Public opinion on the Gaza conflict and international response is deeply polarized and negative, with widespread criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza as war crimes or genocide. The United Nations and other international bodies are viewed as ineffective and biased, failing to provide meaningful intervention. Many express frustration at the humanitarian crisis and call for a fair two-state solution, while some comments also highlight the challenges of disarming Hamas to achieve peace.

Israel

Palestinians

United Nations

[Main source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_October_2023_Gaza%E2%80%93Israel_conflict)  
  
Additionally, I searched the main news outlets for a few countries not present on the list above (namely Bahrain, Cuba, Venezuela, Cambodia, Nepal, Peru)

Glavurdan

Our secretary of state issued a pro Israeli statement even tho we are the only pro Palestinian country in Europe.

Ireland.

twistyjnua

Malta's president issued a statement pro Israel.

Colombia's president called for a two state solution, while not mentioning the terrorist attack at all. It could be called neutral at best, if not pro hamas.

11160704

Although Brazil's president condemned the attacks, it called for a two state solution.

Here is the statement released by the president on his Twitter account:

"I was shocked by the terrorist attacks carried out today against civilians in Israel, which caused numerous victims. In expressing my condolences to the families of the victims, I reaffirm my rejection of terrorism in any of its forms.

Brazil will spare no efforts to prevent the escalation of the conflict, including when exercising the Presidency of the UN Security Council.
I call on the international community to work to immediately resume negotiations that lead to a solution to the conflict that guarantees the existence of an economically viable Palestinian State, coexisting peacefully with Israel within safe borders for both sides."

OrchardPirate

Living in a desert does something to your head, apparently.

silverionmox

L30n_06

Ultra_2704

Scotland did not condemn the attacks and said they were worried about people in Gaza.

[deleted]

Reminder when someone says “this is all because of the occupation”:

In the 1920s, there were anti-Jewish massacres in Jerusalem, Safed, Hebron, etc.

In the 1930s, the Arab Revolt killed hundreds of Jews.

In the 1940s, Palestinian nationalists incited the Farhud, a brutal massacre against the Jews of Baghdad.

In 1948, every single Jew living in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza was expelled down to the last man, woman, and child. The Old Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem was completely razed to the ground.

This all predates the occupation.

jsilvy

Intelligent-Skirt

I seriously have never understood our devotion to Israel. I understand and approve of their right to their land, but I think Palestinians should also have land of their own.

I don't think many in my generation understand  (GenX)

hippityhoppityhi

DropTopEWop

cocacola_drinker

punilySay

I didn’t realize the Falklands ran their own foreign policy.

ThirtyYearGrump

J-A-G-S

619C

that government response to be fare but most Arabs national wouldn't support isreal

Feras47

Please ensure to abide by our rules regarding civility in this thread. We have seen an influx of rule-breaking posts recently in threads concerning the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas. The comments may be locked if the mod team is alerted to a large amount of them in a thread. Thank you.


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/onguardforthee) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

This is a bit of a moot point now that Trump is president. Our next steps should be to figure out how best we can support the inevitable exodus of Palestinian refugees once Israel is done annexing Gaza and the West Bank.

Agent_Burrito

It's a genocide.


The West Bank will be next. Of course it will, they've been slowly carving it up and illegally forcing Palestinians from their homes to set up "illegal" settlements (so-called "illegal", when they don't face any punishment for doing so. Western countries are *happy *to call them illegal to pretend they give a shit about a two-step solution like they claim)


They won't stop. They might not even stop at Palestine.

Hay_Fever_at_3_AM

Canada has fascist underpinnings. It recently tried to argue that it is not responsible for providing its own indigenous folks with clean drinking water after having exploited the land and the labour within. It’s disappointing that this gov cannot become more cooperative, so it makes sense that they would not wish to meet with someone like Francesca Albanese.

spacebrain2

This is eye opening for many of us in Canada.

DonSalaam

Isn't this that crazy lady Francessca Albanese who attended Hamas conferences and wanted to be a keynote speaker to recognized terrorist Charlotte Kates who is the leader of the terror based group Samidoun in a conference hosted by Kates?

