What is your position on the two-state solution? Do you think lasting peace is possible without environmental justice and equitable access to resources?
Since its creation in 1948, the State of Israel has shown the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to be an illusion—a pretext used to extend a policy of colonization aimed at establishing a Greater Israel and the gradual expulsion of the Palestinian people from their historic land, Palestine. The idea of two coexisting states is made unfeasible by the stark imbalance of power between the two sides and Israel’s constant contempt for international law and fundamental human rights. Far from being a sovereign state in the classical sense, Israel appears as a project sustained by Western powers, notably the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as Anglo-Saxon financial circles, which guarantee its artificial survival.
This project must give way to a political reconstruction of a Palestinian nation centered on the indigenous people—the Palestinians—who must enjoy full rights over their land and resources, and live under strict equality among all citizens. Although this perspective may seem idealistic in light of the war crimes and ongoing genocide in Gaza under Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, resolving the Israeli question requires the abandonment of a supremacist, racialist, and militaristic project promoted by extremist factions within Israeli society. The presence of Jewish communities in Palestine, documented for more than a century, is compatible with such a vision. However, the colonial episode of the Zionist homeland and the State of Israel—born out of a historical power grab linked to the upheavals of the two world wars—must come to an end. Israel’s viability, on a territory equivalent to three French departments, depends on material, financial, and military flows from the West, particularly from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and other powers. Without this support, the Israeli entity could not endure long in the Middle East.
This analysis rests on the same observation made by General de Gaulle at his press conference on November 27, 1967, where he addressed the tensions and conflicts arising from the establishment of Israel in Palestine:
“The establishment, between the two world wars—for one must go back that far—of a Zionist homeland in Palestine, and then, after the Second World War, the establishment of a State of Israel, raised at the time a certain number of apprehensions. Indeed, one could ask—and many did, even among Jews themselves—whether the implantation of this community on lands acquired under more or less justifiable conditions, and in the midst of Arab peoples fundamentally hostile to it, would not lead to incessant, interminable frictions and conflicts.”
Several decades later, we can only reaffirm this analysis, while taking stock of the wars, tensions, and massacres directly or indirectly linked to the Israeli project. There is therefore not a multitude of possible solutions: the only long-term solution is the full liberation of Palestine.
And this full liberation of Palestine, inspired by the imperfect model of the end of apartheid in South Africa, requires international supervision to dismantle this powerful Israeli consortium. A policy of nationalization and expropriation—similar to what the Zionist leaders themselves implemented, for example through the Jewish National Fund (KKL) to seize Palestinian lands—will have to be undertaken to guarantee the entire Palestinian population free and fair access to the resources of Palestine. Such a process can only realistically take place under the supervision of an international organization grouping together major nations.
Contrary to Zionist propaganda worldwide, in this project of liberating Palestine “from the river to the sea,” Jewish communities would of course be able to remain in Palestine. But the international community, under the aegis of major nations, must bring an end to the existence of an ethno-religious, hyper-militarized, security-driven, and genocidal state, and instead impose a state founded on democratic principles, recognizing the right of all individuals from different communities—Christians, Muslims, Druze, etc.—to participate in public affairs on the basis of “one person, one vote.”
And in any case, lasting peace is inconceivable without equitable access to resources, which only such a reconfiguration can guarantee. This analysis, far removed from current events, is supported by numerous UN resolutions highlighting the illegality of the Israeli occupation and questioning the legitimacy of Israel’s presence in Palestine. General Assembly Resolution 181 of 1947, although proposing a non-binding partition plan rejected by the Palestinians, did not grant indisputable legitimacy to Israel’s unilateral creation in 1948.
Security Council Resolution 242 of 1967 demanded Israel’s withdrawal from occupied territories and condemned the acquisition of land by force. Resolution 338 of 1973 reaffirmed these principles in favor of a just peace. More recently, Resolution 2334 of 2016 declared Israeli settlements illegal and an obstacle to peace, while the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on July 19, 2024, ruled the occupation illegal and called for its rapid end due to violations of international humanitarian law and the Palestinians’ right to self-determination.
Finally, Resolution A/RES/ES-10/24 of September 2024 reaffirmed the illegality of the settlements and demanded an Israeli withdrawal within 12 months, reinforcing the argument that the establishment and expansion of Israel rest on repeated violations of international law and can only be resolved by restoring Palestinians’ fundamental rights over all their territory.
If the world ever regains its reason and commits to upholding international law while protecting the freedom of peoples, the Israeli project—which must be understood as a global threat (as illustrated by the twelve-day war between Iran and Israel in June 2025)—will have to be dismantled. It is imperative that the international community, especially major powers, act to prevent Israel’s ultra-militarism from eventually leading to the total destruction of the world.
In your view, what are the most severe environmental impacts of the war, particularly on water and soil in Gaza?
