Palestinians

The differences and parallels between urban battlefield circumstances in Gaza, Iraq, and Syria give U.S. policymakers a sobering but clear view of what exactly they will be committing to in supporting Israel’s ground campaign.

Despite the completely surprising nature of the attack, Hamas did in fact give multiple signals that a major operation was in the works.

At least forty-four nations have condemned Hamas and decried its tactics as terrorism, but regional players such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Syria, and Iraq have pinned responsibility on Israel.

As the IDF deals with residual infiltrators in the south, it is already clear that the lessons of the surprise 1973 war need updating.

The long-delayed meeting should clarify the contours and possible requirements for normalization with Riyadh, though Israel’s ongoing domestic turmoil and policy toward the Palestinians may necessitate some difficult political choices.

When examining the legacy of the Oslo Accords, one clear outcome is the way in which diplomatic breakthroughs—along with their failures—have deeply shaped public attitudes towards the conflict. Thirty years later, fresh polls emphasize the deep erosion of trust and support for the two-state solution in Palestinian (along with Israeli) society, but a lingering hunger for some kind of breakthrough.

A panel of former Israeli, Palestinian, and U.S. officials discuss the legacy and future of the Oslo Accords as a framework for achieving Israeli-Palestinian peace.

Leadership dynamics make a two-state breakthrough impossible at the moment, but an Israeli-Saudi accord could help—so long as everyone honestly acknowledges what the situation would be like without Oslo.

While insufficient, a collapse of the Oslo edifice would come with a hefty price for the Palestinians, not only as individuals but also as a people seeking self-determination.