You should read up on what Charlotte Kates has said about multiple terror groups like Hezbollah, the Afghaninstan terrorists assholes, PFLP, and Hamas. Shameful that Francessca sees no problem being affiliated with terrorists and using her platform to spread division while being sympathetic to causes that want to dominante women's lives and keep them in forced child marriages and no protection against rape. While beheading members of the LGBT community.

Because here's the reality. Kates and Albanese are advocating for terror groups to lose their terrorist designations. Meanwhile these groups will behead your LGBT children and make their lives a living hell. Same for women.

Yourfavoritedummy

The Palestinians need an advocate who can speak with moral authority. Apart from the fact that Albanese is an antisemite, her mode and tone is not persuasive.

No_Ask3786

Yes, blocking all humanitarian aid into Gaza violates international law. There is a [customary obligation] (https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule55) to allow rapid and unimpeded humanitarian aid. There are also treaty obligations that apply.

Article 23 of the Fourth Geneva Convention provides a general obligation that applies to parties to an international armed conflict, and it does allow for the restriction of the free passage of aid in some circumstances. However, there are other obligations that apply to Occupying Powers that do not allow for the restriction of aid. Because Israel is the Occupying Power in Gaza, article 23 is not relevant here. 

Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires the following:

&gt; To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.

Isreal is obligated to ensure there is sufficient food and medical supplies for the civilian population in Gaza. 

Article 69(1) of Additional Protocol I provides a further obligation:

&gt; In addition to the duties specified in Article 55 of the Fourth Convention concerning food and medical supplies, the Occupying Power shall, to the fullest extent of the means available to it and without any adverse distinction, also ensure the provision of clothing, bedding, means of shelter, other supplies essential to the survival of the civilian population of the occupied territory and objects necessary for religious worship.

Israel is obligated to provide these necessities, as well.

Similarly, article 59 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires an Occupying Power to facilitate relief to the civilian population of the occupied territory:

&gt; If the whole or part of the population of an occupied territory is inadequately supplied, the Occupying Power shall agree to relief schemes on behalf of the said population, and shall facilitate them by all the means at its disposal... 

&gt; All Contracting Parties shall permit the free passage of these consignments and shall guarantee their protection.

Article 59 allows an Occupying Power 

&gt; the right to search the consignments, to regulate their passage according to prescribed times and routes, and to be reasonably satisfied through the Protecting Power that these consignments are to be used for the relief of the needy population and are not to be used for the benefit of the Occupying Power." 

However, this right is limited. As the commentary notes, "[a] State granting free passage to consignments can check them in order to satisfy itself that they do in fact consist of relief supplies and do not contain weapons, munitions, military equipment or other articles or supplies used for military purposes," but "[t]hese safeguards, which were prescribed in the interests of the Powers granting free passage, must in no case be misused in order to make the rule itself inoperative or unduly delay the forwarding of relief." 

Article 70 of Additional Protocol I also regulates collective relief. It says, in relevant part:

&gt; The Parties to the conflict and each High Contracting Party shall allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of all relief consignments, equipment and personnel provided in accordance with this Section, even if such assistance is destined for the civilian population of the adverse Party.

&gt; The Parties to the conflict and each High Contracting Party which allow the passage of relief consignments, equipment and personnel in accordance with paragraph 2 *[quoted above]*:

&gt; (a) shall have the right to prescribe the technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted;

&gt; (b) may make such permission conditional on the distribution of this assistance being made under the local supervision of a Protecting Power;

&gt; (c) **shall, in no way whatsoever, divert relief consignments from the purpose for which they are intended nor delay their forwarding, except in cases of urgent necessity in the interest of the civilian population concerned.**

As an Occupying Power, Israel is bound by article 70 of Additional Protocol I and must facilitate rapid and unimpeded relief into Gaza.

Article 70 of Additional Protocol I also abrogates the provision of article 23 that allowed for the restriction of aid. The commentary to article 70 provides that:

&gt; Article 70 of the Protocol in this respect modifies Article 23 of the fourth Convention, and the second paragraph of that article should be considered as obsolete in any armed conflict to which Protocol I applies.

Edit: While Israel is not a party to Additional Protocol I, many of its provisions reflect customary international law, including those related to humanitarian aid, as noted in the ICRC customary IHL study linked at the top of this answer.

