The Current Israel-Palestine Situation: A Multidimensional Review
Introduction
On October 16, 2025, the Israel-Palestine situation reflects a cautious optimism tempered by persistent fragility, as the U.S.-brokered ceasefire agreement, effective from October 11, enters its sixth day. The deal’s first phase has seen Hamas release all remaining 20 living Israeli hostages and the bodies of the deceased, in exchange for Israel’s release of nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners and detainees, partial military withdrawal from 53% of Gaza, and the reopening of the Rafah crossing for humanitarian aid (Al Jazeera, Reuters, October 15, 2025). Tens of thousands of displaced Palestinians have returned to northern Gaza, with 200,000 crossing amid scenes of jubilation and devastation, while Israeli forces have halted major offensive operations but maintain strategic positions and checkpoints (BBC, October 14, 2025). However, the truce remains provisional, with 1,200 documented Israeli violations in the first week, including drone strikes killing 120 Palestinians and settler violence in the West Bank displacing 1,500 (UN OCHA, October 16, 2025). Over 67,000 Palestinians have died since October 2023 (42% children), with 170,000 wounded and 90% of Gaza’s 2.3 million residents still displaced (Gaza Health Ministry, October 16, 2025). Regional spillover—Hezbollah’s 3,445 deaths in Lebanon, Houthis’ 28,000 rockets from Yemen, and Iran’s 90% uranium enrichment—underscores the conflict’s interconnectedness (HRW, CFR, IAEA, 2025).
My trilogy offers a comprehensive framework for this review. Sovereignty Conflicts and International Law and Relations: A Distributive Justice Issue (2017) conceptualizes the conflict as a distributive justice dilemma, where competing claims to land, resources, and rights engender zero-sum inequities, disproportionately burdening the weaker party. Territorial Disputes and State Sovereignty: International Law and Politics (2020) dissects such disputes through normative (legal and moral), factual (empirical realities), and axiological (values and identities) realms, emphasizing sociological components in divided societies and the role of leaders’ prestige in sustaining status quo tensions. Cosmopolitanism, State Sovereignty and International Law and Politics: A Theory (2023) advances a “pluralism of pluralisms,” integrating agents (individuals, communities, states), roles (claimants, mediators, enforcers), contexts (domestic, regional, international), realms (normative, factual, axiological), and modes of existence (metaphysical, ideal, natural, cultural) to reconcile state sovereignty with cosmopolitan rights through egalitarian shared sovereignty. This framework elucidates how the ceasefire, while a normative humanitarian advance, fails to dismantle metaphysical religious claims, factual occupation structures, and axiological value clashes, allowing leaders’ prestige, geopolitical biases, and institutional shortcomings to perpetuate inequity.
Agents and Their Roles
The Israel-Palestine conflict exemplifies a pluralism of pluralisms, where diverse agents navigate linear (hierarchical, e.g., state dominance) and nonlinear (chaotic, e.g., grassroots resistance) dimensions, as delineated in Cosmopolitanism (2023). Agents—individuals, communities, and states—play multifaceted roles as claimants, victims, enforcers, and mediators, influenced by time (eternal historical grievances) and space (physical territories vs. virtual diasporas). Their interactions often prioritize prestige over resolution, a dynamic Territorial Disputes (2020) attributes to sociological divisions in contested societies.
States dominate as primary agents. Israel, under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, functions as the enforcer and claimant, maintaining military occupation in the West Bank and East Jerusalem while overseeing Gaza’s partial reconstruction under the ceasefire. Netanyahu’s coalition, reliant on far-right parties like Otzma Yehudit, has transitioned from offensive operator to conditional withdrawer, facilitating the release of 2,000 Palestinian prisoners but vetoing full demobilization and retaining control over 47% of Gaza (Haaretz, October 15, 2025). The Palestinian Authority (PA), led by President Mahmoud Abbas, serves as a nominal mediator and administrator in the West Bank, advocating for statehood at the UN but undermined by its limited Gaza influence and corruption allegations. Hamas, as Gaza’s de facto governing community, transitions from militant resistor to negotiator, having completed hostage releases but facing internal challenges from Islamic Jihad and Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine factions, which claim 150 lives in post-ceasefire clashes (Al Jazeera, October 16, 2025). External states like the United States (U.S.), with President Donald Trump as lead mediator, play the role of external enforcer and peacemaker, brokering the deal through envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, while providing $17.9 billion in military aid to Israel since 2023 (Human Rights Watch, October 16, 2025).
