REASSESSING THE ISRAEL–PALESTINE TWO-STATE SOLUTION: AN ANALYSIS OF GAZA’S 20-POINT PEACE PLAN

Abstract

This study critically reexamines the viability of the two-state solution in light of former U.S. President Donald Trump’s 20-point framework. Through qualitative analysis of the framework and relevant scholarly literature, the research finds that the proposed points significantly depart from the internationally recognized two-state model based on the 1967 borders, instead prioritizing Israeli security and territorial interests. The study argues that, even if accepted by Israel and Hamas and resulting in a ceasefire in Gaza, the framework would institutionalize a governance arrangement that emphasizes economic stabilization over political sovereignty. The proposed technocratic administration of Gaza, effectively controlled by the United States, may alleviate humanitarian and economic deprivation but simultaneously entrenches political exclusion and external dominance. Drawing on social contract theory and Charles’s “State Building 3.0” framework, the study situates the U.S. approach within a broader model of contractual governance over weak and dysfunctional political entities. The findings suggest that while the framework may create conditions for a nominal two-state outcome, it fundamentally redefines Palestinian statehood in a manner incompatible with the 1967 borders and democratic self-determination, reflecting a shift toward externally managed state-building supported by international acquiescence.