But even if none of the above were the case, and article 23 did apply, Israel's conduct would still be unlawful. Article 23 allows for the restriction of humanitarian aid in the following circumstances:

&gt; (a) that the consignments may be diverted from their destination,

&gt; (b) that the control may not be effective, or

&gt; (c) that a definite advantage may accrue to the military efforts or economy of the enemy through the substitution of the above-mentioned consignments for goods which would otherwise be provided or produced by the enemy or through the release of such material, services or facilities as would otherwise be required for the production of such goods.

However, according to Benjamin Netanyahu's office, Israel is not stopping aid for any of those reasons. From [this BBC article] (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9q4w99je78o), quoting Netanyahu's office: "With the end of Phase 1 of the hostage deal, and in light of Hamas's refusal to accept the Witkoff outline for continuing talks - to which Israel agreed - Prime Minister Netanyahu has decided that, as of this morning, all entry of goods and supplies into the Gaza Strip will cease. Israel will not allow a ceasefire without the release of our hostages. If Hamas continues its refusal, there will be further consequences."

Denying basic necessities to civilians to attempt to pressure another party to a conflict to capitulate is entirely unlawful. It also satisfies the elements of the war crime of starvation, one of the crimes that was the basis for the ICC warrants issued for Israeli officials.

There is absolutely no justification for stopping all humanitarian aid into Gaza. It is a violation of international humanitarian law and a *prima facie* war crime.

As for ICJ provisional measures, stopping all aid does appear to multiple measures indicated by the ICJ in January, March, and May 2024. Violating provisional measures orders is an internationally wrongful act and the ICJ could take violations of its orders into account at the merits stage of the case.

Calvinball90

The main problem isn’t that Israel isn’t *providing* aid to Gaza (though they should, since they are the occupying power), the main issue is that Israel is preventing *any* aid, from anywhere in the world, from getting into Gaza. This is a humanitarian catastrophe and a war crime.

You cannot starve civilian populations to death and block medicine from getting to them just because it would be to a military advantage.

Archarchery

Starving a population goes against international law

Altruistic_Date_7716

This post appears to relate to the Israel/Palestine conflict. As a reminder: this is a legal sub. It is a place for legal discussion and analysis. Comments that do not relate to legal discussion or analysis, as well as comments that break other subreddit and site rules, will be removed. Repeated and/or serious violations of the rules will result in a ban.


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationallaw) if you have any questions or concerns.*

veerKg_CSS_Geologist

jrocislit

Isn’t similar to the UN ending shipment of aid to Yemen because the un workers were kidnapped. Does that mean that the UN is also violating international law 

Braincyclopedia

As I understand the current restriction of aid going into Gaza, what isn't being widely reported is that Israel has advises that there is enough aid inside Gaza to last 4 to 6 months.

If correct, and there is no reason to doubt it, then that would likely negate any claim of "war crimes" as some seem to be doing.

Cannon_Fodder888

Yes. And it’s been violated multiple times for a while now. Like over a year.

Ok_Election9009

Israel is within its right to block aid per article 23

&gt;(a) that the consignments may be diverted from their destination,  
(b) that the control may not be effective, or

Hamas is clearly stealing and diverting aid, and control is not effective.

Israel does not have to assist Palestinian war efforts against it.

triplevented

The prohibition on starvation as a method of warfare applies specifically to civilians. making it prohibited to deliberately starve civilian populations. 

The problem here is that HAMAS is taking some of the food that would otherwise sustain civilians. As such cases, the food qualifies as a military objective and become targetable.

https://nypost.com/2024/10/10/world-news/hamas-steals-humanitarian-aid-trucks-from-gaza-strip/

Rear-gunner

Yes yes yes it does. Not sure that this needed  to be asked. Not sure that what you asked was a serious question

You’d have a better case for it if Israel hadn’t spent the prior 42 days sending in 600 trucks a day of aid, giving Gaza a 4 month stockpile.

Dvjex

Aren't both sides committing repeated illegal acts?

Wilson-95816

Israel isn’t blocking all humanitarian aid. It’s shutting its borders. The aid can still come through  other means aka Egypt

Unlucky-Day5019

[A reminder for everyone](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/4479er/rules_explanations_and_reminders/). This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:

* Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
* Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree.

Violators will be fed to the bear.

