How the Israel–Palestine conflict began and why it still grips the world

The dispute between Israel and Palestine remains one of the most enduring and polarizing conflicts in modern history. More than a century after its roots took shape, cycles of violence, failed diplomacy, and deep mistrust continue to shape daily life across the region. The conflict has not only intensified in recent years but has also drawn in global powers, humanitarian agencies, and public opinion worldwide. Understanding how it began and why proposed solutions have struggled to take hold is essential to grasp why peace remains elusive today.

Origins in empire, migration, and competing national movements

The modern phase of the conflict traces back to the final years of the Ottoman Empire and the period after World War I, when Britain took control of the territory known as Palestine. Tensions grew as Jewish migration increased, driven by persecution in Europe and the rise of Zionism, a movement advocating a Jewish homeland. Arab communities already living in the area opposed the demographic and political changes, fearing displacement.

In 1947, the United Nations proposed a partition plan to divide the land into separate Jewish and Arab states, with Jerusalem under international administration. Jewish leaders accepted the plan, while Arab leaders rejected it, arguing it unfairly allocated land. Fighting broke out even before Britain withdrew.

When Israel declared independence in 1948, neighboring Arab states invaded, triggering the first Arab Israeli war. Israel survived and expanded beyond the UN plan’s borders. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were expelled in what Palestinians call the Nakba, or catastrophe. The war created a refugee crisis that still affects millions of descendants today.

Occupation and the hardening of positions

The conflict entered a new phase after the 1967 Six Day War, when Israel captured the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem. These territories remain central to Palestinian aspirations for statehood. Israel cites security concerns and historical ties to justify its control, while Palestinians view the occupation as illegal under international law.

Over decades, settlement expansion, restrictions on movement, and periodic violence deepened mistrust. Palestinian political leadership split between the secular nationalist movement Fatah in the West Bank and the Islamist group Hamas in Gaza, complicating negotiations.

Israeli politics also shifted. Governments led by figures such as Benjamin Netanyahu emphasized security and skepticism toward Palestinian statehood, while Palestinian Authority leadership under Mahmoud Abbas faced criticism at home for limited progress.

Why the conflict has intensified in recent years

Analysts say the dispute has effectively tripled down because underlying issues were never resolved. Periodic wars, uprisings known as intifadas, and cycles of retaliation hardened public attitudes on both sides. Meanwhile, regional and global politics added new layers.

Related News

The involvement of major powers, especially the United States, shaped diplomacy and military dynamics. Peace treaties between Israel and Arab states such as Egypt and Jordan reduced interstate wars but left the Palestinian issue unresolved. More recent normalization efforts involving Saudi Arabia and others shifted regional priorities, sometimes sidelining Palestinian concerns.

Humanitarian conditions in Gaza, repeated clashes in Jerusalem, and rocket attacks followed by Israeli military responses have kept tensions high. Civilian casualties and destruction fuel anger and trauma, making reconciliation harder.

A less discussed factor, according to conflict researcher Yara Hawari of the International Crisis Group, is generational change. Younger Israelis and Palestinians have grown up knowing only conflict, with limited exposure to coexistence initiatives that were more common in the 1990s. This social distance reduces political pressure on leaders to compromise.

Solutions proposed over the years

The most widely discussed solution has been the two state model, envisioning independent Israeli and Palestinian states living side by side. It gained momentum after the Oslo Accords of the 1990s but stalled amid continued violence and disputes over borders, refugees, and Jerusalem.

Another proposal is a one state solution, where Israelis and Palestinians share a single democratic state with equal rights. Critics argue it is politically unrealistic given mutual fears about security and identity.

International mediators have also suggested confederation models, land swaps, and phased sovereignty arrangements. However, none have secured broad support from both populations.

According to former US diplomat Aaron David Miller, negotiations often fail because leaders cannot sell compromises to their domestic audiences. He noted in a recent policy forum that agreements collapse not only at the negotiating table but also in the court of public opinion.

The dispute influences global security, migration patterns, and interfaith relations. It shapes politics across the Middle East and affects energy markets and international alliances. For many countries, including Nigeria, it also resonates through religious ties and diaspora communities.

The current phase matters because the viability of a negotiated solution appears to be shrinking. Continued settlement expansion, political fragmentation among Palestinians, and shifting international priorities risk turning the conflict into a permanent state of managed instability rather than a solvable dispute.

Observers are closely monitoring diplomatic efforts, humanitarian access to Gaza, and internal political changes on both sides. Leadership transitions, regional negotiations, or grassroots peace initiatives could alter the trajectory.

A unique perspective emerging from recent academic research suggests that economic interdependence projects, such as shared infrastructure and climate cooperation, might create incentives for stability even when political agreements stall. This approach focuses on practical coexistence rather than sweeping peace deals.

More than seventy five years after Israel’s founding and over a century since the conflict’s roots took shape, the Israel Palestine dispute endures because it is driven by history, identity, security fears, and unresolved grievances. Proposed solutions exist, yet implementation has faltered amid distrust and shifting politics. Without addressing both immediate humanitarian needs and long term political aspirations, analysts warn the cycle of escalation may continue. The path forward will likely require new ideas, sustained international engagement, and leadership willing to challenge entrenched narratives.