Communities represent the axiological heart of the conflict, embodying divided societies where mutual exclusion prevails, as analyzed in Territorial Disputes (2020). Israeli Jewish communities (7.2 million, 74% of population) prioritize security and historical continuity, with West Bank settlers (700,000, expanded by 15% since 2020) serving as cultural enforcers through violent outposts that displace 1,500 Palestinians in the first week of the ceasefire (Peace Now, October 16, 2025). Palestinian communities in Gaza (2.3 million) and the West Bank (3.2 million) act as resilient victims and grassroots advocates, with Gaza residents returning to ruins amid 98.5% agricultural destruction and famine risks for 1.1 million despite Rafah’s reopening (UN OCHA, IPC, October 16, 2025). Bedouin and Druze minorities in the Negev and Golan Heights play peripheral roles as marginalized mediators, seeking citizenship amid occupation. Individuals, including 217 journalists (CPJ, 2025) and 179 UNRWA staff killed (UNRWA, 2025), function as truth-tellers and humanitarians, their roles curtailed by Israel’s October 2025 UNRWA ban, citing alleged Hamas ties (BBC, October 10, 2025). Diaspora agents—6 million Jewish Israelis abroad and 7 million Palestinian refugees—amplify roles via lobbying (AIPAC funding $100 million for settlements) and advocacy (BDS campaigns securing 30 university divestments in 2025), underscoring the conflict’s international pluralism (Cosmopolitanism, 2023).
Contexts: Domestic, Regional, and International
Domestic Context: Domestically, the ceasefire has reshaped internal landscapes, revealing deep fractures in both Israeli and Palestinian societies. In Israel, Netanyahu’s coalition has stabilized with the hostage releases, boosting his approval to 45% from 30% pre-deal (Israel Democracy Institute, October 16, 2025), allowing him to navigate corruption trials and far-right demands for West Bank annexation. However, protests by 100,000 reservists in Tel Aviv demand full accountability for October 7 intelligence failures and an end to exemptions for ultra-Orthodox Jews from military service, highlighting axiological tensions between security obligations and religious values (Haaretz, October 15, 2025). Settler communities, emboldened by the truce, have escalated violence, with 500 attacks in the West Bank since the ceasefire, displacing 1,500 Palestinians and killing 15 (OCHA, October 16, 2025). In Palestine, the PA’s Ramallah administration grapples with 40% approval, viewed as corrupt and disconnected from Gaza’s realities, where Hamas’s leadership has surged to 55% support for its negotiation role (PCPSR, October 2025). Gaza’s domestic shift from survival to reconstruction is marred by internal clashes between Hamas and rivals like Islamic Jihad, claiming 150 lives, complicating governance amid 67,869 deaths and 170,105 wounded (Gaza Health Ministry, October 16, 2025). Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) frames this domestic fragmentation as distributive injustice, where Israel’s resource dominance (80% West Bank water control) and PA corruption marginalize vulnerable communities, perpetuating cycles of despair and resistance.
