As I said in private and in public, we believe Palestinian people's voices and aspirations must be at the center of post-crisis governance in Gaza. We believe in Palestinian-led governance of Gaza, with Gaza unified with the West Bank. Gaza's reconstruction must be supported with a sustained mechanism.
We also underscored America's firm opposition to actions that would undermine efforts to build lasting peace and security. No forcible displacement of Palestinian civilians from Gaza - not now, not after the fighting stops. No reoccupation of Gaza after the conflict. No attempt to blockade or besiege Gaza. No reduction in the territory of Gaza. No use of Gaza as a platform for terrorism or other violent attacks, and no tolerating the use of the West Bank to carry out such attacks. No more violence from extremist settlers in the West Bank.
These steps are not ends in themselves. They must lead to Israelis and Palestinians living side by side in states of their own, with equal measures of security, freedom, opportunity, and dignity. That’s not something we can put off discussing until after this crisis is over. This discussion must happen now.
This is basically just a description of the "two-state solution" that is the status quo in terms of foreign policy for most nations on Earth, as has been the case for decades.
Now, Mark is free to decry this idea all he wants. But lambasting Blinken (who deserves to be lambasted for all sorts of things) for it, as though this was all his idea, just makes Levin sound like an idiot.