The war waged by Israel in Gaza since October 2023 has inevitably created an environmental catastrophe of unprecedented scale, with devastating impacts on water and soil that threaten the long-term survival of the Palestinian population and intensify an already critical humanitarian crisis. This crisis is marked by widespread pollution and irreversible degradation of vital resources, largely attributable to Israel’s intensive bombardments and blockade, which destroyed essential infrastructure and released toxic contaminants into the environment.
Many outlets such as Bloomberg, The Guardian, and international organizations like the UN and UNEP have documented these damages. Among the most serious consequences for water is the total collapse of the sanitation system, leading to the daily discharge of more than 130,000 cubic meters of untreated wastewater into the Mediterranean Sea and porous soils, thereby contaminating the coastal aquifer—the main water source for Gaza, as UN-affiliated independent experts revealed in the first months of Israel’s aggression.
The water consumed in Gaza contains pathogens, heavy metals, and chemicals from munitions and industrial debris, a problem worsened by the destruction of 88% of water wells and all desalination plants, reducing potable water production to one-third of prewar levels. This has forced the population to drink either saline or polluted water, fueling, since late 2023, outbreaks of waterborne diseases such as diarrhea and cholera, with heightened risks for children and displaced people.
Is a just peace possible without Palestinian control over water, land, and digital resources?
As mentioned earlier, a just peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains illusory without effective Palestinian control over resources, starting with water.
As Amnesty International and The Guardian have reported, Israel has exercised near-total monopoly over water resources in occupied Palestine since 1967, transforming this vital resource into an instrument of territorial control and oppression, in violation of international law. Israel confiscates shared sources and imposes draconian restrictions favoring Israeli settlers at the expense of Palestinians, thereby deepening inequality and humanitarian crises.
This monopoly is enforced through the national company Mekorot, which manages water infrastructure and allocates supplies in a discriminatory manner. In the West Bank, Israel controls 80% of mountain aquifers, leaving Palestinians less than 20% of available resources, with an average per capita consumption of only 70 liters per day compared with 300 for Israelis—a disparity Amnesty International has labeled a flagrant violation of human rights.
In Gaza, as mentioned, the Israeli blockade has led to over-exploitation of the coastal aquifer, rendering 96% of water unfit for consumption due to salinization and pollution, while Israel bans water transfers from the West Bank and routinely cuts supplies. During military offensives, pipelines and treatment plants are destroyed, further worsening the crisis.
As for land, Israel has exercised near-total monopoly since 1967, orchestrating systematic appropriation of Palestinian territories through expropriation, settlement expansion, and administrative restrictions designed to consolidate its territorial control while marginalizing Palestinians—in violation of international law. This monopoly relies on a legal and military arsenal that allows Israel to seize land under various pretexts—“security,” “public needs,” or classification as “state land”—depriving Palestinians of property rights and self-determination.
In the West Bank, over 60% of the territory (Area C) is under exclusive Israeli control, where Palestinians are banned from construction or access, while illegal settlements—state-backed—have multiplied, housing over 700,000 settlers in 2023 according to UN data. As noted earlier, UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016) condemned these settlements as a flagrant violation of international law, declaring them an obstacle to a two-state solution and a confiscation of Palestinian land.
In Gaza, although settlements were dismantled in 2005, the blockade and repeated bombings destroyed 67% of agricultural land, rendering thousands of hectares uncultivable, according to a UNEP report last year. Unfortunately, such examples abound. The Jordan Valley, for instance, a fertile region representing 30% of the West Bank, is under near-total Israeli control. Since the 1970s, Israel has confiscated thousands of hectares to establish agricultural settlements such as Ma’ale Efrayim, expelling Bedouin communities and restricting Palestinians’ access to farmland—considered a strategic zone by Israeli authorities, according to the Israeli NGO B’Tselem.
As for digital resources, Israel maintains an oppressive monopoly in occupied Palestine, using its control over technological infrastructure to block Palestinian autonomy, reinforce the occupation, and consolidate its self-styled status as a “Startup Nation.” This is supported by massive backing from U.S. tech firms and financial capital from Wall Street and the City of London, which fuel this digital and economic domination.
This control extends over telecommunications networks, internet access, technological equipment, and cyber-surveillance systems, restricting Palestinian digital development and turning cyberspace into a tool of repression. Israel dominates mobile and internet networks in Palestine, including the West Bank and Gaza, by controlling radio frequencies and equipment imports. Palestinian operators such as Jawwal and Paltel must go through Israeli companies for network access, leading to exorbitant costs and restricted access. For example, Palestinians only have access to 2G or 3G in the West Bank, while Israel uses 5G—an imposed technological lag that stifles Palestinian innovation and the digital economy.
