Israel vs Palestine

From the Israeli news site Haaretz:  Time to Say Goodbye to the Two-state Solution. Here's the Alternative

Americans should read this for the history because very few are aware of how the state of Israel came to be.  Still I don't think much of the the offered solution. 

1. It seems to be a way to incorporate just enough Palestinians into the Israeli system so that Israeli control is not threatened. 

• The (Jewish) Law of Return would remain intact, but with more stringent examination.
• The return of Palestinian refugees from outside Israel-Palestine would not be allowed, other than within a strict framework of family unification.

2. Gaza is ignored. If Gaza cannot control its borders, all borders including it's coast, it is an occupied territory.

First, the plan relates only to the West Bank, or Judea and Samaria. It is not intended for the Gaza Strip, which is now effectively a sovereign Palestinian territory, properly armed, administered by an independent government, and with an open passage to Egypt and from there to the world.

A one-state solution would better, Israel plus all the occupied territories, a true democracy, but the Israelis wont support that because they are outnumbered and it would mean giving up the Jewish state.

Still, A lot of history here that never seems to make it's way to people in the US. 

"Thus, at the beginning of the 19th century, only 10,000 of the world’s 2.5 million Jews lived in Palestine (there were 40,000 Jews in Afghanistan, 80,000 in Yemen and already a million in Poland). A hundred years later, at the time of the 1917 Balfour Declaration, even with the momentum of Zionism, there were 550,000 Palestinians in Palestine but only 50,000 Jews out of a worldwide population of almost 14.5 million (data from the Encyclopedia Hebraica)."

"That the Palestinians rejected the Balfour Declaration is perfectly understandable, and not only because Britain did not possess the moral authority to promise Palestine to the Jews. By the same token, the League of Nations and its successor, the United Nations, lacked moral or legal authority to divide a country between its inhabitants and a people coming from the outside."

"There is no other people in the world that, after losing – more precisely, abandoning – its homeland and dispersing for many centuries to foreign territories across the world, succeeded, or at least part of it did so, in preserving its national identity."