At a time when ideas to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can be highly speculative, this report attempts to objectively analyze and present the two major options for a negotiated peace and to explain the consequences for both of the parties involved and the international community.
In the current absence of direct negotiations, the Obama administration has an opportunity to reshape the Israeli-Palestinian negotiating framework, according to a report by the Conflict Resolution Program at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. The report recommends that the administration continue to demonstrate strong U.S. support for the two-state model, test the willingness of the parties to compromise and adopt a more comprehensive approach to resolving the conflict with the support of the international community.
Edward P. Djerejian, Yair Hirschfeld, Samih Al-AbidJuly 8, 2015
This report suggests the contours of a more comprehensive policy for the United States in the broader Middle East, one that pursues not only important tactical approaches to counter Islamic extremism and terrorism, but also shapes the larger strategic landscape to secure and promote U.S. interests. After defining the challenge for the United States and the international community, the report provides a brief narrative on the rise of ISIS before presenting key policy recommendations for a more strategic approach.
In a special report, the Baker Institute Conflict Resolution Program outlines goals and strategies for expanded U.S. public diplomacy efforts to support Israeli-Palestinian peace.