In Gaza, Israel regularly imposes total or partial internet blackouts, as during the 2023–2024 offensives when bombings targeted communication towers, cutting network access for millions of Palestinians and hindering humanitarian coordination and freedom of expression (such as sharing photos, videos, or messages). In the West Bank, similar restrictions are imposed through control of submarine cables and access points.
Naturally, Israel also deploys advanced technologies, such as NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware, to surveil Palestinians, including activists, journalists, and political leaders. Reports from The Washington Post in 2021 revealed the use of systems like Blue Wolf and White Wolf, deployed by the Israeli army and settlers to scan Palestinians’ faces in the West Bank, building an intrusive database that reinforces security control and intimidates the population.
Israel’s ambition to position itself as a “Startup Nation”—a term popularized by Dan Senor and Saul Singer’s book—rests on its technological ecosystem, which accounts for 18% of its GDP and 50% of its exports, with a focus on cybersecurity, AI, and fintech. This model is intrinsically tied to its control of digital resources in Palestine, since its tech infrastructure has been partly developed thanks to the occupation. Elite military units such as Unit 8200 train cybersecurity experts who later fuel Israeli startups, often exploiting data collected through Palestinian surveillance. For instance, NSO Group, creator of Pegasus, was founded by former Unit 8200 members—illustrating how the occupation serves as a testing ground for technologies later exported worldwide.
The Israeli digital monopoly is bolstered by massive investments from U.S. tech giants and financing from Wall Street and the City. Around 53% of Israeli R&D is funded by foreign capital, mainly American. Companies like Google, Microsoft, Intel, and Amazon have R&D centers in Israel. For example, Intel invested $25 billion in a chip plant in Israel, and Microsoft launched an Azure Cloud region to strengthen Israeli digital infrastructure. Major acquisitions, such as Intel’s $15 billion purchase of Mobileye and Google’s $1.1 billion purchase of Waze, illustrate Israel’s integration into the global digital economy, supported by venture capital from Wall Street firms such as Sequoia Capital and Accel Partners. These investments, often motivated by profits derived from technologies tested in the context of occupation, allow Israel to maintain its grip over Palestinian digital resources while boosting its image as a global tech hub—at the expense of Palestinian digital sovereignty.
In conclusion, no peace can be achieved in the face of such imbalances—not only regarding water and land, where Palestinian legitimacy is strong, but also in the realm of technology and digital resources, which are being developed at the expense of the indigenous Palestinian population.
In your view, is the war in Gaza a geopolitical tool to impose a new world order?
The war in Gaza is indeed a key geopolitical instrument in establishing a new world order aimed at dismantling nations as political bulwarks against the domination of financial capital—a dynamic analyzed as early as the 1940s by the Belgian Marxist Jewish intellectual Abraham Léon in his Materialist Conception of the Jewish Question, when he described Israel as “the final phase of capitalism, a capitalism beginning to rot.”
Behind the physical and cultural destruction of the indigenous Palestinian people lies an attack against all the world’s peoples, because the Palestinian question transcends the colonial framework to embody a global struggle against capitalism, the power of money, and market logic, in both their spiritual and political dimensions. The Israeli entity, far from being a state in the classical sense—with defined borders, a homogeneous population, or a unified culture—operates like a consortium sustained by external funding, mainly Western, and militarily supported by groups originating from the Irgun, Haganah, and Betar, which became the IDF, Shin Bet, and Mossad, in close partnership with multinational tech corporations.
Since the announcement in 2020 of the “Great Reset”—a project often viewed as an attempt at global restructuring—the Israeli agenda of “Greater Israel” has advanced, seeking to extend influence over Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Gaza, and Yemen. This project is part of a broader strategy backed by Western leaders, as illustrated by figures such as Donald Trump submitting to Israeli interests, particularly through the Kushner Plan, which served as a prelude to operations in Gaza and initiatives such as “Gideon’s Chariots.”
The war in Gaza, marked by the systematic destruction of a people on their ancestral land, represents a crucial stage in this expansionist agenda with global implications: Israel’s aggression against Iran in 2024 exposed the risks of nuclear escalation and global conflict. Faced with this threat, all nations should rally behind the Palestinian cause, since the destruction of Palestine and its people foreshadows an attack on the survival of our societies and nation-states worldwide.
The eventual recognition of a Palestinian state at the UN in September 2025 by Emmanuel Macron’s France—even if followed by other countries—will not change the situation. The crucial political question world leaders must ask is the end of the Zionist project and of the Israeli entity, whose militarism and racialism are driving the world to the brink, threatening to trigger a third world war and the collapse of nations. Yet the corruption of many leaders prevents this question from even being raised.
Even so, hope must be kept alive: since October 7, 2023, a global awakening seems finally to be taking place, particularly among Western peoples, regarding the problem Israel poses for global stability.
Marc Gabriel Draghi
ID: @gabriel_draghi
Jurist / Author
Comment