Brokered through a rare coalition of US and Middle East leaders, President Donald Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan has revived talks of a two-state solution as a possible path to lasting peace.

While it may seem premature to consider conflict-ending solutions, experts say that rejecting one paradigm to address the conflict, without offering an alternative framework for long-term mutual peace and security, is a recipe for perpetual violence between Israelis and Palestinians.

“I fear we are in a reality where it would be too easy to move on and buy the idea of peace and that [the Gaza ceasefire] is the end of all wars in the Middle East. That would be very dangerous, and it is essential to continue to finalize long-lasting peace based on justice,” Haggai Matar, the Executive Director of the Israeli magazine +972, told Al Arabiya English.

Matar said that a two-state solution remains a realistic endgame to the decades-long conflict. However, the path to achieving it is riddled with complexities stemming from both sides and wider geopolitical elements, including the US and neighboring Arab countries.

Navigating a two-state solution

The United States under Trump’s leadership, must navigate between Israel’s flat rejection of Palestinian statehood and the insistence and expectation of a growing majority of its allies that statehood is an indispensable condition to end the conflict and help stabilize the region.

Arab countries say the peace plan must lead to eventual independence for a Palestinian state. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says this will never happen.

The longstanding question of Palestinian statehood was articulated in the disconnect between Trump and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi at the Gaza peace summit in Egypt this month.

While al-Sisi said that a two-state solution was the only way to achieve peace, Trump was noncommittal.

“A lot of people like the one-state solution. Some people like the two-state solution. So, we’ll have to see,” Trump told reports aboard Air Force One.

The Trump administration remains eager to end the conflict, but true peace can only realistically be achieved by Palestinian self-determination – something no US government has been able to deliver, said Sir John Jenkins, a former senior British diplomat, now with Cambridge University’s Center for Geopolitics.

“The situation fundamentally remains as intractable as it always was. Trump’s methods have resulted in some remarkable achievements, but they are essentially deals. To go further requires a strategy and a whole lot of after-care,” Jenkins told Al Arabiya English.

Although Trump’s peace plan focuses exclusively on Gaza, the New York Declaration stipulates that “Gaza is an integral part of a Palestinian State and must be unified with the West Bank.”

Without addressing these challenges – who will govern over what territory and when – statehood will remain aspirational.

Meanwhile, countries in the Middle East have renewed diplomatic efforts towards Palestinian statehood, following the 2023 Gaza war.

Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, Qatar and UAE have repeatedly emphasized their support towards Palestinian statehood as the only path to long-term security in the Middle East.

Saudi Arabia has positioned itself as a key actor to regional stability. Riyadh is leading a global alliance with France to implement a two-state solution.

Saudi foreign minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan in September told an international conference in New York on Palestine that the kingdom views a two-state solution as “a historic opportunity to achieve peace.”

“It is time to achieve justice for the Palestinian people and to recognize a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza,” he said.

Diplomatic adviser to the United Arab Emirates president, Anwar Gargash, called on Wednesday for compromise to end the Middle East conflict by providing a viable state for Palestinians and ensuring security for Israel. His comments came during an interview at the Reuters NEXT Gulf Summit in Abu Dhabi.

In a break with decades of Western foreign policy, Britain, France, Canada, Australia and several other countries have now recognized a Palestinian state, a largely symbolic move that has nonetheless added pressure on Israel.

Obstacles to a two-state solution

A key factor hindering Palestinian statehood is a “deep lack of trust” between the Israelis and the Palestinians, said Ksenia Svetlova, former member of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset.

Before meaningful negotiations can happen, she said, both sides must restore confidence and create a stable, hopeful political horizon for their people.

“One of the main obstacles that remains unsolved is the lack of trust – you cannot really negotiate if you don’t trust that the other side will live up to its word,” Svetlova told Al Arabiya English.

“It is impossible to just jump from [Oct. 7] into a reality in which we have negotiations over borders, security, Jerusalem, refugees, and so on.”

She said a two-state solution remains the only viable option to end the conflict, but it would require time and stability.

Meanwhile, a traditional two-state solution may no longer be practical due to changes on the ground – such as Israeli settlements in the West Bank, security issues and demographic shifts, according to the co-executive director of the Abraham Initiatives in Israel.

“There are so many changes on the ground – especially the issue of security, the issue of settlers, and a lot of demography. The whole landscape has really changed,” Thabet Abu Ras told Al Arabiya English.

He instead suggested a confederation of two independent, democratic states – Israel and Palestine – sharing the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean as one homeland with free movement, equality, and cooperation on key issues like Jerusalem, refugees, and resources.

Lack of a long-term solution threatens more violence

Experts say that a lack of a long-term solution to the conflict threatens to unleash prolonged violence and instability in the region.

According to Haggai Matar, temporary measures like ceasefire, hostage exchanges and aid deliveries are not real solutions and they only delay the next outbreak of violence.

“Without a long-term solution of any kind, we are really just setting ourselves up for the continuation of apartheid and oppression of Palestinians,” he said.

“That will most certainly lead to the next eruption that would also endanger Israelis and cause even more harm to Palestinians.”

Matar emphasized that violence isn’t limited to major flare-ups like the Oct. 7 Hamas attack but that it exists daily under conditions of “apartheid and occupation.” He warned that unless these issues are addressed, another war seems inevitable.