What is the current US policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?

Efforts by the United States to broker a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have faced numerous challenges over the years. Factors such as entrenched divisions among and within the involved parties and a diminishing U.S. commitment to its traditional role as an impartial mediator have diminished the prospects of a peace agreement.

Summary

• The protracted Israeli-Palestinian conflict, spanning decades, finds its origins in overlapping assertions over the Holy Land, leading to contentions regarding borders, Jerusalem, security arrangements, and the issue of Palestinian refugees.
• The United States has persistently pursued a resolution to the conflict involving two separate states, despite the Trump administration’s departure from this objective by adopting alternative policies.
• The Biden administration has reasserted its endorsement of a two-state solution, yet has not taken action to reinitiate negotiations. Instead, it has encouraged Arab-Israeli rapprochement and reinstated aid to the Palestinian territories.

For decades, Israelis and Palestinians have been embroiled in a deeply entrenched dispute over their claims to the Holy Land, making it one of the world’s most enduring and challenging conflicts. While the United States has been a staunch supporter of Israel, it has traditionally sought to promote a diplomatic resolution that can reconcile the conflicting assertions of both parties.

Several U.S. administrations have put forth blueprints for a peace process with the aim of establishing two distinct states, one Israeli and one Palestinian. However, President Donald Trump’s controversial policies on fundamental aspects of the conflict were seen by critics as limiting the potential for a two-state solution.

The current Joe Biden administration has reaffirmed its backing for a two-state resolution but has only partially reversed some of Trump’s changes while retaining others. Meanwhile, levels of violence between the two sides have surged to heights not witnessed since the conclusion of the last Palestinian uprising in 2005.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a century-long dispute over the Holy Land, a region of profound religious and historical significance to Christians, Jews, and Muslims. The conflict’s origins trace back to the increased migration of Jews to Ottoman Palestine, a predominantly Arab region, beginning in the late 19th century. This migration gained momentum after the Holocaust during World War II.

In 1947, the UN General Assembly voted to establish two states in Palestine, one Jewish and one Arab, following years of Arab-Jewish violence. Shortly after, the Jewish community in Palestine declared the independence of Israel, leading to a war with neighboring Arab states.

Palestinian Arabs contend that Western powers, including the United States and the United Kingdom, assisted Jews in taking over their ancestral homeland. They refer to Israel’s establishment and the defeat of Arab armies in the 1948 war as the Nakba, which displaced over 700,000 Palestinians, as estimated by the United Nations.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has evolved into a protracted dispute, marked by multistate wars, intifadas (armed uprisings), and acts of terrorism. A significant turning point was the 1967 Six-Day War, resulting in Israel’s occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza.

UN Security Council Resolution 242, adopted after the war, called for Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories in exchange for peace and secure borders. While lacking specific details, it laid the groundwork for future diplomatic efforts to end the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Today, the area is inhabited by 2.2 million Palestinians [PDF] in the Gaza Strip and 3.2 million in the West Bank. While the majority of Israel’s 9.7 million residents are of Jewish descent, there are approximately two million Arab citizens. Global diplomatic efforts to facilitate a political resolution have seen limited progress. Recent U.S.-led diplomacy has centered on addressing several fundamental issues:

Territorial Boundaries: The concept of two separate states, one being Israel and the other being Palestine, often known as the two-state solution, has garnered significant international backing over the years. This solution would create a Palestinian state encompassing most of the West Bank, with land exchanges to compensate for Israel’s inclusion of certain Jewish settlements in the area. Additionally, it would include Gaza, which Israel unilaterally withdrew from in 2005. Many international diplomatic efforts promoting a two-state solution advocate for Israel to return to a version of its pre-1967 borders. However, there is no consensus on how this would address the presence of Palestinians within those borders and Jewish Israelis residing beyond them.

Jerusalem: This contested city straddles the border of Israel and the West Bank. Israel has declared the entire city as its capital, while the Palestinians assert East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state. A two-state solution necessitates the establishment of a Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem.

Refugees: The conflicts of 1948 and 1967 resulted in the displacement of approximately one million Palestinian refugees. Both the survivors and their descendants, primarily residing in Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, assert their right to return to Israel, as endorsed by a 1948 UN General Assembly resolution.

