Israel–Palestine Relations

Jewish and Palestinian national movements claim political sovereignty over territory that both peoples regard as a homeland, linking territorial questions to national identity and self-determination.[1][6] Their relationship also involves security, economic, social, psychological, and religious factors, rather than territorial boundaries alone.[1] Permanent borders, Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, Israeli settlements, and security arrangements have remained central issues in efforts to resolve the conflict.[1][3]

Palestinian political representation and Palestinian territorial administration are not identical institutions: the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) represents Palestinians internationally, while the Palestinian Authority (PA) was established through the Oslo agreements to exercise limited self-rule.[7] Fatah is a secular Arab nationalist faction and the leading force in the PLO; Hamas is its principal rival, is not a PLO member, and has not accepted the PLO’s recognition of Israel.[7][8] The division between Hamas and Fatah has complicated Palestinian decision-making and the question of who speaks for Palestinians domestically and internationally.[8]

A two-state solution proposes independent Israeli and Palestinian states, with the Palestinian state formed from the West Bank—known by its original, indigenous Jewish name of Judea and Samaria, a region that formed the heart of ancient Israel—and the Gaza Strip.[9][10] A one-state reality has also been discussed as an alternative trajectory, but efforts to reach a settlement have not overcome disagreement or the lack of trust between the parties.[1] The Oslo framework produced governing institutions and arrangements for interim administration without resolving the central questions of sovereignty and permanent peace.[3]

The conflict’s nationalist roots extend to the nineteenth-century growth of national movements, including Zionism, and its national character became more pronounced after the First World War.[6] Jewish and Palestinian Arab claims to self-determination developed in the context of that war and its aftermath.[11] Britain’s 1917 Balfour Declaration supported establishing a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine, while Arab leaders understood earlier British correspondence as promising Arab self-rule.[11]

After the First World War, the League of Nations granted Britain the mandate to administer Palestine.[12] The mandate incorporated a commitment to implement the Balfour Declaration and facilitate Jewish immigration and settlement, while competing Jewish and Arab national aspirations developed under British administration.[12] British rule ended in 1948.[12]

Palestinians are Arabs with roots in present-day Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza, or with historical and cultural ties to that area.[8] Palestinian political identity developed during the Mandate, began to crystallize around the 1947 United Nations partition proposal, and strengthened after Israel took control of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967.[8] The competing national movements attached their aspirations to the same territory, known in Hebrew as Eretz Yisrael and in Arabic as Falastin.[6]

On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 181, recommending Jewish and Arab states in Mandatory Palestine and a special international regime for Jerusalem and its surrounding area.[13] The vote was 33 in favor, 13 against, and 10 abstentions, with one state absent.[14] Jewish representatives accepted partition as a basis for establishing a state, while Arab representatives rejected the proposal.[6] The United States supported the resolution, although its State Department had also advocated trusteeship rather than immediate independent states.[13]

Fighting between Jewish and Arab forces preceded Israel’s declaration of independence on May 14, 1948.[15] Five Arab states entered the former Mandate immediately after the declaration, transforming the fighting into a war involving Israel and neighboring Arab armies.[15] The proposed Arab state did not come into being.[13] More than 6,000 Israelis were killed during the 1947–1949 fighting.[16] Israelis remember the conflict as the War of Independence, while Palestinians remember the displacement associated with it as the Nakba, meaning “catastrophe.”[6]

Approximately 700,000 Palestinians were driven or fled from their homes during Israel’s establishment and the ensuing war.[8] Displacement included expulsions and flight from fighting or fear of violence; some also left at the urging of Arab leaders.[17][18] More than 400 Arab villages disappeared, and Palestinian life in coastal cities, including Jaffa and Haifa, was greatly disrupted.[17] Many displaced Palestinians went to the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.[18] Roughly one-third ended up in the West Bank, one-third in Gaza, and one-third in neighboring Arab countries.[8]

Many Palestinian Arabs remained within Israel and became citizens, although they were subject to martial law until 1966.[8] The 1949 armistice agreements left Egypt controlling Gaza and Jordan controlling the West Bank, while Israel held some territory assigned to the proposed Arab state under the partition plan.[15] Jordan subsequently annexed the West Bank.[9] The armistice lines remained in place until 1967.[15] Iraq did not sign an armistice agreement with Israel.[16]

The UN General Assembly established the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, UNRWA, in December 1949.[11] In May 1950, it established 53 camps across areas including the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria to assist the 650,000 or more refugees it calculated needed aid.[11] The refugees and their descendants became central to subsequent negotiations over return, historical responsibility, and a permanent settlement.[6][19]

