History will not yield to power

Meanwhile, explicit statements by members of Israel's current government advocating for a "Greater Israel" from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River have stripped away any remaining ambiguity. For Palestinians, such declarations are indications of strategic intent, reinforcing the belief that their statehood is not being negotiated-it is being systematically precluded.

Internalizing the core of the conflict

At its core, this conflict is not only about land or security; it is about competing claims to justice. One philosophical truth stands out: a nation cannot secure its future by indefinitely denying other people their fundamental rights. Power can suppress, contain, and even dominate-but it cannot extinguish a people's collective aspiration for freedom and self-determination.

As G.W.F. Hegel observed, "What is rational is actual, and what is actual is rational." However bitter or tragic the circumstances, reality imposes its own logic. Two people inhabit the same land, neither of whom can eliminate the other. No amount of violence, however devastating, can alter this fundamental fact.

A second, equally important truth follows: historical suffering, however profound, does not confer moral license to perpetuate the suffering of others. The Jewish historical experience, culminating in the horrors of the Holocaust, demands security and recognition-but it cannot justify policies that deny another people their dignity and national existence.

Hannah Arendt warned with equal clarity that "violence can destroy power; it is utterly incapable of creating it." Military supremacy may yield temporary outcomes, but it cannot confer legitimacy, foster reconciliation, or secure lasting peace.

Today, roughly seven million Israeli Jews and seven million Palestinians live between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Neither side is going anywhere. This is not a conflict that can be resolved through victory. It can only be resolved through mutual recognition and political compromise.

Since October 2023, positions on both sides have hardened dramatically. In Israel, political discourse has shifted further away from even conditional support for Palestinian statehood, increasingly framing it as an existential threat. Among Palestinians, the devastation of Gaza and the ongoing realities of occupation have reinforced the belief that negotiations are futile and that resistance, in one form or another, is inevitable.

This must change.

Finding a permanent solution is a must

The international community must play a decisive role to break this impasse.

For decades, the US has endorsed a two-state solution while failing to take meaningful steps to realize it. Washington has shielded Israel from accountability and removed incentives for policy change. Washington must translate its stated commitment into concrete policy: condition military assistance, unequivocally oppose settlement expansion, and make it clear that indefinite occupation is incompatible with a long-term strategic partnership.

The European states must move beyond rhetorical alignment by recognizing Palestinian statehood, leveraging trade with Israel, and supporting accountability mechanisms. The Arab states must employ normalization agreements not as ends in themselves, but as tools to press for meaningful progress while insisting on Palestinian political cohesion and institutional reform.

A new Israeli government would need to take immediate steps: halt settlement expansion, enforce the rule of law against settler violence, reaffirm commitment to territorial compromise, and re-engage in credible negotiations. Just as importantly, it must begin preparing its public for the necessary compromises, framing peace not as a concession, but as a strategic imperative.