nationalism is a relatively recent phenomenon in world history the rise of the modern nation state began about three hundred years ago since then many emerging nations have claimed their independence and palestine is no exception the sharing of palestine and the existence of the state of the one nine hundred eighty eight declaration of a sovereign palestinian state gained little attention at the time however since then over one hundred other countries and formally recognize palestine more recently brazil and argentina have weighed in with their recognition of palestine within one nine hundred sixty seven boundaries although the declaration achieved nothing in itself in establ a template for the acceptance of a sovereign palestinian nation in the remaining portion of territory not claimed by israel in one thousand nine hundred eighty eight it is this aspiration for palestinian statehood that in september two thousand and eleven finally came before the united now we are talking about the one nine hundred sixty seven boundaries which are only twenty two percent of what is left of historical palestine and other than forty four percent of historical palestine and there's different already predetermined we know where the result is that was the point of the declaration of independence it was the point of recognizing u n resolutions that implicitly at that time recognized israel and certainly after  three when the p l o explicitly offered full recognition of israel there was no question left anymore about the fact that the palestinian representative body record recognizes the state of israel but the assumption was that negotiations would be about how to arrive at that is already determined result that's not what it turned out to be and i think here we don't have to think of the parties one of the parties as being honest or the other one being dishonest that's not how we have to view it we literally did not understand one another israel supports two state solution a palestinian state side by sides two or jury states this has been the policy for the almost to the year of two thousand and eight give very very generous offers to the palestinians that were rejected by the palestinians the language of two state solution was adopted by the most hard line state of his own making of his own dreams one that looks exactly like how he would like to see palestinians you know cornered we're surrounded no jerusalem for them all the settlements at least the big startlement stay you can divide it into different parts so that you can really keep control over it israel gets to control the jordan valley of course he supports that with palestinians been very competent but you cannot accuse it of being inconsistent it has been clear consistent unwavering never strayed from the very very clear answer of what constitutes an acceptable the acceptable parameters of a palestinian state prepared for a person a palestinian state could be reached only by direct negotiations this is the path the only viable path the only realistic get into peace into a real peace between the israelis and the palestinians no other path will achieve that the israelis thought they were entering into  order to determine what it is their face how the mechanisms of how they can give back what they feel comfortable giving back as long as it does not go beyond what they consider to be the red line palestinians thought they were entering into a negotiation simply about the means of arriving at a full withdrawal to the one hundred sixty seven lines that lead to do two different understandings of what it is to negotiate well actually there is no such thing as bilateral negotiations because you have an asymmetry of power you have the israelis as the occupying power controlling everything and the palestinians as people under occupation and under settlements building that was stealing more land country skating ideas expelling palestinians ethnic cleansing transforming the whole character of palestine all these unilaterally so the bilateral negotiations have been create these facts we need first of all curbing israeli violations immediately holding israel accountable which the international community is responsible to do and then ensuring that the palestinian hundred forty seven actually the un the general assembly have decided on a partition result to divide is road into a jewish state and into an arp stage and the fact of the matter is that the palestinians be our resolution often people talk about the nine hundred forty seven partition plan of the un and how palestinians would not accept it it's hard to imagine how people living in a functioning vibrant society can be made to imagine that they have to now carve up their society not only their land their lives they have to carve up the relationships they have with other people to accommodate the establishment of another state in the midst of their country it was an impossible idea for them to accept of course we can think back now and say maybe they should have accepted it would have been better there is no question that they would have fared better in history had the accepted it but they would have had to be something not human to have done that i think but after the destruction of palestine in  forty eight the focus was how to rebuild oneself how to rebuild one society how to regain one's right and how to regain a shred of dignity took a long time for large segments of the palestinian public to actually be able to take seriously the idea that maybe the answer to their to t to their to their problem can lie in having a mini state that a mini state while it will not return their land fully it will not return their rights it will not give them justice it will not give them what is due to them justice injustice will remain done to them they will remain the victims of oppression they will remain people who have been dispossessed and dispersed but that the might be able to find a way to live with a shred of dignity if there were to be a state in a small part of their country twenty two percent of we asked students at piers a university near ramallah what they thought about recognizing palestine refugees to us i mean the un has always been the source of international legitimacy international law but also the home of the international community so we are going back to the u n in order to say we have and they should among nations we want to add value to be recognized to be protected to be preserved because obviously under occupation israel has been carrying out all sorts of prejudicial measures that are destroying the palestinian and we think that any the solution has to be based on international law i believe that these things the this is a distraction that what matters is reality and getting declarations from the u s changes nothing on the ground and i think that it ultimately is a gift to israel by setting borders that in a sense relinquish the rights of the rest of the palestinians and the refugees of course israel is making a big fuss about it but at the end of the day i think the risk is that it you know it's as if we're saying well we couldn't create a real palestinian state so let's pretend to have one we'll just go to the u n and declare one anyway and this is meaningless on the ground so i'm very skeptical and i think it distracts from real efforts to change the power equation going to the squarely and firmly