---

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalDiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*

If we’re factoring in with what’s happening now imo I’d say quite a few things definitely need to change. I’ll start on the Israel side. 
1. Netanyahu need to go. This asshole and the government officials who are his Allies has been part of the reason why there’s been little progress to peace for quiet a while. https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/amp/ 
2. Settlers need to leave the West Bank. The settlers within the West Bank have been absolutely horrible to the Palestinians living there before the Hamas terror attack on 10/7. And Netanyahu completely supported the settlers going onto what’s considered Palestinian land for years.

Now for Palestine.

1. HAMAS. Do I need to say it? These fundamentalists assholes need to be completely destroyed. They are the other key reason why there’s little to no peace. Using civilians as shields, killing anyone who isn’t religious, wanting to kill every single Jewish person, the list goes on.
2. The radicalism. Quite a few Palestinians are quite anti semitic. Even the supposedly “moderate” PLO government is anti semitic with the President Abbas literally having a phd in holocaust denial  https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/mahmoud-abbas-still-a-holocaust-denier . And not to mention the martyr fund to kill Jews(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_Fund ). There’s a reason why so many of their neighbors are refusing to allow Palestinian refugees in(Lebanon insurrection in the 70s, causing trouble to Egypt, trying to kill the Jordan king). Those things need to stop. 

My solution: I have no idea. Politics especially in the Middle East is complicated. What I do know however is this conflict is super complicated and neither side is free of blame. So it’s gonna require both sides to kick the extremists to the curb. Which I sadly don’t see happening for quite a while. I definitely feel bad for the citizens caught in the crossfire.

Peace can’t happen until 2 major things happen. 

1. Hamas needs to be disarmed and ended since it is a state sponsored terrorist group.
2. Both sides need to admit they both have the right to exist and that they must share the region. 

After those two things happen a two state solution can be negotiated in good faith.

GrayBox1313

To look at it from a purely objective level, you won't get lasting peace until Palestinians have a functioning economy. Right now you've got 4.5 million Palestinians with a GDP of $10B, &gt;30% unemployment and exports of $720M. Palestinians have minimal access to higher education, no real industrialization and no real prospects for growth.

It really doesn't matter if you blame Israel, Hamas, Iran or the US for this state of affairs. Unless and until a child growing up in Palestine has access to a better future than their parents we're going to see this conflict continue.

The average Palestinian doesn't want death to Israel or martyrdom. They want what everyone else wants - a job and home so they can raise a family and live their life.

Absence of war is only the first step. You also need a stable government, reliable access to electricity and drinking water, education and economic development. Once the current crisis is over, the international community needs to move in this direction. Otherwise we're just going to have the same debate in another ten years.

Zombie_John_Strachan

My two cents based on what I know so far:

**Short-term**: International agreement to dismantling Hamas while protecting Gaza civilians through strict war strategy oversight of Israel, as well as global provision of humanitarian aid and basic services. Israel may need tangible accountability measures to agree to this, but if the US joined these international efforts, I think it could happen.

**Long-term:** After Hamas is dismantled, international community occupies Gaza together temporarily, while working together to develop a new leadership system with representatives from the Gaza strip. Criteria for representative leadership would be (a) support from the majority of Gazans and (b) a commitment to a peaceful two-state solution. U.S. and global community ceases aid to Israel until the leadership of Israel also agrees to a two-state solution. U.N. moderates negotiations.

**Long-Long term:** A penpal/video chat friendship program to get the children in Palestine and Israel talking to each other. It's very easy to demonize an entire people when you have no exposure to them and live in an echo chamber of your own narrative. Exposure to the humanity of others and their stories improves interest in peace.

koolaid-girl-40

1. One side wipes out the other 

2. Two state solution. And I mean a legit two state solution where Palestinians have a good shot at prosperity and Gaza is connected to the world at large (and the West Bank especially)


I don’t see a one secular state solution working. Way too much bad blood at this point.

Dizzy-Resolution-511

I can tell you one way it's *not* going to end: a secular, democratic Palestine made up of all the land from the former Mandatory Palestine. Why? Because neither side actually wants it. Polls have shown that Palestinians would prefer to live under Islamic law where Muslims have a higher position than non-Muslims do, where religion plays a major role in everyday life and politics, so they wouldn't agree to it. Israelis won't agree to this for obvious reasons. Besides, it takes a special kind of naivete to think something like this would be possible in this region. Just look at some of the surrounding countries. Can any of them be called secular, democratic states? But we're supposed to believe Palestine would be the exception? This fantasy is only entertained by Western idealists - i.e. people with no skin in the game. It's time to stop taking it seriously.

