New Perspective and New Approach Needed to Resolve the Israel Palestine Crisis

New Perspective and New Approach Needed to Resolve “The Israel Palestine Crisis”

Casualties

From the Nakba of 1948 (the Palestinian catastrophe) to April 2024, more than 134,000 Palestinians have been killed due to Israeli aggression. Among these, from the year 2000 to April 2024, approximately 46,000 Palestinians were killed, and over 35,000 have died in Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip since October 2023 alone. The exact number of wounded is hard to determine, but it is estimated that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians have been injured in these conflicts.

While precise statistics are hard to obtain, the Israeli blockade and conflicts have led to increased food shortages and malnutrition in Gaza and the West Bank, causing the deaths of many Palestinians. In the Gaza war alone, more than 14,873 children have been killed.

Displacement

During the Nakba of 1948, around 800,000 Palestinians were displaced from their homeland. Currently, about 6.56 million (6.56 lakhs) Palestinians live as refugees in Arab countries, and approximately 800,000 reside in other countries.

In 1946, the total population of Palestine was about 1.9 million. Considering the high birth rate among Palestinians, this population has naturally grown to approximately 14.63 million today.

Land Distribution Between Israel and Palestine

In 1946, under the British Mandate, the total area of Palestine was approximately 27,000 square kilometers. Currently, Palestinians control the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which together span about 6,020 square kilometers, representing around 22% of historical Palestine’s total area. This indicates a significant reduction in Palestinian-controlled land due to historical and political changes.

Prior to 1946 (under the Ottoman Empire), the area of Palestine was about 27,000 square kilometers. The 1947 UN Partition Plan proposed dividing Palestine into Jewish and Arab states, allocating about 56% (15,128 sq km) of land to Jews (who comprised about 27% of the population), and 43% (11,672 sq km) to Palestinians (who were 62% of the population).

After the 1948 war, Israel expanded its control to approximately 78% (20,864 sq km) of the land. From the 43% allocated to Palestinians, Israel seized about 35%, adding it to their territory. Thus, Israel occupied 22% more land than was originally proposed by the UN. Compared to 1946, Israel has significantly increased its territory, reflecting historical and political shifts.

Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa Mosque Area

The Al-Aqsa Mosque is located in the southeastern part of Jerusalem’s Old City, covering an area of about 144,000 square meters (14.4 hectares). This site is known to Muslims as Haram al-Sharif. The Old City of Jerusalem spans about 0.9 square kilometers (90 hectares) and contains holy sites for three religions:

• Islam: Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock (Qubbat As-Sakhrah)

• Christianity: Church of the Holy Sepulchre

• Judaism: Western Wall (Kotel)

Al-Aqsa Mosque and its surrounding Haram al-Sharif area occupy about 16% of Jerusalem’s Old City.

If Palestine’s total area is 27,000 square kilometers, then:

• 33% = 8,910 sq km

• 44% = 11,880 sq km

• 77% = 20,790 sq km

• 56% = 15,120 sq km

The Jerusalem District spans about 6,800 sq km, and the Al-Aqsa area occupies roughly 0.2% of it. The Jerusalem District makes up 25.18% of Palestine’s total area. Today, Jerusalem is fully under Israeli control, although Palestinians claim East Jerusalem as their capital. After the Six-Day War of 1967, Israel captured East Jerusalem and later declared it its capital—a claim that remains internationally disputed. Palestinians insist that East Jerusalem should be the capital of their future state.

Jerusalem City and Al-Aqsa

• East Jerusalem (pre-1967): -670 sq km = 2.48% of Palestine’s 27,000 sq km.

• Total area of Jerusalem: -710 sq km = 2.63% of total Palestine.

• West Jerusalem: -40 sq km.

