When the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) decided to embark on the two-state political platform in 1974, this constituted tacit recognition of the reality of the state of Israel in Palestine within the Green Line. The PLO's shift was also effectively an admission of defeat for the previous PLO programme that called for a secular, democratic state throughout all of Palestine. Today, advocates of the one-state solution argue that the two-state solution is no longer possible due to the realities Israel has created on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza. In other words, the political programme launched by the PLO in 1974 has effectively been defeated. The growing one-state movement is, thus, the third time Palestinians are reacting to Israel's defeat of Palestinian attempts to obtain their human rights. It is against this background that this paper attempts to address three questions: Why has the two-state political programme not been achieved?; What sources of non-violent power could potentially realize and effect Palestinian human rights?; and What is the single most important strategy of which no Palestinian political programme should ever lose sight?

This is a report on a conference held at the University of Massachusetts in Boston about the ‘One-State Solution for Palestine’. The latter is a response and an alternative to the ‘Two-State Solution’ favoured by the United States and the international community. Such a solution is losing credibility in terms of its possible implementation by most Arab Palestinians and the vast majority of Arabs. The two-day conference hosted academicians and activists from Palestine, the United States, and Europe defending the ‘One-State Solution’. (For further information, see http://www.onestateforpalestineisrael.com/ .)