GZERO World Clips
How Netanyahu used Hamas to avoid talks of a two-state solution

How Netanyahu used Hamas to avoid talks of a two-state solution | GZERO World

Israel’s government doesn’t want a two-state solution with Palestine, according to the former prime minister.
On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer sits down with former Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Barak to discuss the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas and the possibility of a two-state solution. Barak was part of the 2000 Camp David negotiations, and came closer than any other Israeli leader to securing peace, though ultimately failed. Barak’s belief is that current Israeli government–headed by his perennial rival Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu–makes the dream of a lasting peace even more distant.
“If your conclusion is that Israel is the only or the main responsible for the situation, you're wrong,” Barak tells Bremmer, “But if you mention as a matter of fact that this government doesn't want to see two-state solution, that's objectively accurate.”
Barak thinks Netanyahu’s policies have counterintuitively promoted the idea that Hamas in Gaza is an asset while the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank is a liability, not the other way around, all for political reasons. This dynamic has led to a “poison pill” against any political process, which is now even more difficult to achieve following the October 7th attacks and subsequent invasion.
Ian Bremmer answers reader questions about geopolitical risks and potential conflicts, from the Middle East and the South China Sea to Ukraine and Venezuela.
Regional parliamentary elections began in the Pakistan-administered portion of Kashmir on Monday, but the first round of voting has been racked with violence.
Newly released Kimi K3 has become the center of a fierce debate in Washington and Silicon Valley over whether America’s “closed” approach is protecting its lead, or helping China catch up.
In his latest Quick Take, Ian Bremmer discusses the on-again off-again ceasefire between the United States and Iran and why it has failed to hold, arguing that both sides remain locked in a fundamental disagreement over who has the leverage.