annapolis is supposed to deliver a 2-states solution.
Is it really a wonder that people who want a real change are turning away from this? And what solution are you offering? Telling us that 1-state means supporting the status quo (an accusation without any proof to back it) and calling for "rebranding", the most empty concept ever, straight for marketing speak, the more acceptable name of propaganda... |
|
