If Israel offers a square foot of Negev Desert, they can get another square foot of Desert in return. Besides, it won't alleviate the problems the settlements cause by strangling the Palestinian economy and preventing any expansion of communities.
Every single settlement is built in the wrong place, and not a single of them can stay without making a Palestinian state less viable. If you don't believe me, you can always check the map:
Source: http://peacenow.org.il/eng/content/november-2011-map-settlements-west-bank-and-east-jerusalem
Every time I look at the map, I scratch my head, because I always reach the same conclusion: It's either the settlements or the two-state solution, but not both. Israel can't keep any settlements if there's going to be a two-state solution.
I must say that I seriously doubt Hillary Clinton's commitment to a two state solution - she's unwilling to criticize the settlements, and at the same time she's extremely critical of those who do in the form of BDS, a shown in the OP. Her stance makes a two-state solution impossible.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read