In any case, there really is no solution to this that doesn't involve a lot more bloodshed. That has been the story of the Middle East for the last century, and [that will be the story of the Middle East forever](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN4mnVLP0rU)

AntarcticScaleWorm

Seeing the slogans on the pro-Palestine banners, and watching a bunch of videos from the Ask project, it seems the two state solution is over. This is kind of shocking to me as I always thought this was the only reasonable off ramp.  Palestinians don't seem to want it. That just means war.

Phssthp0kThePak

Me default reaction is to say that you could nuke the whole area and the survivors would fight over the glass.  
  
Look, this is a hatred that runs deeper and longer than most countries have existed. It’s not even a space where you could remove one population from the other with a land grant. It’s the land itself that they’re willing to die for. Until you can convince one side to quit the land, there won’t be peace. Ever. We’re just going to see this generation after generation.

Alfred_The_Sartan

Stop giving money to the middle-east, don't buy oil from the middle-east, and cut all funding and support to the middle-east. If they don't have our money, they don't have the means to do anything.

Hamas unconditionally surrendering, and freeing all the hostages. Then going away, and never returning would be a great solution and would work full proof.

STC1989

Am immediate commitment from Hamas for no more attacks (and also Hezbollah) and a recognition that neither side will get everything they want.

Netanyahu going and a more moderate Israeli government.

And, Iran staying out of it.

I_am_Reddit_Tom

Hamas needs to be destroyed like the Nazis. No if ands or buts, they are a terrorist organization that has only one goal, kill as many Jews as possible. The Palestinians need a good strong leader willing to work with Israel and Israel needs to work with them. Palestine needs to be recognized and both deserve to live in peace. The UN needs yo broker a deal that is satisfactory to both sides.

I don’t think there is one really. 

Israel probably ends up trying to kick out the Palestinians 

Or just becomes super heavy handed 

It’s a bad situation

Finishweird

There isn’t one frankly. The end goals of either party are the antithesis of the other. Israel wants to continue its existence in the Middle East, whereas Palestine wants the complete and utter destruction of Israel and the return of Israeli land to Palestinian hands.

While I will not argue in favor of Israeli warcrimes, it should be noted that the Palestinian population voted Hamas into power during an election that was rigged against them, and continues to support them as government officials. That would in turn mean the general population is in support of Hamas’s goals, or at least complicit with them. Again, that does not mean that Israel should’ve blockaded the city or leveled multiple city blocks in Gaza, they are civilians after all.

The solution isn’t the Two State Solution. Israel and the wider international community have made numerous attempts to set such a system up, but Palestine (even before Hamas), have unilaterally rejected such proposals. Their unwillingness to even consider the idea means they aren’t negotiating in good faith, so there won’t be a peaceful option for a long, long time. That waiting period will only continue to increase as the frequency of human rights violations increases too.

Unfortunately, this is one where there is no good solution. Jerusalem and several other cities in that area are considered cities of significant religious importance, which means that as long as there are religious extremists in the middle east, there are going to be people more than happy to kill and die for control of those religious landmarks.

There are really only a few potential outcomes that I believe are possible. None of them good.

1. Each side keeps attacking the other side perpetually in an endless cycle of violence (Current strategy)
2. Radical Palestinians and allies commit genocide and either kill or drive every Jew from Israel
3. Israel commits genocide and either kill or drive every Palestinian from Palestine
4. Israel takes over Palestine with a significant number of casualties while the survivors undergo mass re-education and deprogramming to undo the decades of antisemitic brainwashing and propaganda Palestinians have received from Hamas and other radical Islamic groups.

SilentSwine

Secular government with religion completely removed from all government. That's impossible, but that is the framework that could work in a few generations totally committed to it.

As a jew I'm completely horrified by the right wing nut jobs. "Let us become the people that mimic those that put us in camps"

I'm also completely horrified at the stated goals of hamas and how they launched the attack.

There are no good guys in this fight. However, I side with Israel on this because the Palestinians want every jew dead to obtain their goals. Whereas Israel is oppressive and corrupt but stops short of genocide.