Ongoing discussions revolve around whether the descendants of the survivors should also be considered as refugees with this right. Israel regards the right to return as a potential threat to its identity as a Jewish state and suggests that the refugees should be resettled in the Palestinian state created as part of a two-state solution.

Security: Israel perceives certain Palestinian militant groups as significant threats, particularly Hamas, the Islamist organization governing Gaza, which has expressed its intent to dismantle Israel. These groups frequently engage in suicide bombings and rocket attacks that primarily target Israeli civilians.

Israel advocates for the disarmament of these groups and the demilitarization of a Palestinian state, while recognizing the importance of a robust Palestinian police force. Palestinians aspire to terminate Israel’s military occupation and assume full control over their security, accepting certain restrictions on their armaments. Israel seeks to maintain the capacity to act within Palestinian territory to counter security threats.

Mutual Recognition: Both sides aim for reciprocal recognition of their respective states by each other and the international community. A majority of Israeli Jews desire international acknowledgment of Israel as a Jewish state, while Palestinians seek acknowledgment of their forced displacement during the Nakba from Israel.

End of Conflict: The overarching goal for both sides is to reach a comprehensive peace agreement that resolves their conflicts and acknowledges the legitimate claims of each party. Such an agreement would pave the way for peace and the normalization of Israel’s relations with all Arab states, aligning with the Arab League’s Arab Peace Initiative.

The Middle East has historically held a significant role in U.S. foreign policy, with successive administrations pursuing a multifaceted set of interconnected objectives.

These objectives encompass securing crucial energy resources, countering Soviet and Iranian influence, ensuring the survival and security of both Israel and Arab allies, combating terrorism, advocating for democracy, and mitigating refugee flows. Simultaneously, the United States has been committed to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a key driver of regional dynamics, with the aim of aligning with these strategic goals while balancing its support for Israel and promoting broader regional stability.

It’s worth noting that this conflict has also been a central concern for both the American Jewish community and Christian Evangelicals, both of which have been strong supporters of Israel.

However, in recent years, U.S. interest in addressing the conflict has diminished. The onset of the Arab Spring uprisings in 2011, subsequent conflicts in Syria and Yemen, Iran’s regional ambitions, and the rise of terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and the self-declared Islamic State have presented more immediate threats to U.S. interests.

Furthermore, the dynamics of U.S. relations with Iran and the Arab Gulf states no longer appear to be primarily influenced by Israeli-Palestinian issues, causing the conflict to become even less of a priority.

The United States has played a central role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for over half a century. Its involvement began shortly after World War II when it joined the United Kingdom in a 1946 inquiry that proposed the relocation of one hundred thousand Holocaust survivors to Palestine, which was envisioned as a state that would not be exclusively Jewish or Arab. The United States then became the first country to officially recognize Israel as a sovereign nation in 1948.

Following the 1967 Six-Day War, the United States, along with Britain, France, Russia, and the United Nations, attempted to mediate in the broader Arab-Israeli conflict.

However, it was the 1973 war, during which Israel initially faced challenges in defending itself against invading Egyptian and Syrian forces, that compelled the United States to take the lead in future diplomatic efforts. Although Israel ultimately achieved military victory, the Arab nations delivered a significant psychological blow.

This war also marked a pivotal moment in U.S. foreign policy, as it led to Arab oil-producing countries imposing a detrimental oil embargo on the United States.

Additionally, it brought the United States, which supported Israel, and the Soviet Union, which provided arms to Egypt and Syria, dangerously close to a nuclear confrontation, following a period of détente. The conflict was also a significant turning point for the Palestinian cause, as the Arab League formally recognized the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people” in 1974.

In the months following the conflict, U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger assumed the role of the primary intermediary between the Arab states and Israel. His shuttle diplomacy in 1974 and 1975, involving travel between various Middle East capitals, contributed to the de-escalation of the war and the disentanglement of the combatants.

In 1978, U.S. President Jimmy Carter hosted the Camp David peace negotiations between Israel and Egypt, which yielded two frameworks laying the groundwork for future Middle East diplomacy. The first framework called for discussions involving Egypt, Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinians regarding Palestinian self-rule in Gaza and the West Bank.

The second framework centered on a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel, which the two nations signed at the White House in 1979. Despite Jordan’s involvement in the 1973 war, it did not participate in the talks due to concerns about backlash from other Arab nations. A separate Israel-Jordan peace treaty was later signed in 1994.