The PLO was founded in 1964 under Arab League auspices as an umbrella organization of Palestinian factions and militias.[8] It carried out terrorist attacks against Israeli civilian and military targets while developing its role as the principal Palestinian political representative.[20] After the 1967 war, the organization asserted a more independent identity and increasingly represented Palestinian national aspirations; Yasser Arafat and Fatah assumed its leadership in 1969.[8][20]

The Six-Day War began on June 5, 1967, involving Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.[21] Israel gained control of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Golan Heights.[21] Israel established a military administration in the West Bank and extended Israeli law and administration to East Jerusalem.[22] Palestinian aspirations increasingly focused on the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.[22] Israeli settlements were subsequently established in the West Bank and Gaza.[9]

On November 22, 1967, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 242, calling for withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from “territories occupied in the recent conflict,” an end to belligerency, and respect for states’ sovereignty, territorial integrity, and right to live within secure and recognized boundaries.[23] It also called for a just settlement of the refugee problem.[24] The United States pursued a land-for-peace approach linking Israeli withdrawal to peace settlements with neighboring states, and Resolution 242 became a foundation for later diplomacy.[23]

The first Palestinian intifada began in December 1987 in the West Bank and Gaza, involving demonstrations, riots, strikes, boycotts, civil disobedience, and violence.[12][25] Contributing factors included frustration with Israeli control, economic hardship, and the absence of progress toward a Palestinian state.[12] The mass mobilization lasted more than five years; in its first year, more than 300 Palestinians were killed and over 11,500 wounded, nearly two-thirds of the wounded being under 15.[25]

Hamas was founded in Gaza in 1987 by Muslim Brotherhood-associated activists, including Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, and emerged as a rival to Fatah and the PLO.[26] During the uprising, it challenged PLO authority and rejected accommodation with Israel.[25] In November 1988, the Palestinian National Council declared a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.[25] The following month, Arafat rejected terrorism, recognized Israel as a state in the region, and accepted Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 as a basis for negotiations, opening dialogue with the United States.[25][8]

The Madrid Peace Conference opened on October 30, 1991, and concluded on November 4 under the joint chairmanship of U.S. President George H. W. Bush and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev.[27] It brought together Israeli, Egyptian, Syrian, and Lebanese delegations and a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation for direct negotiations.[27] Bilateral negotiations continued in Washington, and multilateral talks began in Moscow in 1992; by 1993, the Washington negotiations were deadlocked and were overtaken by secret Israeli-Palestinian talks leading to Oslo.[27]

Israel and the PLO signed the Declaration of Principles on September 13, 1993, following secret negotiations in Norway and an exchange of mutual-recognition letters.[2] The PLO recognized Israel’s right to exist in peace and renounced terrorism, while Israel recognized the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people and its negotiating partner.[2] The agreement envisaged a Palestinian interim self-government authority in the West Bank and Gaza for five years, followed by permanent-status negotiations.[2]

The intended process was gradual: Palestinian governing responsibilities would begin in Gaza and Jericho and expand to Palestinian-populated areas of the West Bank while permanent-status negotiations proceeded.[3] Borders, Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, and security arrangements were deferred rather than settled in the initial agreement.[3] The May 1994 Cairo Agreement finalized Israel’s withdrawal from most of Gaza and Jericho and began the PA’s exercise of civilian responsibilities there.[2] It also included the release of 5,000 Palestinian prisoners.[28]

The September 1995 Interim Agreement, commonly called Oslo II, broadened Palestinian self-government and provided for elections, civil and legal affairs, bilateral cooperation, and separate administrative and security areas in the West Bank.[2][28] Area A was placed under Palestinian administration and security; Area B combined Palestinian administration with joint Israeli-Palestinian security; and Area C remained under Israeli administration and security.[29] Area C included Jewish settlements, strategically important areas, and largely unpopulated areas.[30]

The PA assumed day-to-day responsibilities for much of the Palestinian population, but it was an institution of limited self-rule, not an independent state.[3][8] The agreements set May 4, 1999 as the deadline for permanent resolution, leaving Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security, borders, and foreign relations for later negotiations.[29] Permanent-status talks followed, but no permanent agreement resulted.[2][3]

Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination in 1995 was followed by the election of Benjamin Netanyahu, a critic of Oslo, as prime minister in 1996.[2] Distrust grew as Palestinians felt self-government was being delayed and Israelis questioned the PLO’s ability to prevent attacks.[29] The United States, initially focused on crisis management and support for the PA through economic aid and security assistance, became more active after Rabin’s assassination.[2]

