By Kurt Hengl, former Austrian Ambassador to Israel

A renewed effort to establish two sovereign states in the former British Mandate of Palestine is not only advocated by well-meaning great powers or international organizations but also by former “adversaries” themselves: former Jerusalem Mayor and Israeli Prime Minister (2006–2009) Ehud Olmert and former Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister (2005) and nephew of Yasser Arafat, Nasser Al-Kidwa.

The two-state solution was launched by the United Nations on November 29, 1947, through the adoption of a partition plan, but was rejected by the Arab states. In the 1948 War of Independence, they sought solely to eliminate the newly established state of Israel without creating a second, Arab state (whose territory was promptly annexed by Transjordan). It was only after Israel’s victory in the Yom Kippur War of 1973 that the Arab world came to realize that Israel could not be erased: Egyptian President Anwar Sadat extended a hand of reconciliation in Jerusalem in 1977, and the peace treaty followed in 1979. Only since then has the Arab side pursued the establishment of a second—”Palestinian”—state, which had already been granted to them in 1947.

Following the historic Oslo Accords (1993 and 1995), which led to the mutual recognition of the State of Israel and the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, discussions and negotiations have continued regarding the coexistence of two peoples and the establishment of two (equal) states. The promising Madrid Peace Conference of 1991, which included international aid programs for a future Palestinian state, ended in the bloodshed of the Second Intifada and further violent outbreaks, culminating in the shocking events of October 7, 2023. On that day, the terrorist group Hamas took both Israel and the international community hostage, much like the Lebanese Hezbollah has done in the past, forcing Israel into an ignominious ceasefire. Suddenly, the realization dawned that periodic military conflicts would lead nowhere and that only a political vision could offer the Middle East a peaceful future.

Olmert passionately presents the joint peace proposals, asserting that the two-state solution is the only viable path and that all other ideas would lead to no realistic resolution. Without an agreement on Jerusalem, he argues, there will be no lasting peace. He also emphasized that Hamas, through its atrocities, is the greatest enemy of the Palestinian people, fully aware that Israel’s defensive actions in the densely populated Gaza Strip would tragically result in the deaths of many innocent civilians.

These proposals had already been presented to P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas, who, however, hesitated to publicly support them. Pope Francis, EU member states in Brussels, and the United Nations have also been reminded of this peace plan, particularly in this moment of international paralysis and lack of vision regarding the future.

The core of the jointly presented proposal is based on Olmert’s 2006 “Convergence Plan”: a unilateral Israeli withdrawal to Jewish-populated areas and their annexation, similar to Ariel Sharon’s 2005 disengagement plan for Gaza, which did not bring peace.

Now, in their pursuit of peace between the peoples of Israel and Palestine, Olmert and Al-Kidwa propose an agreement that would establish a Palestinian state alongside Israel, within the borders of June 1967 (before the Six-Day War), ensuring peace, security, and mutual recognition—the two-state solution!

The Plan

1. The plan, seemingly plausible, envisions a mutually agreed land swap: Israel would annex 4.4% of the West Bank (Judea & Samaria) along with its “Jewish” settlements and the “Jewish” neighborhoods in Arab East Jerusalem. In return, Israel would cede an equivalent area of its own territory, including a land corridor connecting the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
2. Gaza: Olmert recalls a bitter lesson from the Gaza war: neither Israel nor the Arabs—neither side—can ever fully eliminate the other. Therefore, both politicians welcome UN Security Council Resolution 2735 and the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, which provides for the release of all hostages, an end to hostilities in Gaza, and the gradual withdrawal of the Israeli army. A Palestinian organization composed solely of technocrats should manage the Gaza Strip on behalf of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) and oversee its reconstruction with international assistance. Additionally, this body should prepare long-overdue elections in both the West Bank and Gaza, the last of which were held in 2005.

To ensure a smooth Israeli withdrawal, Olmert and Al-Kidwa propose the deployment of a “Temporary Arab Security Presence”, which, alongside Palestinian security forces, would stabilize the precarious situation. A particularly sensitive mission for this Arab presence would be to prevent any further Hamas attacks on Israel from Gaza. Both politicians call on the relevant Arab states to recognize their shared responsibility and urge wealthy nations to organize a donor conference to rebuild Gaza.

After addressing the urgent humanitarian crisis in Gaza, Olmert and Al-Kidwa turn to the ever-contentious issue of Jerusalem. Arafat’s nephew declared that as long as Israel’s flag flies over the Old City, there can and will be no peace.

1. Jerusalem: The plan proposes a division of the city along the Green Line of June 1967, similar to the land swap arrangement:
2. Israel’s capital would be Jewish West Jerusalem, expanded to include the Jewish neighborhoods built in the Arab eastern part of the city under Mayor Teddy Kollek.
3. The rest would become the capital of Palestine.

According to the peace plan, no single state would have exclusive sovereignty over the Old City of Jerusalem, which is enclosed by the walls of Sultan Suleiman. Instead, a five-state council, including Israel and Palestine, would serve as the governing authority in accordance with UN Security Council guidelines. The historical role of the Jordanian King would be emphasized (as stipulated in Israel’s 1994 peace treaty with Jordan).

The two politicians envision an almost utopian outcome: there would be no restrictions on religious practice or access to this sacred area—Jews, Muslims, and Christians would all have free access to their holy sites.

1. Security: After these details, the proposal briefly outlines a critical condition for Israel’s security: Palestine would be a demilitarized state, except for the necessary internal police force.

Olmert and Al-Kidwa acknowledge that their appeal is merely a starting point for negotiations on further critical issues, such as Jewish settlers and settlements in the West Bank, refugees, and the possible deployment of an international force along the Jordan River to ensure Israel’s security. They invite the involved parties to work toward a comprehensive agreement with international support, one that would foster peaceful development for both states and the entire Middle East.

Author’s Note: The ongoing debate about the political and economic future of the Gaza Strip, especially contributions from the newly inaugurated U.S. President, underscores the urgency of comprehensive negotiations based on the two-state solution.

All publishing rights and copyrights reserved to MENA Research Center.