A two-state solution means Israel and an independent Arab state living side by side under a negotiated agreement. Past plans differ: the 1937 Peel Commission proposed partition, the UN’s 1947 Resolution 181 recommended two states with an international Jerusalem regime, and later negotiations addressed borders, security, refugees, and Jerusalem. The most disputed questions remain the terms, implementation, and guarantees.
What earlier proposals establish
The Peel Commission proposal was not adopted, and the Zionist Congress authorized negotiations rather than accepting its map as written. In 1947, Jewish leaders accepted Resolution 181 while Arab political leaders rejected partition. At Camp David in July 2000, Israeli and PLO leaders negotiated without reaching an agreement. In 2008, Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas discussed a comprehensive package, but no final map or accord was signed. Read the category pages on partition before Israel, Khartoum and Camp David, and the 2008 Olmert proposal for the documentary details.
What must be settled
A final agreement would need to establish borders and land swaps; define security responsibilities and prevent armed groups from attacking Israel; determine arrangements for Jerusalem and its holy places; and resolve refugee claims, including return, resettlement, and compensation. It would also need credible governance and enforcement in both states. Israel’s experience with Hamas’s violent takeover of Gaza informs its insistence on security safeguards, while a sovereign neighboring state requires defined authority and viable territory.
Israel’s conditions and the positions of Arab leaders have changed across governments and negotiations. No historic proposal can stand in for a current mandate from the parties. The practical question is whether elected leaders can agree on a package and carry it out. The U.S. security dialogue in 2014 outlined possible layered arrangements in the Jordan Valley, while leaving final decisions to the negotiators. See security options for the Jordan Valley and refugees, education, and institutional policies for two difficult parts of the agenda.