Israel Faces Decades-Old Dilemma on Borders and Identity Post-Oslo

Thirty-three years after the Oslo Accords and a decade after the death of Shimon Peres, Israel remains far from resolving the fundamental question of its borders and national identity. The recent conflict, sparked by the October 7th Hamas attack and the subsequent war in Gaza, has understandably eroded public trust in the Palestinian partner. However, this does not absolve Israel from the necessity of deciding its future.

The core issue is twofold: defining Israel's permanent borders and determining the nature of the entity beyond them. While the latter's political character can be deferred, the former requires urgent resolution. A distinction must be made between the border of sovereignty, which must ensure a Jewish majority and democracy, and a security border, which can extend to the Jordan River as long as the current reality necessitates.

Regarding permanent borders, the starting point will likely be the 1967 lines with land swaps. The current geopolitical climate presents a unique opportunity to establish optimal borders for Israel, incorporating major settlement blocs and addressing security needs. Leveraging the Trump administration and the Arab Peace Initiative could lead to an international agreement on permanent borders without immediately settling the political status of the territory beyond.

Such a move could pave the way for peace with Saudi Arabia, expand the Abraham Accords, and weaken Iran. Defining the political border would diminish the incentive to create 'facts on the ground' through settlement expansion in areas not destined for Israeli sovereignty, potentially leading to a gradual return of settlers to sovereign Israel over time.

Peres himself advocated for a solution that would allow Israel to remain both Jewish and democratic, suggesting that permanent control over millions of Palestinians was unsustainable. While he did not initially favor a Palestinian state, exploring Jordanian or confederative options was part of his vision. The article argues that Israel, ten years after Peres's death, should embrace the logic behind Oslo: dividing the land is essential for securing Israel's future as a Jewish and democratic state. The author suggests that a leader capable of achieving this is currently absent within Israeli politics, making external impetus, possibly from figures like Trump, more likely than an internal initiative.