The only way for peace is to take religion out of it... so I don't think it's possible, and I don't know what the end game is.

Religion sucks.

Carbon_Gelatin

There could be either a one or two state solution in theory both are possible but they require that the constitution accept the right that people of all or no faith can live there and have a right to be free from oppression.

That needs to be enforced and enshrined into the next generation through a generation of forced education, forced government services, forced multiculturalism and a forced alternative to the current governments.

Ideally an international coalition would go in to get rid of all the religious extremists and would create a new nation by force with, in it's constitution, such rights and obligations.

After a few decades of forced peace maybe truly democratic political parties and aspirations could take birth and start representing and leading all people of the Levant that agree on basic human and equal rights.

But there's no way in hell that you'll find the couple hundred thousand volunteers that would be willing to go to war, tunnel warfare specifically, against Hamas and the likes and would be willing to invest decades of nation building by force on the Palestinians.

Between the failures of nation building efforts like Afghanistan and the usefulness of the Palestinian conflict for some islamist nations like Iran most nations have more interest in staying away from the conflict as getting any form of really involved can be infinitely costly to possibly less than zero benefits.

human8264829264

Both sides have to agree that the other side has a reasonable right to security.

emcdonnell

Build a time machine and go back to 1947.
I don't see a real solution atm tbh.

Ts0mmy

I think everyone agrees that Hamas is a big part of the problem. The other is Iran. It's my belief that Iran helped instigate the attack by Hamas because of the Abraham Accords. The Abraham Accords was a big step twords peace in the Middle East and normalizing relationships between Israel and Arab states. It possibly could have lead to a pact between Saudi Arabia and Israel which Iran wants to thwart at all costs. Even just recently leaders of Iran have stated that chants like Death to America or Death to Israel are not just mere throw away slogans to rally the masses but are official policy. 

So it's a complicated conflict with different players some at the forefront some in thinly veiled. But I would think any solution would have to require the removal of Hamas from Gaza. But I think the push to remove them cannot just come from the outside but must also come from within Gaza. The people of Gaza must work with outside forces to oust Hamas. They should be given guarantees that if they help remove Hamas that it will be worth the effort. There should be some negotiating what the rewards are for that effort. I would think that are people within Gaza that are tired of Hamas and tired of them hoarding what little resources there for them to attack Israel which in turn leads to a response from Israel and it's a never ending cycle. Time to break that cycle. 

If Hamas can successfully be rooted out then there's the issue of Iran. Iran needs to be sanctioned for supporting terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran shouldn't be given the opportunity to just insert a substitute if Hamas is thrown out. Iran is one of the biggest instigators of conflict in the region and it needs to be clear it won't be tolerated any longer.

Ham-N-Burg

Go back to the end of WWI and get some people who knew the area to draw a better landscape of the Middle East post Ottoman Empire

Israel annexes the entire region making all Palestinians equal citizens under the law. Jerusalem falls under the occupation of UN mandate that works of the logistics of worshippers at Holy sites.

If the Palestinians laid down their arms, there would be peace. If Israel laid down their arms, there would be no Israel. There's your answer.

goofunkadelic

Israel needs to
1. Go back to 1967 boarders
2. Dismantle all settlement communities
3. Limit the influence of far-right Zionist parties in the government
4. Have the Haredi community enter the labor market or at least stop reproducing so fast

Palestine needs to
1. Accept a 2 state solution deal that’s at least with 1967 boarders
2. Dismantle Hamas and all religious fundamentalist parties
3. General population be more moderate about religion 
4. Be economically self sufficient

I dont have a comprehensive solution, but the only path to a solution requires the United States to cease using its position on the security council to shield israel from citicism and to cease supporting its military. 

This hegemonic support encourages extremism within israel and encourages a sense of impudence and unaccountability in israeli politics. Israel is going to have to compromise on *something* to improve the situation and that isn't possible if israel can continue to act without taking consequences into account.  

The closeness of the United States and Israel has led to the creation of a violent and destructive far right in both countries that worsen both. The far right in israel helped and supported trump just as the far right in the US help and support settler attacks and corruption like netanyahu has been on trial for.  If this relationship goes on these far right forces will only get stronger.

tracertong3229

The Israelis are not interested in peace because they don't need it. The status quo benefits them. Their country is one of the the most innovative in the world, one of the richest per capita, and one of the most powerful on the region, besides being under the protection of the US.