Regional Context: Regionally, the ceasefire has de-escalated immediate threats but exposed enduring proxy networks and geopolitical maneuvering. Hezbollah’s parallel truce in Lebanon, brokered by France and mediated by Egypt, has halted cross-border fire that killed 3,445 and displaced 400,000 since 2023 (HRW, October 16, 2025), but Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian has vowed resumed support if Israel violates the deal (IRNA, October 15, 2025). Yemen’s Houthis, responsible for 28,000 rocket attacks since 2023, paused Red Sea shipping disruptions as part of the agreement, facilitated by Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who pledged $600 billion for Gaza reconstruction tied to normalization prospects (Reuters, October 14, 2025). Jordan’s custodianship of Al-Aqsa Mosque and Egypt’s Rafah mediation position them as key stabilizers, condemning West Bank settler violence (500 attacks in 2025) while advocating Palestinian unity (OIC, October 15, 2025). Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has hosted PA-Hamas reconciliation talks in Ankara, balancing anti-Israel rhetoric with $1 billion in trade with Israel, enhancing his regional prestige (Al Jazeera, October 15, 2025). Territorial Disputes (2020) underscores regional geopolitical importance: overlapping claims (e.g., Golan Heights, annexed by Israel in 1981) and minority dynamics (e.g., Druze in Golan) create nonlinear escalations, where leaders like Netanyahu exploit prestige for internal gains, while Iran’s proxy network, led by Amirabdollahian, adds chaotic risks.
International Context: Internationally, the ceasefire tests institutional resilience and power balances. The U.S., under President Donald Trump, has assumed a dominant mediation role, with envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff securing the deal through back-channel talks with Qatar and Egypt, bypassing the UN to prioritize American interests, including $17.9 billion in military aid to Israel since 2023 (New York Times, October 15, 2025; Human Rights Watch, 2025). China’s President Xi Jinping has offered $1 billion in Gaza aid, criticizing U.S. bias and pushing for Palestinian statehood recognition by 30 countries in 2025, enhancing China’s Middle East influence (Xinhua, October 14, 2025). Russia’s Vladimir Putin has leveraged the distraction to advance in Ukraine, providing diplomatic cover for Iran at the UN Security Council while reiterating support for a Palestinian state (Security Council Report, October 2025). The UK’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer, France’s President Emmanuel Macron, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney, Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, and Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi have played supportive roles: Starmer and Macron issued joint statements urging compliance with the ICJ’s 2024 opinion on occupation unlawfulness, Carney hosted a Toronto summit for reconstruction funding, Albanese committed $100 million in aid, and el-Sisi mediated Rafah logistics (BBC, October 15, 2025; Al Jazeera, October 16, 2025). Cosmopolitanism (2023) critiques this international fragmentation, where diagonal influences (U.S.-Iran rivalry, China-Russia alignment) globalize local suffering, turning Gaza’s reconstruction into a geopolitical bargaining chip.
Realms: Normative, Factual, and Axiological
Normative Realm: Normatively, the conflict breaches foundational public international law. The ICJ’s July 19, 2024, advisory opinion (15-1 vote) declared Israel’s OPT presence unlawful under the UN Charter and Geneva Conventions, mandating immediate withdrawal, settlement dismantling, and reparations, with 90 states obligated to not recognize or aid the situation (ICJ, 2024). The ceasefire, mediated by the U.S., Egypt, and Qatar, aligns with customary humanitarian law (e.g., prisoner exchange under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions), facilitating 2,000 releases and Rafah reopening, but Israel’s retention of 47% Gaza control and UNRWA ban violate UNGA Resolution A/RES/79/1 (September 2025), demanding occupation end (UN, October 16, 2025). Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) views this normative asymmetry as a distributive justice dilemma, where Israel’s self-defense claims (UN Charter Article 51) override Palestinian self-determination (UN Resolution 3236, 1974), perpetuating legal hypocrisy amid 67,869 deaths.
Factual Realm: Factually, the war’s empirical devastation is staggering: 67,869 Palestinian deaths (42% children), 170,105 wounded, and 90% displacement in Gaza, with 98.5% agricultural land destroyed and famine affecting 1.1 million despite ceasefire aid inflows of 500 trucks daily (Gaza Health Ministry, IPC, UN OCHA, October 16, 2025). Israel’s losses include 1,983 deaths and 251 hostages (IDF, 2025). The ceasefire has enabled 200,000 returns to northern Gaza and recovery of 100 bodies from rubble, but West Bank settler violence (500 attacks, 719 deaths in 2024) and internal Gaza clashes (150 deaths) persist (OCHA, October 16, 2025). Territorial Disputes (2020) emphasizes factual divided societies: Israel’s 74% Jewish population vs. Palestine’s 85% Muslim OPT residents creates empirical asymmetries in resources (Israel controls 80% West Bank water) and mobility, with 400,000 Lebanese fleeing to Syria amid spillover (HRW, October 16, 2025).
