“At the end of the day, I fear that the United States, Israel and the Arabs will fall short of meeting Abu Mazen’s requirements for staying on,” he said. “More than likely, we are entering a new era.”

So said former Assistant Secretary to the Middle East/North Africa and former U.S. ambassador Israel Martin Indyk.

What new era is Indky referring to? Indyk knows that Israeli refusal to end settlement expansion on the occupied West Bank and Israel’s objection to sharing Jerusalem with the Palestinians has for all purposes nearly ended the prospects for a two-state solution.

Israel has built so many settlements that it is not even clear is a viable Palestinian state can still emerge and in any case regardless of events on the West Bank, the Palestinians will never accept a deal that denies them their right to have occupied East Jerusalem as their capital.

If history passes the two-state solution, then the “new era” will be the battle for a one-state solution. Indyk, as a passionate Zionist, fears this because Israel will lose that battle.

What will this “new era” look like. The Financial Times perfectly captured the fight for equal rights in the Holy Land:

If that is so, then the prospect is for a long and bitter fight for equal rights within one state. That would spell the end of Israel as a democratic Jewish state. It would come to resemble in many ways the struggle against apartheid in South Africa. If Mr Netanyahu believes that he has achieved a victory by refusing to halt the settlements, he is wrong. It is more like a project of national suicide.

Israel has brought its own demise through its arrogance, hubris and greed.