By comparison, the Palestinians have one of the most underdeveloped regions in the world, in a big part due to Israelis interest in keeping their sworn enemy as weak as possible.

The negatives of the situation for Israel are close to negligible. The few rockets that were launched to them have never impeded their prosperity, and even the most devastating attack by the Palestinians, while tragic, killed a tiny percent of their population.

Meanwhile, they control all Palestinians, whether directly in the West Bank or indirectly through blockade in Gaza, and are free to take over the West Bank chunk by chunk via settlements.

It may sound like I'm biased against Israel here, but I am not, I'm just trying to be factual. Both sides have committed atrocities, but of the two, Israel is the least bad. First because they are 'only' stealing land slowly , while the Palestinians want to kick or kill the all immediately. Secondly because they gained control of the region after winning a defensive war. And third because their partial democracy with limited institutional racism is still much more humane than radical Islam government.

There won't be any everlasting peace until and if the balance of strength of the two changes. Perhaps all Palestinians get expelled and the conflict ends that way. Perhaps a disaster happens on Israel and they are forced to compromise with the Palestinians, think an attack by WMD. Perhaps Hamas manages to increase the damage they cause to Israel with the same effect of forcing concessions. Or perhaps in 500 the situation remains the same.

athelard

There really isn't much of an issue in Israel.

Muslims, Jews, Christians Bhai and other religions live in relative peace in Israel proper.

It's area a, b, c and Gaza where the real problems exist.

They aren't Israeli, nor are the places in Israel, nor under Israeli occupation.

The best thing that could happen, the 4 areaa fully remove all terrorists, form a democratic country, and vote for sane leadership.

hawkxp71

As an atheist, this looks like an issue that could be greatly reduced by increasing the amount of atheism on both sides. Hardliners hold a massive amount of the blame, and those hardliners are empowered by religion.

If religion gets you into a problem, removing it will likely be necessary to get you out of it.

ReferredByJorge

1.  Return to 1967 borders, which means Israel gives back all the settlements since then.  
2.  No more settlements. Period. 
3.  Two state solution now.
4.  Total self-determination and independence for the Palestinian state.  
5.  Complete end to all US aid to Israel if 1-4 do not happen.

NowIDoWhatTheyTellMe

If Hamas is disbanded, and a UN peacekeeping force controls Gaza, Israel should withdraw to pre 1967 borders, Palestine is then recognized as a state. Elections held shortly thereafter

steamed---hams

1. Israel should recognize and enforce the 1947 UN border, pull back the settlements.
2. Israel should invest in West Bank to increase their standard of living and made the West Bank into an example that showcase Israeli and Palestinian can indeed coexist. 
3. Given enough time, if the West Bank project succeed, Hamas will naturally lose their influence in Gaza. 

These are long term solutions, I'm not going to comment on current conflict because I see those as futile effort from both side. Hamas is never going to made any significant damage to Israel, and the current Israeli campaign to "eradicate" Hamas is going to fail no matter what. Israel can kill every Hamas operator, and another group with a different name will swiftly enter its power vacuum.

65726973616769747461

The only solution is a commitment to peace by Palestinians.   Settlements continue for 2 years of peace.  Then negotiations can begin.  But without a firm demonstration that Palestinians wish to live in peace nothing can be done

Vegasgiants

The ODS solution has been gaining more approval recently among both Palestinians and Israelis. Here, take a look at it explained by an Israeli Jew, Ner Kitri.  


https://mondoweiss.net/2023/07/the-transition-from-a-jewish-state-to-true-democracy-will-benefit-all/

verocity1989

At the end of Clinton's term there was an agreement on a two state solution but Arafat backed out at the last minute due to Jimny Carter telling him not to accept the offer (sources say because Carter didn't want the win for Clinton). Ever since that time I have realized the situation will never be resolved. Netanyahoo is an ass and the Palestinians don't negotiate in good faith. 
The evangicals want a war to initiate the rapture. Every group has an agenda.

therealDrA

Israel annexes the west bank and Gaza and absorbs their population.

Similar to what happened to the Israeli Arabs, who are now well integrated into Israeli society with no issues. Should have happened in 1967 , we would have been done by now.

