A long-term, sustainable political solution is impossible without addressing the core issues of statehood, security guarantees, and mutual recognition. Any pause in hostilities that fails to tackle these fundamental, existential questions is merely a temporary truce that buys time until the next inevitable cycle of violence.

These core issues are not merely diplomatic talking points; they represent the root causes of the conflict and the essential components of a peaceful reality for both Israelis and Palestinians.

The Inescapable Necessity of Addressing Core Issues

Decades of failed peace processes and recurrent conflict have proven that managing the status quo—by focusing only on economic relief, humanitarian pauses, or limited security coordination—is a recipe for continued bloodshed. Sustainable peace requires a paradigm shift that establishes a clear political horizon anchored in a resolution of these major disputes.

1. The Imperative of Palestinian Statehood and Self-Determination

For Palestinians, the denial of sovereignty and self-determination is the engine of the conflict. Without a clear, tangible, and irreversible path to an independent, viable, and sovereign State of Palestine along the pre-1967 lines, no agreement can be considered an end to the conflict.

• Legitimacy and Agency: A political solution must grant the Palestinian people political agency and dignity, allowing them to determine their own destiny. As long as Palestinians live under occupation or without full control over their land, borders, and resources, any agreement will be viewed as a forced submission, not a legitimate peace. This fuels extremism and undermines moderate political leadership.

• Viability of the State: The future Palestinian state must be contiguous and economically viable—a concept gravely undermined by the expansion of Israeli settlements, the physical fragmentation of the West Bank, and restrictions on movement and trade. Addressing statehood must therefore include a clear resolution on borders, the status of Jerusalem, and a fair solution for the Palestinian refugee question in line with international law.

• A Rights-Based Approach: The foundation of any solution must be equal rights for both peoples. The long-term security and democratic future of Israel is itself inextricably linked to ending the occupation and ensuring the Palestinian people realize their right to an independent state. The alternative is a single state reality with unequal rights, which is fundamentally unsustainable and non-democratic.

2. The Non-Negotiable Requirement for Mutual Security Guarantees

For Israelis, the overriding core issue is physical security. No Israeli government will agree to a political solution that does not provide credible, enforceable, and long-lasting security guarantees against armed attacks, terrorism, and threats to its existence.

• Ending the Threat of Violence: A final political settlement must involve the demilitarization of the future Palestinian state and the establishment of effective, internationally-supported security cooperation mechanisms. This includes a commitment from the Palestinian side to a complete and permanent end to all forms of violence against Israeli civilians and the dismantling of all militant groups.

• Sovereign Security for Israel: Israel requires and is entitled to secure and recognized borders. The security arrangements in a final peace deal—which may involve a phased Israeli withdrawal, international monitoring presence, and technical security cooperation—must be robust enough to convince the Israeli public that the risks of peace are lower than the certain dangers of perpetual conflict.

• True Interdependence: The greatest security guarantee for both sides lies in shared interests and mutual vulnerability. Sustainable peace must create a reality where the political and economic success of the two states is so intertwined that neither side can credibly benefit from a return to violence. This makes the failure of peace mutually devastating, thus incentivizing compliance.

3. The Foundation of Mutual and Reciprocal Recognition

The conflict is not merely territorial; it is a clash of two national narratives on the same land. Without mutual recognition of the other’s legitimate national rights, no political agreement can hold.

• Recognition of the National Rights of Both Peoples:

  • Palestinian actors must explicitly and unequivocally recognize the State of Israel's right to exist in peace and security.

  • Israeli actors must explicitly and unequivocally recognize the Palestinian people's right to an independent, sovereign state on Palestinian territory.

• The Power of the Narrative Shift: Recognition is a political act that signals an end to existential conflict. It validates the national existence and aspirations of the other side. This critical step, often delayed or conditioned in past negotiations, is the psychological and political cornerstone of reconciliation at the elite level, enabling leaders to sell the peace to their respective, traumatized publics.

• Regional Dimension: Final political recognition is also key to regional stability. Full normalization between Israel and the wider Arab world—often referred to as a "Grand Bargain"—is conditional on achieving a just and comprehensive solution that includes a sovereign Palestinian state. This regional framework acts as a powerful international guarantee for the political solution.

Why Temporary Pauses Are Insufficient

Temporary pauses or limited ceasefires, while essential for immediate humanitarian relief, fail to address any of the core issues. They are transactional—an exchange of hostages for prisoners and aid, for instance—rather than transformational political acts.

• Risk of Exploitation: Ceasefires without a political track can be exploited by all parties to regroup, rearm, and consolidate control, ultimately making the next conflict more destructive. They leave the root cause of the violence—the political denial of national rights—intact.

• Erosion of Hope and Trust: Each temporary pause that ends in resumed conflict reinforces the cynical view on both sides that the other is fundamentally committed only to war. This erosion of hope empowers extremists who argue that only violence can achieve their goals, while moderate political efforts are delegitimized.

• The Cycle Continues: Absent an agreed-upon endpoint that resolves the core issues of statehood, borders, refugees, and security, the dynamic remains one of perpetual conflict management. The long-term political solution is not simply the end of a pause, but the irreversible commitment to the agreed-upon, final status arrangement.

In conclusion, for any future diplomatic effort to break the cycle of violence, it must be time-bound, condition-based, and singularly focused on achieving a final status agreement that addresses the core issues. There are no shortcuts to peace; the foundation must be built on the principles of self-determination, equal rights, and mutual, guaranteed security.

By Jo Ikeji-Uju

https://ubuntusafa.com

https://ubuntusafa.com/Ikeji