Although the United States was not directly involved in the 1993 Oslo Peace Accords negotiations, which led to Palestinian recognition of Israel’s right to exist and Israel’s acknowledgment of Palestinian autonomy in Gaza and the West Bank, the final agreement was signed at the White House.

The United States and the Bill Clinton administration assumed a more significant role in 1998 when they sponsored negotiations between Israel and the PLO, resulting in the Clinton Parameters outlining the establishment of a two-state solution. Subsequent administrations have proposed their own plans for a two-state solution, including George W. Bush’s Road Map to Peace, Secretary of State John Kerry’s Six Principles, and Trump’s Peace to Prosperity.

While seeking to facilitate an agreement between the parties, the United States has historically shielded Israel from international criticism, a stance that some argue has impeded conflict resolution efforts.

Since 1970, the United States has exercised its veto power as a permanent member of the UN Security Council to block numerous resolutions censuring Israel, viewing the United Nations as biased against Israel. Since 1980, the United States has allowed the Security Council to condemn Israel for its settlement construction only once, in late 2016, when the outgoing Obama administration abstained from a vote on the matter.

The Trump administration departed from decades of U.S. policy aimed at serving as a neutral mediator in negotiations and chose to align with Israel on various issues. In August 2020, the administration facilitated an agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, known as the Abraham Accords, in which the two nations committed to normalize their relations.

Under this accord, Israel also agreed to temporarily postpone plans to annex approximately 30 percent of the West Bank. Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan subsequently announced their own U.S.-brokered agreements to normalize relations with Israel. Critics of these normalization agreements argue that they undermine the Palestinian cause, as the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative stipulates that Arab League members will establish relations with Israel only after the creation of a Palestinian state, among other conditions.

The Biden administration, instead of attempting to resolve the overarching conflict [PDF], has concentrated on advocating for equal rights for both Israelis and Palestinians and encouraging more nations to normalize relations with Israel.

It has consistently supported a two-state solution and condemned actions that could jeopardize it, such as planned expansions of West Bank settlements and provocative rhetoric from both sides that incites violence. Additionally, the administration played a role behind the scenes in brokering a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas during a conflict in 2021.

The Biden administration’s relationship with the right-wing Israeli government elected in December 2022 is strained due to concerns about settlement expansion and potential threats to democratic principles arising from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to revamp Israel’s judiciary.

Nevertheless, in July 2023, the administration reaffirmed its support for Israel’s right to self-defense when Israel carried out a significant counterterrorism operation against new militant groups in West Bank cities like Jenin and Nablus. President Biden also criticized the Palestinian Authority (PA) for its failure to address these groups effectively, noting their unpopularity and ineffectiveness.

Biden has reaffirmed U.S. commitment to a two-state solution, advocating for the creation of separate Israeli and Palestinian states with borders that mirror the pre-1967 war boundaries. This territory encompasses the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and portions of East Jerusalem.

The Clinton Parameters established the framework for the establishment of a Palestinian state and the resolution of other remaining status issues. George W. Bush marked a significant milestone as the first U.S. president to publicly support a Palestinian state, which found representation in the 2003 Road Map for Peace proposal jointly presented by the United States, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations.

During the Obama administration, efforts were made to advance the two-state solution, but negotiations broke down in 2014 due to disagreements over settlements, the release of Palestinian prisoners, and various other matters. In 2016, Secretary Kerry articulated principles for a two-state solution based on the outcomes of those final status talks.

Trump’s proposed initiative, named Peace to Prosperity, aimed to establish a Palestinian state while granting Israel sovereignty over an essentially undivided Jerusalem, encompassing the Old City and its holy sites. The Palestinian capital would have been confined to a small portion of East Jerusalem.

The plan did not include provisions for the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their former lands but pledged approximately $50 billion in investments for the development of a Palestinian state.

Trump’s plan featured a conceptual map that indicated a reduction of Palestinian territory in the West Bank to 70 percent, as Israel would annex the Jordan Valley and all its settlements in that area. Critics argued that the plan, developed without consulting Palestinian leaders, favored Israel on all major final status issues, leading to its rejection by the Palestinian Authority (PA).

While historically advocating for a two-state solution, the United States has traditionally opposed Palestinian attempts to achieve statehood through United Nations processes, asserting that this matter should be resolved exclusively through negotiations with Israel.