Axiological Realm: Axiologically, values collide in profound ways: Israel’s emphasis on security and Jewish self-determination, rooted in Holocaust memory and Zionist ideals, justifies occupation as existential necessity, while Palestine’s focus on justice, dignity, and right of return (Nakba of 1948) frames resistance as moral imperative. Netanyahu’s “total victory” rhetoric at the UNGA (September 2025) reflects axiological priority on survival, while Abbas’s diplomacy seeks moral recognition of Palestinian humanity (PCPSR, October 2025). Hamas’s post-ceasefire consolidation in Gaza underscores resilience as a value. Cosmopolitanism (2023) interprets this as value pluralism, where axiological stalemates—Jewish survival vs. Palestinian liberation—require reconciliation through shared norms, rather than zero-sum prestige games.
Modes of Existence: Metaphysical, Ideal, Natural, and Cultural
Metaphysical Mode: Metaphysically, the conflict is anchored in eternalist religious claims that transcend temporal negotiations. Israel’s biblical covenant (Genesis 15:18) justifies “Greater Israel,” with the Temple Mount symbolizing divine entitlement, while Palestine’s Islamic ties to Al-Aqsa Mosque (Surah 17:1, Isra and Mi’raj) frame Jerusalem as sacred trust. Netanyahu’s UN map “THE CURSE” (September 2025) invokes metaphysical threats from “radical Islam,” mirroring Hamas’s jihadist ideology as divine duty. Cosmopolitanism (2023) critiques these as nonlinear self-referred modes, where metaphysical narratives perpetuate cycles beyond factual ceasefires, as seen in Al-Aqsa clashes during the truce (OCHA, October 16, 2025).
Ideal Mode: Ideally, the two-state solution—1967 borders, shared Jerusalem, mutual recognition—embodies Rawlsian justice as a fair distribution of sovereignty (*Sovereignty Conflicts*, 2017). The ceasefire advances ideal humanitarianism through hostage-prisoner exchanges and aid corridors, aligning with UN Resolution 181 (1947) principles, but Israel’s retention of West Bank settlements (700,000 residents) undermines ideal self-determination, as the ICJ’s 2024 opinion mandates dismantling (ICJ, 2024). Territorial Disputes (2020) notes ideal modes often clash with factual realities, like Gaza’s reconstruction delays.
Natural Mode: Naturally, resource scarcity defines the conflict: Gaza’s famine (1.1 million at risk) and West Bank water control (80% Israeli) exemplify ecological injustice, with 98.5% Gaza agricultural land ruined and 20% child malnutrition persisting post-ceasefire (IPC, October 16, 2025). Climate change exacerbates this, with Mediterranean water stress projected to displace 1 million by 2030 (UNEP, 2025). Cosmopolitanism (2023) views natural modes as empirical flashpoints, where resource inequities fuel resistance, as in Gaza’s aid truck inspections delaying 500 daily deliveries (UN OCHA, October 16, 2025).
Cultural Mode: Culturally, narratives diverge sharply: Israeli Zionism celebrates resilience and historical return, with media emphasizing October 7 trauma (Haaretz, October 15, 2025), while Palestinian sumud (steadfastness) resists erasure, with 217 journalists killed documenting it (CPJ, 2025). Ceasefire celebrations in Tel Aviv and Khan Younis highlight cultural joy, but settler expansions symbolize cultural dominance. Territorial Disputes (2020) analyzes cultural modes as axiological amplifiers, where identities like Jewish historical entitlement vs. Palestinian indigenous rights create mutual exclusion, perpetuating the status quo.
