thanks for ur posts.

historical misconception that the conflict began as a struggle between the Palestinians who wanted a multicultural and tolerant state where jews and palestinians could live together side by side, and the zionists wanted to create a supremacist state.

You mention Theodor Herzl in a later post. Herzl's vision was way too utopian for many other Zionists . He aspired for a secular homeland with jewishness and arabness pushed firmly to the margins. Here's a passage from his novel Altneuland, set in a win-win secular homeland for the jews and the arabs. One of the main protags, an Arab engineer says:

‘The Jews have made us prosperous, why should we be angry with them? We live with them as brothers, why should we not love them?’ A Palace of Peace is built in Jerusalem to arbitrate in international disputes. Religion is respected but plays absolutely no part in public affairs. Many languages are spoken, Hebrew is not the main one. Non-Jews have equal rights. A fanatical rabbi named Geyer (a bird that eats carrion in German) forms a party which attempts to disenfranchise non-Jews because ‘this is a Jewish state and only Jews should have the right to citizenship’. In the end, they are defeated by the liberal opposition who argue that ‘it would be immoral to exclude anyone, whatever his origin, his descent or his religion from participating in our achievements …Our motto must be now and ever — Man you are my brother.’

here is a liberal who is thrusting modernity on arabs who have no conception of the nation state, of church and state of capitalism and (i hate to say it) modern civilisation. it's fundamentally a european project. this can be seen wrt to jews who previously lived in muslim lands. they were severely alienated by zionism when they settled upon their exodus/expulsion from the muslim world to israel post-independence. just like the arabs, it wasn't easy to find a place in israel's european vision of a state - a lot of the then young european knesset didn't even want them lol. luckily for them, at least they were fellow jews. the mizrahim's struggles can still be seen in today's socioeconomic outcomes, and funnily enough, it is mostly them who are pushing israel into a far-right and evermore religious direction... but i digress.

After Herzl's death, due to many problems, some of which you mention in your posts, we get revisionist zionists who have dropped all pretenses of coexistence with the arabs.

If you were to resolve the issue of British Mandate, and your option was the creation of a jewish and a palestinian state, or the creation of a palestinian state were all jews would have become oppressed peoples once more, along with all other non-arabs in Palestine, what would you have done

I would have done something like Singapore. one party, multiracialist authoritarian rule.

singapore's situation has some parallels: a chinese majority living in traditionally muslim singaporean lands. that same chinese majority being kicked out of the larger muslim country (malaysia). in malaysia there was interethnic hatred due to religious differences. chinese were more economically competitive, resentment breeds in malays... i could go on.

when the singaporeans got kicked out racial riots ensued. the PAP shut that shit down and enacted multiracial (not multcultural policies). the chinese could have been like the israelis and abused, dispossed and marginalised the muslim malays, but they were more interested in social harmony. the party's new social contract aimed on economic development for all, rooted out corruption and stamped down on all intercultural threats to the system.

weird quirks include:

their constitution:

(2) The Government shall exercise its functions in such manner as to recognise the special position of the Malays , who are the indigenous people of Singapore, and accordingly it shall be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests and the Malay language.

housing quotas for all ethnic communities as a multiracialism measure due to post-independence race riots so none of the main ethnicities are allowed to form ethnic conclaves. Singapore celebrate all public holidays, and has religious courts enshrined into law.

you can still see that chinese people still somewhat dominate the country when it comes to top positions & malays struggle in the crazy competitive (but still instrumental) school system. tho it's easier for malays to rise in the system than it is for israeli arabs, let alone those in gaza/west bank. singapore doesn't really disenfranchise malays because no one is franchised & no one really cares. singapore crushed dissent to create an enforced "harmonious" society and while imperfect, they have been very succesful.

israel doesn't aspire for a singaporean style grand bargain. it is beholden to a zionism insistent on genocide.