This month marks the 85th anniversary of when my grandmother was arrested by the Soviet NKVD on October 5, 1937. My paternal grandparents met because they were both sent to one of Stalin's gulags in Vorkuta.
In December 1978, my grandparents left the Soviet Union for Israel. My grandparents, and their lives in the gulag, taught me to always appreciate the protection of the First Amendment and the existence of Israel.
As I was thinking about the anniversary of my grandmother's arrest, I learned that left-wing political commentator Katie Halper,was fired from The Hill TV morning show "Rising" for her anti-Israel comments.
It's easy to defend freedom of speech when you agree with someone. I strongly believe that conservatives will never defeat cancel culture unless they defend lefties as well.
I think Halper is wrong about Israel, but she has the right to say whatever she wants. More importantly, Israel's supporters cannot effectively defend Israel in public debates unless they consistently hear their opponents' arguments.
Halper got fired because she defended Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., for saying that a person cannot be progressive and pro-Israel. Halper also referred to Israel as an apartheid regime.
These arguments are wrong.
In 2018, even J Street, which I seldom agree with, withdrew its endorsement of Tlaib because she supports a one-state solution.
J Street believes that all Palestinian refugees should be allowed to return to a future Palestinian state while also supporting a "very limited, primarily symbolic number of refugees to return to Israel for the purpose of family reunification."
Apparently, this was not good enough for Tlaib.
If Israel was an apartheid state, Arabs would not be allowed to serve on Israel's Supreme Court, its parliament, and they wouldn't be allowed to vote. Even progressive Peter Beinart, who abandoned his support for Israel, and no longer believes a two-state solution is possible, has argued that Israel is not an apartheid state.
In Halper's monologue, she argued that Israel was in an apartheid state in part because the "Israeli Citizenship Law of 1952 deprived Palestinian refugees and their descendants of legal status, the right to return and all other rights in their homeland."
A right of return for 5 million Palestinian refugees to Israel proper is antithetical to a two-state solution.
In 1948, there were approximately 750,000 Palestinian refugees. In 2012, only 30,000 refugees from 1948 were still alive.
Eventually, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), expanded the definition of refugees to include the descendants of the original refugees. The refugees, and their descendants, have a combined population of 5 million Palestinians.
In December 2021, there were 6.98 million Jews in Israel and almost 2 million Israeli Arabs. If you add 5 million Palestinian refugees, Israel will lose its Jewish majority.
I think a two-state solution requires a viable Jewish majority in Israel and a Palestinian majority in Palestine to keep the peace. Refugees can return to a future Palestinian state, but not Israel.
Whenever I am listening to Israel's critics, I ask myself, "Is this person more anti-Israel than he/she is pro-Palestinian?" If someone is more pro-Palestinian than he/she is anti-Israel, I think we can convince some of those people to support a two-state solution.
I think the two-state solution is the best way to help the Israelis and the Palestinians. I just don't pretend that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, or Hamas, support a two-state solution.
I believe the main obstacle to a peace agreement is the rejectionism of the Palestinians and their supporters in the West who are emboldening them.
Israel has made normalization agreements with six Arab countries. The Palestinians cannot even normalize relations between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Last month, Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid called for a two-state solution at the UN General Assembly. Lapid said: "We have only one condition: That a future Palestinian state will be a peaceful one. That it will not become another terror base from which to threaten the well-being, and the very existence of Israel. That we will have the ability to protect the security of all the citizens of Israel, at all times."
Under Article 31 of the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement, "Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations."
In other words, the Palestinians cannot bypass the Israeli negotiators and unilaterally declare a state until a final deal is concluded. As long as the progressives continue to embolden the Palestinian rejectionists, there will be no two-state solution.
Robert Zapesochny is a researcher and writer whose work focuses on foreign affairs, national security and presidential history. He has been published in numerous outlets, including The American Spectator, the Washington Times, and The American Conservative. When he's not writing, Robert works for a medical research company in New York. Read Robert Zapesochny's Reports — More Here.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.