‘How Can There Be Peace?’: Anchor Stunned As Israeli Ambassador ‘Absolutely’ Rejects Two-State Solution

In a heated interview with Sky News journalist Mark Austin, Israeli ambassador Tzipi Hotovely dismissed a two-state solution to the ongoing Israeli-Palestine conflict, telling the reporter that the idea of a Palestinian state alongside Israel is off the table.

The Hamas attack that occurred in October, Hototvely asserted, had completely changed the acceptability of previously negotiated peace frameworks. She said Israel had new ideas about what it required for its future security.

When pressed on whether a new paradigm would include a Palestinian state, Hotovely’s response was unequivocal: “Absolutely no.”

“Is there still a chance for a two-state solution?” Austin asked.

“I think it’s about time for the world to realise the Oslo paradigm that failed on the 7th of October,” Hotovely said, referencing the Oslo Accords, a series of agreements made in the 1990s aimed at achieving peace in the Middle East.

She continued: “We need to build a new one, and in order to build a new one…”

Austin interrupted: “And does that new one include the Palestinians living in a state of their own?”

“I think the biggest question is what kind of Palestinians are on the other side,” the ambassador said. “This is what Israel realises…”

“Do [the Palestinians] have a state though?” Austin pressed again.

“The answer is absolutely no and I’ll tell you why,” Hotovely replied.

“Then how can there be peace? Without a state for Palestine, how can there be peace in Israel?” the journalist asked. Talking over one another, Hotovely called the reporter by name and laid out the Israeli position clearly.

“Mark, the world should know now,” she said. “The reason that Oslo Accords failed is because the Palestinians never wanted to have a state next to Israel. They want to have a state from the river to the sea.”

“So the two state solution is dead?”

“Why are you obsessed with a formula that never worked, that created this radical people on the other side?” she pushed back. “Why are you obsessed with that?”

Hotovely’s statement signals a significant shift in Israeli diplomatic rhetoric and raises questions about the future of peace negotiations. The stance represents a stark departure from previous diplomatic efforts aimed at resolving the conflict through the creation of two states, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace and security.

This significant moment in Israeli foreign policy, casting doubt on the viability of previously pursued peace solutions and suggesting a new, yet unclear, path forward will bring implications for diplomats negotiating Israel’s shifting stance in one of the world’s most enduring and complex conflicts in recent history.

Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com