Since 2011, the PA has been actively seeking full United Nations membership for Palestine, a status that necessitates approval by the Security Council, where the United States holds a veto. Despite the PA’s efforts, it has not yet secured sufficient support for this bid. However, in 2012, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution recognizing Palestine as a nonmember observer state, with the support of 138 countries.

In 1947, when the UN General Assembly voted to partition British-controlled Palestine into separate Arab and Jewish states, it designated Jerusalem as a corpus separatum, recognizing its shared religious significance to Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

However, upon gaining independence, Israel established its government headquarters in the western part of the city and later captured East Jerusalem from Jordan in 1967. Subsequently, Israel expanded the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem to include neighboring Palestinian towns and effectively annexed the area.

Under the 1993 Oslo Accords, the last major agreement on this issue, Israel and the PLO agreed that the status of Jerusalem would only be determined in final status negotiations. Presently, Israel regards all of Jerusalem as its capital, while the Palestinian Authority claims East Jerusalem as the future capital of a Palestinian state, considering Israel’s control over the territory as an occupation.

For many years, the United States and most other countries with diplomatic relations with Israel maintained their embassies in Tel Aviv to avoid precluding a potential future peace agreement. Although a 1995 U.S. law [PDF] mandated the relocation of the American embassy to Jerusalem, successive presidents exercised waivers “to safeguard the national security interests of the United States.”

However, in 2017, President Trump chose not to issue a waiver and moved the embassy to Jerusalem, officially recognizing the city as Israel’s capital. Supporters of this relocation argued that there was no pressing national security reason to prevent the move and that U.S. diplomatic representation to Israel should align with the country’s government seat. This announcement led Palestinian officials to sever ties with the Trump administration. While President Biden has restored these relations, he has affirmed that the U.S. embassy will remain in Jerusalem.

In 2021, President Biden expressed his intention to reopen the Palestinian mission in Washington and the U.S. consulate in East Jerusalem, both of which were closed during Trump’s tenure. However, as of mid-2022, they remain closed, and their reopening faces challenges.

A law from 1987, which Trump’s predecessors had bypassed, prohibits Palestinians from maintaining a mission in the United States. The Trump administration also enacted legislation to prevent future leaders from waiving this restriction. Reestablishing the consulate in East Jerusalem would require the approval of the Israeli government, which seems unlikely.

Following the 1967 war, Israel initiated the construction of settlements in territories it had seized. Initially, settlement building was undertaken by Labor party governments with the objective of fortifying defense in regions of the West Bank that had witnessed intense conflict during the Arab-Israeli wars.

However, this activity expanded rapidly as some settlers considered the land to be their religious and historical birthright, while others found economic incentives to reside there. By 2022, approximately seven hundred thousand Israelis had settled in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Over the years, the United States officially criticized these settlements, referring to them as an impediment to peace. However, they refrained from explicitly labeling them as illegal, in order to avoid the potential for Israel to face international sanctions. A 1978 State Department legal opinion declared that Jewish settlements in occupied territories were not in conformity with international law.

Nevertheless, President Ronald Reagan, in a 1981 interview, described the settlements as “ill-advised” but “not illegal.” It was President George H.W. Bush who first tied the amount of aid to Israel with its settlement construction, deducting the cost of settlement building from U.S. loan guarantees. Later, President Clinton allowed exemptions for settlement construction in East Jerusalem and for “natural growth.”

In 2004, President George W. Bush sent a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, recognizing that the “new realities,” or settlements, would make it impossible for Israel to return to its pre-1967 borders in any peace agreement. Most U.S. administrations came to believe that Israel would retain its three largest settlement blocs in exchange for conceding other land to the Palestinians in a potential peace deal, deeming it unrealistic for Israel to compel a large number of its citizens to leave these settlements.

During the Obama administration, efforts were made to shield Israel from movements that sought to penalize Israeli businesses operating in the West Bank. However, the administration also expressed disapproval of Israel’s settlements by abstaining from a UN Security Council vote that declared the settlements illegal.

In a departure from previous U.S. stances on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Trump administration adopted a notably pro-Israel view of Jewish settlements. In 2019, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo disagreed with the 1978 State Department opinion, stating that civilian settlements in the West Bank were “not, per se, inconsistent with international law” and did not hinder the peace process. This announcement led more than one hundred members of Congress to sign a letter expressing disapproval.