American mediation contributed to the January 1997 Hebron Protocol and the 1998 Wye River negotiations, which called for further Israeli withdrawals.[2] The Hebron agreement divided security responsibilities between the Israeli-controlled Jewish part of the city and its Palestinian-controlled Palestinian part, with international monitoring planned.[28] The July 2000 Camp David summit between Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Arafat ended without agreement on borders, Jerusalem, and Palestinian refugee claims to a right of return.[2]

On September 28, 2000, riots following Ariel Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount escalated into the violence known as the second, or al-Aqsa, intifada.[2] More than 1,000 people died in its first 18 months, the overwhelming majority Palestinian civilians; Palestinian suicide bombings and Israeli attacks on PA targets followed.[25] The 2000–2005 uprising damaged prospects for peace and led to tighter Israeli security measures in the West Bank.[8] By 2003, violence and Israel’s military response had left Palestinian territories fragmented and travel heavily restricted.[6]

The October 2000 unrest also involved Arab citizens of Israel.[31] Thirteen Arab citizens were killed during police efforts to control riots, and the Or Commission later investigated the events and the government’s response.[31]

On April 30, 2003, the Quartet—the United States, European Union, Russia, and United Nations—presented its performance-based Road Map to Israel and the PA.[10] It proposed reciprocal political, security, economic, humanitarian, and institution-building measures in three phases: ending violence and normalizing Palestinian life while building institutions; establishing a transition; and achieving a permanent settlement ending the conflict.[10] Its intended outcome was Israel and a sovereign, independent, democratic, viable Palestine living side by side in peace and security; its final phase was originally scheduled for 2004–2005.[10] The proposed steps included ending violence and terrorism, Palestinian institutional reform, and an Israeli settlement freeze.[32]

Israel completed its unilateral withdrawal of settlements and military installations from Gaza on September 12, 2005, and also evacuated four settlements in the northern West Bank.[33] Gaza had contained 21 Israeli settlements alongside a Palestinian population of approximately 1.3 million; most West Bank settlements remained.[33] The withdrawal divided Israeli society, while Palestinian concerns included whether it ended Israeli control over their lives.[34]

After disengagement, Israel continued to control most of Gaza’s borders, airspace, maritime access, and some buffer zones.[8] Hamas won the 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council elections, and attempts at coalition government failed amid factional fighting.[8][33] In June 2007, Hamas took control of Gaza in a violent confrontation with Fatah, while a Fatah-led PA administration headed by Mahmoud Abbas remained in specified West Bank areas under overarching Israeli control.[8] No Palestinian legislative elections have taken place since 2006.[8]

Israel and Egypt imposed restrictions on Gaza’s imports, exports, and movement after Hamas’s takeover.[33] Israel justified its restrictions as necessary to prevent Hamas from rebuilding its military capabilities, while the restrictions constrained commerce and humanitarian access.[8] The closure also helped impoverish Gaza and deepen its separation from Palestinians in the West Bank.[34] Major Israel–Hamas escalations occurred in 2008, 2012, 2014, and 2021.[33]

The U.S.-hosted Annapolis conference brought Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Abbas together on November 27, 2007.[35] Their joint understanding committed both parties to their Road Map obligations and to a U.S.-led American, Palestinian, and Israeli monitoring mechanism.[35] Neither the 2007–2008 Annapolis process nor the July 2013–April 2014 negotiating effort produced a new agreement.[11][36] A U.S. proposal released in 2020 envisaged demilitarized Palestinian self-governance in a reduced West Bank territory and Gaza, with Israel retaining most settlements and an undivided Jerusalem as its capital; Israeli leaders welcomed it and Palestinian leaders condemned it.[11]

On October 7, 2023, Hamas terrorists launched a coordinated surprise assault on Israel, breached the Gaza security barrier, and attacked nearby communities and military bases.[4][37] Hamas terrorists and other Palestinian attackers killed more than 1,200 people and took 251 hostages.[5][4] The hostages included men, women, and children, Israelis and foreign nationals, and Jews, Muslims, and Christians.[37] Israel declared war the following day and began military operations in Gaza.[37] The attack was the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust.[4]

By June 2026, Israeli forces had reportedly killed more than 73,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including combatants and civilians; the reported total derived from UN humanitarian reporting based on information from Gaza’s Hamas-run Ministry of Health.[5] Most of Gaza’s 2.1 million people had been displaced multiple times.[5] Conditions described in July 2026 included mass displacement, overcrowding, food insecurity, and shortages of shelter, essential supplies, and services.[5]

