Bumping this one.

I have made some amendments, including adding a disclaimer, which I believe hasn't altered the main gist of the market. Let me know if you think otherwise.

I'd suggest rephrasing the mention to Resolution 181 to make it clear it was never "done" in the first place, so it doesn't need to be undone; the Arabs violently rejected it, first with the Mandate Civil War and then, once British sovereignty had ended, with the invasion of Israel by nearly all Arab nations.

Separately, what does this plan say about the right of any Jew to live in the land of Israel? Does it count if that right that currently exists is abolished?

@BrunoParga Thank you for engaging!

I must hasten to acknowledge that Resolution 181 was vehemently opposed and, further, that it was never carried out accordingly. Having said that, I have completely removed this (perhaps unnecessary) embellishment from the condition.

As for the 'right of Jews to return,' acknowledging that it's a significant point of contention, I want to leave specifics like this open, as this would need to be addressed in a new constitution and subsequent immigration laws. Would you agree?

@GazDownright like, from the point of view of the market, I think it's okay to leave it open to be decided by a future, hypothetical constitution of such a state. But I think the market should make it explicit that this market doesn't take a position on the issue and defers it to whenever the unified state arises.

With that said, and now looking at it from the point of view of someone very pro-Jews, pro-Israel, pro-Zionism: I think, and I assume most Israelis would agree, that the right of aliyah must continue to exist. This is the same as some European countries do (e.g. Italy), of granting citizenship to anyone who's a descendant of that country up to a certain generation. Spain is acknowledging the harm it caused by expelling the Jews 530 years ago and granting their descendants citizenship if they request it. In doing the same, Israel is acknowledging the right of the descendants of those expelled from their homeland 2000 years ago. So, in short, if I were Israeli I'd strongly oppose a one-state solution that didn't protect in perpetuity the right of aliyah.

Now, I understand the Palestinians that left the land under varying degrees of pressure during their Civil War against the Jews ("theirs" because they started it, on the morning immediately after 181 was passed, 1947-11-30) or during the War of Independence, and their descendants, thesepeople would like to return - especially since their fellow Arabs have kept them perpetually marginalized in the host countries. I think the exact terms of this return would have to be negotiated; again if I were Israeli, I'd probably want to connect this issue with that of the comparable number of Jewish refugees who were expelled by Arab nations and received by Israel in the couple years immediately after Israeli independence.

I bring this all up not only to highlight important points of the history of the conflict, but because this most likely matters to the resolution of the market as well. A unified state with some form of perpetual guarantee of the right to aliyah, and with the Palestinian right to return interpreted in the context of both the wilful rejection of their assimilation by their host Arab nations and the Mizrachi Jewish refugees Israel absorbed in the 1950s, doubling the country's population? Sure, that can very well be considered - it sounds a lot like the original Zionist idea adapted to what happened later. Now, a unified state where Arab nations just dump their hosted Palestinian refugees like they dumped their Jewish population in the 50s, and on top of that a potential anti-Semitic majority has the right to curtail aliyah like the British did during the Holocaust? Hell no, 100% no, that's a non-starter.

So I think it's up to you, as the market creator: you might want to specify these parameters of an eventual solution, maybe create different markets, or leave it open as part of the uncertainty predictors have to try to capture.

Phew! That was a long comment!

@BrunoParga Thank you very much for your insightful response. I will spend some time to digest the content. Thanks for keeping the separation of the market and the history at the forefront of your mind.

@GazDownright thank you for creating the market! I think it's great for us as a community to include deep, difficult, important topics in addition to the memery, and I appreciate your contribution to that with this market.

@BrunoParga I have chosen to leave the specifics of repatriation rights (and similar) open to future hypothetical negotiations. The reason is that I believe it will open a can of worms that is hard to handle without leaning toward biases. Instead, I will rely on the spirit of the question for potential market resolution. I've added a disclaimer inspired by your suggestion.