President Trump took many watchers of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by surprise with his Feb. 15 statement that he’s “looking at two-states and one-state” and would support a solution “that both parties like.”  While the President later affirmed his support for the decades-long U.S. goal of a two-state solution, his openness to a different outcome has renewed interest in whether alternatives exist that can meet the national aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians. One model that has garnered attention addresses several core demands, but may create other hurdles in the process.   

Photo Courtesy of 1913: Seeds of Conflict, produced with support from an NEH grant, PBS
Photo Courtesy of 1913: Seeds of Conflict, produced with support from an NEH grant, PBS

Dahlia Scheindlin, a polling expert and political consultant, and Dov Waxman, a professor at Northeastern University, outlined the model, known as confederation, in an article last year. The concept is not a full departure from two states. In a March 7 discussion at USIP, Scheindlin even referred to the idea as the two-state solution 2.0.

At its core, the model calls for two independent, sovereign states that mutually agree to create a voluntary political association with:

  • Open borders and freedom of movement for both sides.
  • A distinction between citizenship and residency. Palestinians could live on the Israeli side, and vice versa, but citizens of each side would retain national voting rights only in their own state.
  • A unified Jerusalem as the capital of both states.
  • Joint authorities on such issues as resource management, water, waste and the environment.
  • Jointly managed security, building on the security cooperation that exists today in the West Bank between Israel and the Palestinians. 

An intriguing aspect of the model is its potential to resolve the most difficult aspects of previous negotiations toward a two-state solution: the right of return for Palestinian refugees, the status of Jerusalem and the evacuation of Jewish settlers from the West Bank. On each of these issues, the confederal model builds in flexibility aimed at replacing the all-or-nothing equation that has caused former processes to fail. 

For its supporters, the model addresses a core demand of both sides in a way that classic partition cannot, by eliminating the hard border and thus allowing both Israelis and Palestinians access to their “homeland.” As former Palestinian negotiator and Brookings Fellow Khaled Elgindy noted at the USIP event, confederation offers a “…fresh approach, given its creative treatment of territory and nationality.”   

Yet the proposal also provides openings for spoilers on both sides who could take advantage of the open borders to conduct attacks, and it would have to overcome some major hurdles, such as a deep lack of mutual trust. Mike Yaffe, USIP’s vice president for Middle East and Africa programs, said in the discussion that the challenges posed by confederation far outweigh the difficulties of continuing the relentless pursuit of a firm partition into two states. 

In an environment in which declining numbers of Israelis and Palestinians continue to believe in a two-state solution (55 percent of Israelis and 44 percent of Palestinians, down from 59 percent and 51 percent six months ago, according to a February poll), a consideration of alternatives has the potential to unlock creative thinking for moving beyond the current stalemate. It also might convince the parties that the two-state solution actually is the most viable and most realistic option after all.

Related Research & Analysis

With Cease-fire Holding, Can Israel and Iran Move Toward De-escalation?

With Cease-fire Holding, Can Israel and Iran Move Toward De-escalation?

Wednesday, June 25, 2025

Israel’s stunning and sophisticated June 13 attack on Iran set off a worrying 12-day escalatory spiral. Iran responded in short order with ballistic missile and drone strikes, which led to a series of tit-for-tat exchanges between the two sides. A cease-fire is now in place -- but will it hold?

Type: Analysis

Jordan’s King Walks a Diplomatic Tightrope in Washington

Jordan’s King Walks a Diplomatic Tightrope in Washington

Wednesday, February 12, 2025

Jordan has long been one of the United States closest allies in the Middle East and its leader, King Abdullah II, is typically the first Arab leader to meet with a new U.S. president. But when Abdullah met with President Donald Trump on Tuesday, the two leaders had to navigate profound differences over what happens next in Gaza amid a fragile cease-fire. Trump’s proposal to relocate Gazans to Egypt and Jordan has been met with sharp rejection by both countries and the broader region. The president has suggested that he may withhold aid to Egypt and Jordan if they don’t agree to take Palestinians from Gaza.

Type: Question and Answer

The Current Situation: Israel, The Palestinian Territories, Egypt and the Levant

The Current Situation: Israel, The Palestinian Territories, Egypt and the Levant

Monday, February 10, 2025

For over seven decades, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — and its broader regional reverberations — has shaped Middle East politics and impacted U.S. interests in the region. Hamas’ unprecedented terror attack on October 7, 2023, the Israeli military response in Gaza and the implications for neighboring Jordan and Egypt — as well as seismic ripples in Lebanon and Syria — have sparked a new phase in the conflict’s and the region’s trajectory.

Type: Fact Sheet

Netanyahu Comes to U.S. Amid Potential Inflection Point in the Middle East

Netanyahu Comes to U.S. Amid Potential Inflection Point in the Middle East

Tuesday, February 4, 2025

On Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu becomes the first foreign leader to meet with President Donald Trump since his return to the White House. The visit comes as a fragile but holding cease-fire in Gaza approaches the midway point of its initial six-week phase, and as phase two of the agreement’s prescribed negotiations begin, with critical questions surrounding Gaza’s transitional security and governance to be decided. It also comes against a backdrop of a recently extended cease-fire deal between Israel and Hezbollah, expressed interest by both Trump and Netanyahu in advancing Israeli-Saudi normalization, and international concern over Iran’s nuclear threshold, despite the setbacks dealt to the “Axis of Resistance.”

Type: Question and Answer

View All Research & Analysis