The hottest Peace process Substack posts right now

The U.S. proposed a 28-point peace plan with a Thanksgiving deadline that is informal and being revised as talks continue.
Negotiations have involved leaked documents, meetings in Geneva and Abu Dhabi, and many outside parties, while both sides keep fighting to gain leverage.
Both Ukraine and Russia now need a respite from war, so this initiative may have a better chance of working than skeptics think.

He proposed a "Board of Peace" and a plan to rebuild Gaza that includes a luxury "Gaza-Lago" resort city as part of a broader peace effort.
The initiative is driven by a philosophy of positive thinking rooted in Norman Vincent Peale, prioritizing optimism over detailed political or historical solutions.
Many see the vision as wildly optimistic and possibly naive given the deep, complex realities of the Israel–Palestinian conflict.

The conflict between Israel and Palestine revolves around the question of who can legitimately claim the land.
The history of the region involves various populations ruling over the land, with complex dynamics of religion, ethnicity, and governance.
Ultimately, both Israelis and Palestinians have strong claims to the land, but the resolution should focus on factors like self-determination, international recognition, and adherence to legal norms.

The peace plan is moving toward a second stage with an International Stabilisation Force meant to demilitarize Gaza, secure borders, and protect civilians, and detailed planning is already happening at a US-led coordination center.
Political problems are blocking progress — the unrecovered remains of an Israeli and a dispute over whether the Rafah crossing should be two‑way are stalling implementation and complicating the return of Palestinian governance.
Practical preparations (military specialists, NGOs, and EU oversight of crossings) exist, but growing violence, Israeli political disunity, and doubts about the ISF’s mandate threaten the plan’s momentum.

Israel has repeatedly violated ceasefires, resulting in many civilian casualties, while the situation for Palestinians remains extremely dangerous.
The recent U.N. resolution backed a plan that essentially allows foreign oversight and control over Gaza without recognizing Palestinian rights or statehood.
The ongoing discourse around the two-state solution often ignores the reality of Palestinian suffering and appears to favor maintaining the status quo rather than promoting genuine peace.

Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

Israel's need for peace with the Palestinians is crucial, especially after decades of conflict. Various leaders have tried to address this issue, but lasting solutions have proven hard to achieve.
The recognition of a Palestinian state is becoming more accepted internationally, reflecting a desire for resolution in the region. However, the path to achieving this remains uncertain.
Current Israeli leadership is at risk of increasing isolation, as they avoid negotiations with Palestinians. Without dialogue, finding a stable solution will be very difficult.

The conflict between Israel and Hamas remains unresolved, with challenges in reaching lasting peace deals.
There are divisions within the Israeli government on how to handle the situation, including differing views on the future of Gaza and the Palestinian Authority's role.
Efforts from external parties, like the US, Europeans, and Arab states, are crucial in addressing the complexities of the Israel-Gaza conflict and finding potential solutions.

The two-state solution is gaining international support as the preferred resolution for the Israel-Palestine conflict, even if challenges remain in the path to achieving it.
Historically, efforts towards a two-state solution have faced obstacles such as disagreements over Jerusalem control and refugee rights.
The aftermath of recent conflicts in the region has highlighted the urgency for immediate actions to address relief, reconstruction, governance, and security in Gaza before moving towards long-term peace negotiations.

The gravest existential threat is internal: government policies that expand isolated settlements and weaken democratic checks risk turning the country into a non‑Jewish or non‑democratic state.
A secure two‑state outcome is technically compatible with Israel’s security and is more achievable if pursued now with U.S. backing and cooperation from moderate Arab states; waiting only narrows Israel’s options.
Iran remains a long‑term nuclear risk but its breakout timeline has been delayed, so Israel should use this window to build regional and U.S. coordination and treat military strikes as a last resort.