Religious Sites and Locations

• Islam:

  • Al-Aqsa Mosque: Southeastern part of Old City, East Jerusalem

  • Dome of the Rock: Center of Old City, East Jerusalem

• Christianity:

  • Church of the Holy Sepulchre: Western part of Old City, East Jerusalem

• Judaism:

  • Western Wall (Kotel): Western part of Old City, East Jerusalem

We know that the first seven proposed solutions to the Palestine crisis have failed:

1. Establishing a joint state of Palestinians and Israelis. (Only Israel emerged as an insecure state; Palestine did not)

2. Separate independent states for Palestine and Israel. (Neither side truly agreed, especially not Israel)

3. Resettling Israelis in Madagascar. (Israel did not agree)

4. Resettling Israelis as an autonomous nation in a Russian province. (Israel did not agree)

5. Offering them a new state in an unoccupied part of Africa. (Israel did not agree)

6. Dispersing and rehabilitating Jews across various countries. (Israel didn’t agree, and no country was willing to take in so many migrants)

Now, I present some additional proposed solutions:  Third-Party or Three-State Proposal

This idea suggests dividing the territory into three parts:

• One part under Palestinian control

• One part under Israeli control

• A third neutral zone under the control of neither side

This neutral zone would be governed by the United Nations, under an international council, and be free from both Israeli and Palestinian control…

(Note: The rest of the article is cut off at this point. If you’d like me to complete the translation of the remaining part, please share it.)

 Third Party Concept or Three-State Proposal

If a proposal is made to divide the territory into three parts—one controlled by Palestinians, another by Israel, and the third being a neutral zone—then that third country would not be under either Israeli or Palestinian control. This country would be under the authority of the United Nations and governed by a council. The number of settlers from both Israel and Palestine would be regulated. However, all Palestinians and Jews could enter the area. No military personnel from either side would be allowed entry without permission, and more than 10 military personnel could not enter at once. They would also be forbidden from entering with weapons or in military uniform.

Civilians would not need permission to enter, but registration would be required. Jerusalem would be established as an independent and sovereign state. Citizens from all countries except Israel and Palestine would need a visa to enter. While Palestinians and Israelis could enter without a visa, their numbers would be regulated—not more than 20,000 per day.

This new country would cover 6,800 square kilometers, which is 22% of the total territory. Though sovereign, it would remain under UN control for a transitional period and would have no military of its own. The UN peacekeeping force would be responsible for its security. Its airspace would be a no-fly zone for all countries, except for authorized civilian aircraft.

Only those who believe in equal rights for citizens of both nations and in peace instead of war would be allowed to live there. It would prosper through missionary activities, investment, and donations from different countries. Tourism would be one of its key sectors. There would be special protection policies for minorities. A special treaty would establish the country, with all terms detailed.

Proposed Population Distribution:

• Proposal 1: Palestinians 62%, Israelis 33%, Arab Christians 5%

• Proposal 2: Palestinians 40%, Israelis 30%, Arab Christians 10%, Other Arabs 10%

• Proposal 3: Palestinians 35%, Israelis 25%, Arab Christians 10%, Neighboring Arabs 10%, Citizens of other countries 20%

• Proposal 4: Palestinians 33%, Israelis 20%, Arab Christians 10%, Neighbors 15%, Global citizens 22%

• Proposal 5: Palestinians 30%, Israelis 20%, Arab Christians 10%, Neighbors 12%, Global citizens 25%

The goal of involving global citizens through immigration is to connect international interests to this region. The number and percentage of immigrants from different countries and religions would be predefined.

New solutions could emerge through discussion and analysis. A Council would be formed based on population ratios. The council would include one representative each from Palestine, Israel, Arab Christians, the UN, and the Arab League—5 in total. An additional 20 representatives would be chosen based on population or direct elections, totaling 25 council members. Initially, selection would be by population, followed by election.

Jerusalem would be declared a UN Peace Land.

What features will UN PeaceLand have?

1. PeaceLand will be governed under the UN through a council. Council structures may vary by agreement with each country.

2. Population will be regulated by number and percentage.

3. No single country will hold a majority.

4. No military personnel may enter without permission; no weapons or military uniforms allowed.

5. No country may use its land or airspace for war purposes.

6. Violation of its policies may lead to revocation of citizenship.

7. It will be recognized as a sovereign country and a UN member.

8. Every UN office worldwide will have a PeaceLand division with a diplomat; visas will be issued from there.

9. Though it won’t have a military, it may have a police force, and will have its own flag, symbol, and representation in international forums.

10. PeaceLand will have a distinct representative in the Arab League and regional organizations. The representative can be a citizen or from the UN peace mission.

