“A two-state solution is the only path to long-term security for Israel as a Jewish and democratic state and to legitimate aspirations of Palestinians for a state of their own.”
Sources (click to view full provenance)
Propose an edit to this promise's details
Suggest a sourced correction to the promise text, topic, scope, significance, or dates. Changing the promise text requires a source. Your suggestion is reviewed before it changes the record.
Free — it takes a minute. New here? Create an account and complete the Contributor Agreement once.
Assessments
evidence-backed verdictsThese are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.
Independently verified. As president (2021-2025) Biden made the two-state solution official US policy, repeatedly and personally advocated it (UN, 2024 State of the Union), and drove the flagship diplomatic effort built around it (the Saudi-Israel normalization framework with a time-bound pathway to Palestinian statehood), while insisting the Gaza war end with a pathway to Palestinian independence, which Netanyahu rejected. That is active leadership of the effort beyond a single supporting vote, though it was never enacted (CHAMPIONED). Adversarial harshness check: the April 18, 2024 veto of Palestine's full UN membership (12-1-2) and continued largely unconditioned arms to Israel amid settlement expansion are real contradictions, but the UN Security Council record shows the US framed the veto as pro-two-state-through-negotiation ('does not reflect opposition to Palestinian statehood... it will only come from direct negotiations'), not as opposition to Palestinian statehood; so MISALIGNED/HOSTILE would be unfair. Leniency check: not FULL (never achieved) and confidence held moderate to reflect the gap between rhetoric and concrete pressure tactics. Same standard would yield CHAMPIONED for either party. Both cited quotes (UN News PRIMARY; Responsible Statecraft) verified verbatim against the live pages; all sources are real and live.
Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)
Sign in to vote.
Discussion
community opinionsComments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.
Sign in to join the discussion.
Propose a correction
community accountabilitySee an error in the promise text, status, significance, or missing source? Submit a sourced correction — a reviewer will evaluate and apply it if accurate. Your submission must cite evidence; unsourced changes are not accepted.
Sign in or create an account to propose a correction.
Debate
sourced community argumentsThese are sourced community arguments — not StumpWatch assessments. Each cites a source and is community-contributed; it does not change the official status or rating above.
No arguments yet
Be the first to weigh in. Every argument cites a source and is reviewed before it publishes. Create an account to add one and help keep this promise honest.
Add a sourced argument
Cite a source for your point. Submissions are held for reviewer approval before they appear.
Sign in or create an account to add an argument.