This post was originally published in Hebrew, in Haaretz.

There are two prevailing myths among the Israeli left that we should critically examine. First, that the occupation is destined to fail: the Palestinians will not tolerate it forever, and so we can anticipate further rounds of violence, ultimately leading to its collapse. Second, that Israel is already a de-facto binational reality and that, barring a diplomatic solution, we are destined (for better or for worse) to live in a binational state.

These claims are inaccurate. History shows that the status quo in Israel-Palestine, and many other nations, is sustainable. Military occupations, discrimination and segregation do not dissipate on their own. In Israel, it will take a broad, Palestinian-Jewish-International coalition to end the occupation. As long as the balance of power is so clearly in Israel’s favor, and as long as Israel is determined to hold on to the territories and continue with its system of segregation and discrimination, we have no reason to think the Palestinians will make any political gains in their national struggle – not through peace, nor through violence.

The comparison between Israel and other colonial projects – specifically the colonization of the Americas and Australia – is not perfect, but it is useful in this case. The most important point of resemblance is in that the current Israeli government (and most of its predecessors), like the European colonies in the New World, aspire first and foremost to control as much of the natives’ territory and exclude them from the political establishment at the same time.

These colonial projects won, despite persistent resistance on the part of the natives. In the new world, just as in Israel/Palestine, the natives did not have the necessary means to challenge the colonies. So long as the occupied is completely devoid of political and military leverage, and so long as the occupier is determined to maintain the status quo, it will be maintained. The natives fought and lost, and the Palestinians will continue fighting. We should expect more rounds of violence, but in the absence of fundamental changes in the geopolitical balance of power, we ought not to expect the Palestinians to make any meaningful political gains.

The second claim is also inaccurate. Many on the Israeli left compare Israel to the Apartheid regime in South Africa, but this comparison is only partial. Enormous domestic and international pressures were put on the Apartheid regime – pressures we have no reason to expect in Israel’s case. Not in the foreseeable future. The United States was the first country to officially divest from South Africa in 1986; America under Donald Trump will be the last to divest from Israel. Barring such pressures, the occupation, segregation and disenfranchisement will not cease.

We ought to learn from the past, and from the ongoing experience of other peoples in similar circumstances: the Rohingya in Myanmar, the Kurds in Turkey, the Sahrawis in Western Sahara, the Bidun in the Persian Gulf, the Tibetans in China, and countless others that prove the occupation will not end without a wide coalition working against it.

We should, therefore, invest our time and efforts in two main fronts. First, damage control and persistent, nonviolent, binational resistance at home. Second, in building multinational coalitions of oppressed peoples. Such coalitions should mark the year 2020, for example, to promote a progressive candidate in the US to push their agenda.

As long as Netanyahu treats us as a bargaining chip with the Arab states; as long as the Israeli population remains indifferent at best; as long as the world loses its interest in our struggle; as long as we wait for a “messiah” to come and take this terrible occupation off our shoulders – it will not end. An equal and just society does not sprout on its own, we must cultivate one.