The American Public and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 2000-2020 (BESA Center)

Data and analysis of surveys of American public opinion on three issues—views of Israel vs. the Palestinian Authority, sympathies with the two sides, and support for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state—reveal that from 2000 to 2020, Americans have consistently viewed Israel favorably and the Palestinian Authority unfavorably and shown much more sympathy for Israelis than for Palestinians. They are increasingly supportive of the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, a trend that might have resulted from the inclusion of a Palestinian state in President Donald Trump’s peace plan.


The Paradigm Shift on Palestine (Project-Syndicate)

The Trump administration’s Israel-Palestine peace plan has undermined the belief that internationally agreed principles, such as the need to adhere to the pre-1967 borders, are unassailable. Given how willing the rest of the world seems to be to abandon the Palestinians, these losses will not be easy to reverse.

Shlomo Ben-Ami, a former Israeli foreign minister, is Vice President of the Toledo International Center for Peace. He is the author of Scars of War, Wounds of Peace: The Israeli-Arab Tragedy.

The “Deal of the Century” Is a Stimulus, Not a Blueprint (BESA Center)

President Trump’s peace plan must be understood as a systemic impetus toward a new breakthrough rather than as a practical blueprint for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.


From negotiation to imposition: Trump’s Israel-Palestine parameters (ECFR)

Comparing the US “peace plan” for Israel-Palestine with ECFR’s own work on future parameters illuminates how Donald Trump is departing from longstanding international consensus positions.

Hugh Lovatt

The Confederation Alternative for Israel and Palestine (The Century Foundation)

American policy on Israel and Palestine has long been stymied by contradictions. In particular, the United States professes a goal of fostering peace, but enables the processes that perpetuate conflict. This contradiction is at the heart of Washington’s sharp loss of credibility as an honest broker in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, a loss that damages U.S. standing in the Middle East at large.

Abbas Still Faces Unattractive Alternatives to Peacemaking by The Washington Institute

In deadlocked Israel-Palestine peace process, little room for Indian role (Md. Muddassir Quamar, South Asia Monitor)

Historically, India has maintained a steadfast position on Palestine. It supports a negotiated political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict leading to formation of a sovereign and united state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital, existing alongside Israel. During his visit to Palestine in October 2015, President Pranab Mukherjee said, “India would like to see the people of Palestine living within secure and recognized borders, side by side and at peace with Israel, as endorsed in the Arab Peace Initiative, the Quartet road map and relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions.” Over the years, however, the Indian position has evolved with the changing circumstances. The most noticeable change was the establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel in 1992 and since then India’s relations with Israel has steadfastly improved. In spite of its growing relations with Israel, India has maintained its support for the Palestinian cause.