8) Proposal for a Third and Fourth State

Under this idea, the third state would only be Jerusalem city, with an area of 710 sq km. Additionally, there would be a fourth state, with borders designed to separate Israel and Palestine in a way that direct attacks become impossible. This would also be a neutral state with a controlled population:

• Israel + Palestine (combined): 30%

• Other Arab countries: 30%

• Global citizens: 30%

• 10% special category settlers approved by the UN.

Global investment would help develop this country into a modern state. It would have maritime borders and be home to people who value mutual rights, peace, democracy, and reject racism.

Jerusalem city would have an area of 710 sq km, while the fourth state (GulfLand) would be 6,000 sq km. It would be an independent, sovereign country, but during its initial formation would remain under the PeaceLand framework. Power would later be transferred to its citizens through elections.

Initially, all PeaceLand rules would apply. Even after becoming sovereign with its own military, the restriction on using its land and air for other nations’ military purposes would remain. Residents would be peace-believing individuals from both Israel and Palestine.

If the Palestinian population percentage is not met, it would be filled by Arab Muslims.
If Israeli numbers fall short, Jews from other countries would fill in.
If Arab Christians fall short, Christians from other countries would be brought in.

9) Plan for a Third, Fourth, and Fifth State

Here:

• Palestine would receive 43% of the land, as allocated by the UN.

• Israel would get 33% of the land, matching its 1946 population ratio.

• Jerusalem City would be a 4% land area or 1,000 sq km.

• GulfLand would be 10% or 2,700 sq km.

• FriendLand would also be 10% or 2,700 sq km.

FriendLand would be for those from both Israel and Palestine (especially Arabs) who wish to live together. Their population numbers would also be fixed and regulated. It would initially be under PeaceLand and could later become a sovereign state.

Benefits of These Two Small Countries (GulfLand and FriendLand):

1. Their borders would include access to the sea, and they would prevent direct borders between Israel and Palestine.

2. A five-country coalition would form, centered around the Dead Sea and Jerusalem, including Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, and others.

3. People from around the world would come to invest and engage in tourism.

4. Peace-loving Israelis and Palestinians could settle safely in their own land.

5. These people would be able to elect their own government.

6. If everyone agrees, this could lead to permanent peace in the region.

7. Involving the global community would make it a multiparty issue, not just bilateral.

8. Those Palestinians who don’t agree with Hamas could come to a separate state and express their views.The Third State Theory 

   “Third State” or “Third Country” solution proposed in your text is a bold, imaginative, and structurally detailed idea to resolve one of the most intractable conflicts in modern history — the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly around Jerusalem. Here’s my perspective on it:

   Positives of the Third State Solution

   1. Neutral Ground for Peace

   Creating a neutral, sovereign state governed under the United Nations with restricted military access could de-escalate tension around Jerusalem — one of the most sacred and contested cities in the world. The idea of making it a “UN Peace Land”  with shared, regulated access has the potential to reduce direct confrontation.

   2. Demographic Balance and Control

   The proposed system of population quotas based on religion, ethnicity, and origin — including Jews, Palestinians, Arab Christians, and international citizens — aims to ensure no single group dominates. This could foster diversity and a culture of coexistence.

   3. Symbolic and Diplomatic Value

   Making Jerusalem a model city for peace under the UN could serve as a symbolic precedent — like how Geneva represents diplomacy. It could become a beacon of interfaith harmony, showcasing a new way forward for divided cities and regions globally.

   4. Economic and Cultural Hub

   With open access to international citizens, investment, tourism, missionary and educational activities, the Third State could be a cultural and economic powerhouse — potentially turning a conflict zone into a thriving global city.

   ⚠️ Challenges and Concerns

   1. Feasibility & Political Resistance

   Convincing both Israel and Palestine — and their allies — to cede authority over Jerusalem or allow a new sovereign entity in that region is highly unlikely under current political dynamics. Nationalism, historical grievances, and religious sentiments run deep.

   2. Security Risks

   Maintaining a demilitarized zone surrounded by two hostile or mistrusting neighbors is risky. The UN has struggled in the past with peacekeeping (e.g., Rwanda, Bosnia), so success would depend on strong international will and cooperation.