HilbertInnerSpace

There is no practical solution that doesn't come with the price of hundreds of thousands more dead.

Neither Gaza or West Bank are able to commit to a peaceful resolution due to decades of genocidal indoctrination of their children.  They will not just suddenly have a change of hearts and minds until their actual existence is threatened by enough to change their will.

I would hope that it wouldn't take such drastic measures, which there won't be, but nothing in the last 70 years suggests otherwise.

The world needs to come together and act like Childrens Services and just take all of the kids and put them in foster care and let the adults duke it out until one side or the other relents.

Funklestein

People don't really understand that the UN only functions because powerful countries are not forced to abide by it and that the only country actually willing to impose UN plans is the US. All of this arguments are hilarious as they imagine the UN has any power outside of what the security council and particularly the US grants it.

PushforlibertyAlways

Look into the League of Nations experiment and how that went after expelling member states.

Ghost313Agent

I say keep them in. Every time Netanyahu goes to the UN and gives a speech he just pisses off more and more world leaders. If we kicked them out we’d be missing out on the fun.

_-Kr4t0s-_

1. Syrian Civil War (2011–present)

Death toll: Estimated 500,000+ deaths.

2. Iraq War and Insurgency (2003–2011)

Death toll: Estimated 300,000+ deaths.

3. Darfur Genocide, Sudan (2003–present)

Death toll: Estimated 300,000+ deaths.

4. Second Congo War (1998–2003)

Death toll: Over 5.4 million, though largely from indirect causes (disease, starvation).

5. Yemeni Civil War (2014–present)

Death toll: Estimated 250,000+ deaths (including civilians dying from famine and disease).

6. Afghanistan War (2001–2021)

Death toll: Estimated 240,000+ deaths.

7. Tigray War, Ethiopia (2020–2022)

Death toll: Estimated 500,000–600,000 deaths.

8. War on Drugs, Mexico (2006–present)

Death toll: Estimated 350,000+ deaths.

9. Boko Haram Insurgency, Nigeria (2009–present)

Death toll: Estimated 350,000+ deaths.

10. South Sudan Civil War (2013–2018)

Death toll: Estimated 400,000+ deaths.

11. Libyan Civil War (2011–2020)

Death toll: Estimated 25,000–30,000+ deaths.

12. Central African Republic Civil War (2012–present)

Death toll: Estimated 25,000–40,000 deaths.

13. Russo-Ukrainian War (2014–present, escalated in 2022)

Death toll: Estimated 500,000+ deaths.

14. Myanmar Rohingya Crisis (2017–present)

Death toll: Estimated 25,000+ deaths.

15. Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (2000s–present)

Death toll: Estimated 40,000+ deaths.

16. Somali Civil War (2009–present)

Death toll: Estimated 500,000+ deaths (combined with deaths from famine and disease).

17. Kashmir Conflict (2001–present)

Death toll: Estimated 50,000–100,000 deaths.

18. Rwandan Rebel Conflicts (2000–present)

Death toll: Estimated 10,000+ deaths.

19. Philippine Drug War (2016–present)

Death toll: Estimated 12,000–30,000 deaths.

20. Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict (2020)

Death toll: Estimated 7,000+ deaths.

blues_red

Why would they remove Israel but keep all the other member states in violation of blatant human rights? I can highlight a bunch of countries on the UNHRC that are worse on a daily basis.

Kicking out Israel while keeping in Sudan and Afghanistan? Come on.

Maximum_Mud_8393

Weird, when Mehdi Hassan said precisely  this a couple of days ago, people said it could only have been motivated purely by him being a brown Muslim terrorist.

Blacksmith_Heart

As a point of fact, The United Nations, since the 60s, has issued more condemnations of Israel than every other country out together (think of the human rights abuses over the last 60 years by Iraq, China, Sudan, Somalia, Serbia, Afghanistan, North Korea, Myanmar, on and on and on).

That might tell you something about their priorities as an organization

throwawayyawaworth77

The ongoing conflict in Gaza has drawn condemnation from the international community, with allegations of genocide against Israel. The Arab League summit in Baghdad prioritized calls for urgent humanitarian aid and reconstruction funds for Gaza.

Gaza Conflict and International Response

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want