within international law and within the international community to as saying this is not our creation this is the creation again of the international community we have that act to set the  law of international law and is that has to be held accountable and of course our territory has to be recognized as the one nine hundred sixty seven boundaries as occupied territory jerusalem has to be recognized as our capital and so in a way this time that the world is science that that has to be some sort of engagement and intervention to prevent israel from resting the whole region into a whole new cycle of violence and extremism actually if we are speaking about history it's worthwhile reminding people here that on december fifteenth one thousand nine hundred eighty eight the palestinians already went to the general assembly and already got a resolution for a palestinian state one hundred four countries supported that only two voted against that the united states and israel and nothing the palestinians did not receive a state because of that and that will clearly be the case in september if they go again to the to the general assembly of the u n they should understand and the word should clarify to them that if they want to state and we want them to have a state they should anything in the day after so i don't know the results of this thing it's basically a very interesting tactic decision that has you know pros and cons but as an israeli activists that is struggling together w listing and it's really interesting to see how it corners all the propaganda machine of the right wing israeli government around the world to become more and more  not all critics of israel agree with the current palestinian bid for statehood embodied in their objection is a concept known as the one state solution a proposal in which the entire territory of historic palestine would be united in a single secular democratic state with equal rights for jews and arabs alike civil rights and then we have more of them jews and this is the greatest fear of jewish israelis even the left the most left the majority you know to lose the most graphically try to predict where the trend is the trend is not towards anything that looks like a palestinian state so anybody in their right mind looking at what's going on on the ground would have to arrive at that conclusion is that every vers but it would take it would take a very concerted will on the part of israelis to reverse this and they seem to indicate nothing but the opposite will the will not to make that possible so people who are sober minded very looking at the ground and seeing what's looking in front of them and saying let me take my cue from what the world looks like on the ground invariably conclude this is not leading to a state this thing is not realizable the people who support the one state solution a really i think people with their more a communist or inflation or is called the lunatic left in israel and my opinion is that they're it's not up to me to decide it's up to the palestinians to decide what they want there are other visions as i said people often talk about a one state solution and i don't want to criticize that vision because it is a beautiful building it is a vision in which you imagine the israeli people and the palestinian people from within themselves overcoming their past overcoming their conflict and saying we will live as equal citizens what is unsaid in the articulation of that vision we will erase our identity as we now understand it we will be different people we will no longer think of ourselves as palestinians we will become something else will no longer think of ourselves as israelis we will become something else these things that happened in human history but it's something that monumental you would have to wait for the one state solution to be something other than a beautiful and very admirable dream in a world that resembles our own that is structured by the territorial state in which human beings organize themselves and identify themselves along national lines the one state solution is very difficult to imagine so sadly we find ourselves between a beautiful but unrealizable vision in the world we know beautiful and also unrealizable vision but with a little bit more possibility of realizing what would be the parameters of a sovereign palestine and how could it be successful if it did exist well i think what i'm striving for what i've been striving for all my life is to have an independent sovereign palestine that is genuinely democratic that has system of good governance based on the rule of law based on  that interacts with others on the basis of equality with common perceptions and values that admin everson like human rights and so on so it is this state that we are struggling for of course the bandit is the sixty seven boundaries we cannot afford to give away more land we've already compromised to accept only twenty two percent of historical palestine and israel insists it wants to annex even more of those boundaries which means the west bank including one vision of a dynamic and prosperous palestine comes from a small town on the california coast the arc project began back in two thousand and three when two private donors who are affiliated associated with the rand corporation a research institution here in santa monica approached friends separately with an interest in funding to studies about a prospective palestinian state the first study would look at the broader question of what would a palestinian state if one were created need to succeed and the second study was focused more on the inference the physical infrastructure of the state would need transportation housing and so one of the conclusions of the study was that if a palestinian state is going to succeed gaza and the west bank would have to be a single territorial into which means that they would need some form of l and a link has been part of every diplomatic agreement since oslo in the form of what are called safe passage one of the main benefits is connecting the places where people live and work that's a basic principle of cities around the world for people to have jobs and to take care of their families go to school they need to be able to move freely and easily between between cities that's what the arc infrastructure does that allows relatively rapid movement north to south between the major cities but also with connections to very good bus service from the east and west to smaller cities and the outskirts of the primary town generally our work is urban designers is focused on  helping people enjoy the maximum benefits they can from living in cities in different parts of the world and the principles that we applied in palestine in a way were no different than we applied to projects anywhere else in the world we made a huge assumption that peace accord had been signed that a new state had been formed and then asked the question what's the way to optimize the land the cities and the people in the human resources to grade the best chances for success in that new state so that's how we approach the problem not not politically not with with an agenda but trying to problem solve with a with a very good to be sure optimistic set of assumptions but those there will have to be a peace accord if a new state is to come into existence and and enjoy the possibility of success and we hope that