Skip to content

Israel Palestine Trumps Deal of the Century the Two-State Solution reduced to

Marxist Theory · 2020-01-28

Core Argument

The article argues that Trump's "Deal of the Century" is not a genuine peace proposal but an ultimatum designed to provide full US backing for Israeli expansionism while reducing the two-state solution to absurdity. The plan's impossible demands on the Palestinian leadership — including recognition of illegal settlements, surrender of the right of return, acceptance of Jerusalem as Israel's "undivided" capital, and submission to permanent military occupation — are intentionally structured to be rejected, thereby giving Israel a free hand to pursue annexation with Washington's explicit endorsement. The central thesis is that the deal marks the logical endpoint of the Oslo Accords framework, which Marxists denounced from the outset as a trap that would lead precisely to this outcome.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis is rooted in the Marxist tradition's understanding of imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism, and specifically the role of the US as the dominant imperialist power in the Middle East. It draws on the classical Marxist critique of "national self-determination" under conditions of imperialist domination, where formal statehood is offered as a cover for continued subordination. The article implicitly deploys Lenin's analysis of how imperialist powers use "independent" states as instruments of indirect rule, and Trotsky's concept of "combined and uneven development" — here applied to the grotesque geography of the proposed Palestinian entity, a collection of disconnected plots linked by tunnels and bridges, with no control over borders, water, energy, or trade.

The argument also sits within the Marxist tradition's long-standing critique of the two-state solution as a framework that legitimises Zionist colonisation while offering Palestinians a statelet stripped of sovereignty. This places the article in continuity with the positions of the Fourth International and later Trotskyist currents, which rejected both the PLO's reformist strategy and the Stalinist-influenced "peace camp" that accepted Oslo as a step toward liberation.

Conjunctural Relevance

The article was published in February 2020, at a specific conjuncture shaped by several factors:

  • Israeli political crisis: Netanyahu had just been charged with bribery, fraud and breach of trust (28 January 2020), and Israel had endured two inconclusive elections in April and September 2019, with a third looming on 2 March 2020. Trump's intervention was timed to boost Netanyahu's electoral prospects.

  • US imperialist strategy: The Trump administration had already moved the US embassy to Jerusalem (May 2018), endorsed the Jewish Nation State Law (September 2018), and recognised Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights (March 2019). The "Deal of the Century" was the culmination of this trajectory — the most complete US backing for Israeli land-grabbing ever offered.

  • Regional dynamics: The plan relied on Gulf monarchies (Saudi Arabia, UAE) to provide investment and a cheap Palestinian labour force in special economic zones, revealing the alignment of interests between US imperialism, Israeli capital, and Gulf petro-monarchies against the Palestinian masses.

  • Palestinian political impasse: The Palestinian Authority under Abbas was already deeply compromised, with little authority among the population. The article predicts that any leadership accepting the deal would face a mass revolt, especially from Palestinian youth.

Where the Argument Continues

The article is a conjunctural analysis of a specific event — the unveiling of Trump's plan — but it points toward several ongoing lines of argument within the Marxist tradition:

  • The fate of the two-state solution: The article argues this plan reduces the two-state solution to absurdity, but it does not fully develop what comes next. The logical conclusion — that only a single, democratic, secular state in historic Palestine can resolve the contradiction — is implicit but not elaborated. This argument is developed elsewhere in the Marxist tradition, particularly in writings on the one-state solution.

  • The role of the Palestinian Authority: The article notes that Abbas cannot accept the deal without provoking revolt, but it does not analyse the PA's class character or its function as a subcontractor of Israeli occupation. This is a theme taken up in other IDOM articles on the PA's collaborationist role.

  • The Israeli ruling class: The article notes that Netanyahu and Gantz agree on the Palestinian question despite their rivalry, but it does not explore the internal contradictions within the Israeli bourgeoisie — between expansionist settlers and capital seeking stability — which are analysed in broader Marxist texts on Zionism as a settler-colonial project.

  • The response of the Arab regimes: The Gulf monarchies' role is mentioned but not fully theorised. The article points toward a broader analysis of how Arab ruling classes have been integrated into US-Israeli regional hegemony, a theme developed in Marxist writings on the "normalisation" process.

Connections

  • Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism: The theoretical framework for understanding how imperialist powers use formal sovereignty to maintain domination.

  • Trotsky, The Permanent Revolution: The concept of combined and uneven development is essential for grasping the grotesque geography of the proposed Palestinian entity.

  • IDOM articles on the Oslo Accords: The article explicitly references the Marxist denunciation of Oslo in 1993. Earlier IDOM pieces on the two-state solution provide the historical context.

  • Against the Stream episodes on Israel-Palestine: The RCI's podcast has covered the evolution of US policy, the normalisation deals (Abraham Accords), and the collapse of the PA's authority.

  • Marxist writings on settler colonialism: The article implicitly draws on the tradition that analyses Zionism as a settler-colonial project, distinct from classical imperialism but articulated with it. Key texts include those of the Israeli Marxist left (e.g., Moshe Machover, Akiva Orr) and the tradition of the Revolutionary Communist League (Israel).

Key Quotes

  1. "Trump's 'Deal of the Century' is not a deal, but rather an ultimatum. It was never Trump and Kushner's intention for it to be accepted by the Palestinian leadership, which was not even invited at the plan's public presentation, not to speak of the negotiating table."

  2. "This 'Deal of the Century' marks the Reductio ad Absurdum of the 'two-state solution' underpinning the Oslo Accords of 1993, which established the Palestinian Authority. As Marxists, we denounced them back then as a trap for the Palestinians, which would lead to the present, nightmarish scenario."

  3. "The new Palestinian 'state' drawn on the map is not and will never be viable. Israel will continue holding the keys to the entire Palestinian infrastructure: water, energy, telecommunications, supplies and trade by access to deep-sea ports."

  4. "The Palestinian entity will be a conglomerate of separate plots connected by a maze of bridges or tunnels (the most crucial being a long tunnel connecting the West Bank and Gaza)."

  5. "Any section of the Palestinian leadership going down that road will lose what little authority they still have in the eyes of the Palestinian masses, especially the youth, who will be rebelling against these unacceptable terms of capitulation dictated by the Israeli state with the patronage of US imperialism."

  6. "The conditions attached for the implementation of the Plan are a list of the most humiliating demands from the Palestinians that could possibly be envisaged, all in the framework of a four-year 'transitional phase' to be implemented under a de-facto Israeli occupation."