In early 2023, the Israeli government commenced the construction of thousands of new settlement homes and sought to legitimize several unauthorized outposts. The Biden administration intervened by suspending a Palestinian-led UN resolution condemning the expansion of settlements and helped broker an agreement in which both sides committed to suspending unilateral actions.

The historical alliance between the United States and Israel has deep roots, primarily based on the United States’ steadfast support for the establishment of a Jewish state. During the era of the Cold War, numerous U.S. defense strategists recognized Israel as a crucial partner in countering Soviet influence in the Middle East, and it subsequently played a pivotal role in U.S. counterterrorism efforts.

In the contemporary landscape, Israel continues to hold the status of being the United States’ most prominent strategic ally in the Middle East. Both nations share concerns regarding Iran’s nuclear aspirations and its backing of Islamist extremist groups, notably Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon. Consequently, the United States has committed to ensuring Israel’s military superiority over any potential regional adversaries. This commitment is enshrined in law, mandating that U.S. arms sales to other Middle Eastern states must not compromise Israel’s qualitative military edge against threats [PDF].

The provision of military assistance to Israel by the United States began after Israel’s withdrawal from Arab territories, as part of the peace process. Washington considered it a duty to provide this security aid in light of the risks Israel undertook for the sake of peace. The United States also extended substantial aid packages to Egypt and Jordan in exchange for their commitment to the peace process.

Since the conclusion of World War II, the United States has offered more cumulative foreign aid [PDF] to Israel than any other nation. While the U.S. provided substantial economic aid to Israel from 1971 to 2007, Israel’s robust economic growth, particularly since the 1990s, has shifted the focus more towards military assistance.

Notably, a significant portion of President Biden’s foreign military aid request for the fiscal year 2022 was allocated for Israel. As per a memorandum of understanding dating back to 2016, the United States is bound to allocate nearly $4 billion annually to Israel, including $500 million designated for missile defense. In the aftermath of the 2021 conflict between Israel and Hamas, an additional $1 billion was allocated for missile defense funding.

U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel and the Palestinian Territories

Constant 2020 dollars

The United States also offers assistance [PDF] to Palestinians, primarily directed towards government and humanitarian initiatives. Aid distribution underwent a significant overhaul in 2007, following Hamas’s violent separation from the Palestinian Authority (PA), which was led by the Fatah party. Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip, and the United States, considering Hamas a terrorist organization, implemented measures to prevent it from receiving aid.

Between 1950 and 2018, the United States provided over $6 billion in aid to the UN Palestinian refugee agency (UNRWA). However, U.S. aid to the Palestinians started to decrease during the Trump administration. This reduction included a cut in assistance to the West Bank and Gaza, along with the cessation of contributions to UNRWA.

In 2019, President Trump signed an antiterrorism law that enabled Americans to sue recipients of U.S. foreign aid, including the PA, for alleged involvement in acts of war. Concerned about potential lawsuits, the PA requested the termination of U.S. aid. Although the antiterrorism law remains in effect, the Biden administration has resumed aid to the West Bank and Gaza, with a commitment to provide Palestinians with at least $500 million by 2024, pending congressional approval.

The divisions between the two sides have been exacerbated by various factors, including the Abraham Accords, the 2021 Israel-Hamas conflict, and the increase in violence in 2022. These developments have made it difficult to envision a positive resolution to the conflict. Furthermore, the text highlights that it is unlikely the Palestinians will receive a more favorable package of concessions from Israel than what they have rejected in the past. The political divisions between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority also present challenges to a negotiated settlement.

These factors have led to discussions about the possibility of a one-state solution, which some experts believe may have already become a reality. However, this option is seen as perilous because it could potentially jeopardize Israel’s status as a Jewish state, especially if Arabs make up a significant portion of the population. Denying Palestinians equal rights in such a scenario could undermine Israel’s future as a democracy.

Interestingly, a joint Israeli-Palestinian poll in January 2023 [PDF] found that a significant percentage of Israel’s Arab citizens would support a shared state with equal rights for both Jewish and Palestinian citizens, while a smaller percentage of Israel’s Jewish citizens expressed similar support. About one in three Palestinians also indicated they would support such a plan.