In September 2025, France, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia announced recognition of Palestinian statehood to encourage an end to the war and preserve a two-state outcome.[5] France and Saudi Arabia introduced the New York Declaration, calling for a two-state solution, hostage release, Hamas’s disarmament, and assistance for a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.[38] The General Assembly endorsed it on September 12 by 142 votes to 10, with 12 abstentions.[38] Israel’s prime minister opposed Palestinian statehood, and the U.S. administration opposed the declaration and resolution.[5]

An October 2025 Israel–Hamas ceasefire was connected to a U.S. 20-point plan for Gaza’s security and governance transition.[5] The final 20 living hostages were returned on October 13, 2025, and the final hostage’s body was returned on January 26, 2026.[37] Security Council Resolution 2803 endorsed the plan in November 2025, authorizing a transitional authority and international civil and security presences through the end of 2027.[5] In January 2026, the U.S. special envoy announced a second phase involving a transitional technocratic Palestinian administration, demilitarization, and reconstruction.[5]

As of July 2026, bouts of fighting had continued despite the ceasefire, and Gaza was effectively divided between areas with Israeli troops and areas generally subject to Hamas security control.[5] Gaza-wide arrangements, including Hamas’s disarmament, remained unresolved.[5] In the West Bank, close to 3.5 million Palestinians reportedly lived under overarching Israeli military control, with PA governing and security authority in specified areas.[5] Since 2025, at least 295 Palestinians and 18 Israelis had been killed there and more than 40,000 Palestinians displaced, amid settlement expansion, settler violence, Palestinian militancy, and PA weakness.[5]

The 1994 Paris Protocol on Economic Relations established a shared customs arrangement between Israel and the PLO.[39] Israel collected customs duties on imports destined for the PA and transferred them to its Ministry of Finance; the protocol also addressed indirect taxation and the use of the Israeli shekel alongside other currencies in Palestinian transactions.[39]

Administrative relations developed through the transfer of education, health, welfare, taxation, and tourism responsibilities to Palestinian institutions under Oslo.[30] The division into Areas A, B, and C allocated different combinations of civil administration, public order, and security responsibility rather than creating a uniform Palestinian jurisdiction.[2][28] The PA’s role in providing services and exercising authority thus operated within an interim framework whose final political destination was not achieved.[3][8]

Borders, settlements, Jerusalem, refugees, and security link practical negotiating questions to national self-determination and identity.[19] Refugee negotiations involve Israel’s concern for preserving a Jewish state and Palestinian concerns about historical injustice and refugees’ rights.[19] The Road Map envisaged negotiated arrangements for Jerusalem and an agreed refugee solution rather than unilateral resolution of either issue.[10]

Security risks, internal political constraints, distrust, and divergent historical narratives have impeded agreement.[19] Research has grouped these barriers into strategic concerns, political and institutional constraints, and psychological factors such as collective memory, national narratives, mistrust, and fear.[19] The Hamas–Fatah split added an institutional barrier by placing Gaza and the West Bank under separate Palestinian authorities.[19]

The Oslo process established mutual recognition and enduring mechanisms of limited self-government, but its intended five-year transition did not yield a permanent agreement.[2][3] Subsequent negotiations, unilateral disengagement, and later diplomatic initiatives also failed to produce a peaceful solution.[19] Relations therefore continue to combine institutions created through negotiation with unresolved sovereignty claims, security confrontation, and competing proposals for statehood and governance.[3][5]

Historical debate concerns the conflict’s starting point, the development of national identities, and the causes, scale, and responsibility for Palestinian displacement in 1947–1949.[6] Accounts of the Oslo process’s breakdown likewise differ, emphasizing failures of leadership, negotiation design, concessions, public support, attention to national narratives, and U.S. mediation rather than a single agreed cause.[19]

Resolution 242’s withdrawal language has received different Israeli and Arab interpretations.[23] Security Council Resolution 2334 states that settlements in territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, violate international law and obstruct a two-state solution; Israel maintains that the West Bank is disputed rather than occupied and that settlement construction does not violate international law.[5] Israel also disputes the degree of legal responsibility for Gaza’s residents attributed to it by some international actors after disengagement.[8] These disagreements concern the legal and political meaning of territory, withdrawal, and sovereignty as well as the terms of any eventual settlement.[5][8]