What’s new:

Henry Kissinger, the renowned former U.S. Secretary of State, expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of the two-state solution for Israel and Palestine shortly before his death at the age of 100.

Why it matters:

Kissinger’s comments carry weight due to his historical role in shaping U.S. foreign policy and his influence on international relations. As the first Jewish Secretary of State, his views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are particularly notable. His stance suggests a shift in thinking regarding long-standing approaches to achieving peace in the Middle East.

Big picture:

Amid recent escalations of violence, Kissinger questioned the promise of peace that the two-state solution purportedly offers. He cited the complications following Israel’s unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip and the rise of Hamas as evidence of the two-state solution’s limitations.

Between the lines:

Kissinger proposed that, instead of pursuing direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, which he deemed unfruitful especially after recent events, engagement should occur between the Arab world and Israel. He highlighted the changing dynamics in the region, with Egypt’s shifting allegiances and the need for greater American involvement to prevent ongoing conflict.

Alternative paths:

In lieu of the two-state framework, Kissinger suggested the possibility of transferring control of the West Bank to Jordan. He argued that the two-state model leaves room for hostile intentions against Israel, particularly from territories under Palestinian control.

What we’re watching:

As the region grapples with the aftermath of Kissinger’s comments and the recent surge in violence, the international community may consider new strategies for peace and security in the Middle East. Kissinger’s insights could prompt a reassessment of the two-state solution and exploration of alternative approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

This story was first published on ynetnews.com.