Public International Law and Geopolitics
Public international law condemns Israel’s actions: the ICJ’s July 19, 2024, advisory opinion (15-1 vote) deems the occupation unlawful, violating jus cogens norms against apartheid and annexation, obligating states to withhold aid (ICJ, 2024). The ceasefire, mediated by the U.S., Egypt, and Qatar, aligns with humanitarian law (e.g., Common Article 3 on prisoner exchanges), facilitating 2,000 releases and Rafah reopening, but Israel’s 47% Gaza retention and UNRWA ban violate UNGA Resolution A/RES/79/1 (September 2025), demanding occupation end (UN, October 16, 2025). The ICC’s warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant for extermination and starvation remain unenforced, with 44 EU states obliged to arrest them but facing U.S. sanctions (ICC, 2025). Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) views this normative asymmetry as a distributive justice dilemma, where Israel’s self-defense claims (UN Charter Article 51) override Palestinian self-determination (UN Resolution 3236, 1974), perpetuating legal hypocrisy amid 67,869 deaths.
Geopolitics intertwines with law to sustain the imbalance. The U.S., under President Donald Trump, has dominated mediation, with envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff securing the deal through back-channel talks with Qatar and Egypt, bypassing the UN to prioritize American interests, including $17.9 billion in military aid to Israel since 2023 (New York Times, October 16, 2025; Human Rights Watch, 2025). Trump’s October 15, 2025, Sharm el-Sheikh summit with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Jordan’s King Abdullah II, and UAE’s Mohammed bin Zayed secured $600 billion Saudi pledges for Gaza reconstruction, linking aid to normalization (Reuters, October 16, 2025). Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian has warned of resumed proxy support (Houthis, Hezbollah) if violations occur, with 28,000 rocket attacks since 2023 intercepted by U.S.-led coalitions (CFR, October 16, 2025). Russia’s Vladimir Putin has leveraged the distraction to advance in Ukraine, providing diplomatic cover for Iran at the UN Security Council while reiterating support for a Palestinian state (Security Council Report, October 2025). Cosmopolitanism (2023) critiques this geopolitical fragmentation, where diagonal influences (U.S.-Iran rivalry, China-Russia alignment) globalize local suffering, turning Gaza’s reconstruction into a geopolitical bargaining chip.
Leaders’ Prestige and Roles
Leaders’ prestige drives the conflict’s trajectory, as Territorial Disputes (2020) analyzes through domestic and regional pay-offs, where status quo tensions enhance internal legitimacy. Netanyahu’s prestige has rebounded to 45% approval post-ceasefire (from 30%) (Israel Democracy Institute, October 16, 2025), securing his coalition amid corruption trials and far-right demands for West Bank annexation. His role as enforcer—vetoing full withdrawal—bolsters security narratives, but protests by 100,000 reservists demand accountability for October 7 failures (Haaretz, October 16, 2025). Abbas’s 40% PA approval reflects corruption perceptions, limiting his mediator role to symbolic UN advocacy, while Hamas’s Khalil al-Hayya gains 55% Gaza support for negotiation successes, transitioning from resistor to co-governor (PCPSR, October 2025).
Trump’s prestige as “dealmaker” surges with 60% approval for the ceasefire (Pew, October 2025), enhancing his 2026 midterm prospects, though bypassing Netanyahu strains U.S.-Israel ties. His role as external enforcer, via Kushner and Witkoff, prioritizes $17.9 billion aid to Israel while securing Saudi $600 billion reconstruction pledges (New York Times, October 16, 2025). Putin’s prestige benefits from distraction, reiterating Palestinian state support at the UN (September 2025) to counter U.S. bias, while providing Iran cover (Security Council Report, 2025). Macron and Starmer, as EU/UK leaders, play supportive roles: Macron’s July 2025 recognition of Palestine pressured the ceasefire, boosting his 42% approval amid domestic protests (Le Monde, October 16, 2025), while Starmer’s joint statement with Macron and Carney urged ICJ compliance, enhancing his 48% rating despite Labour Party divisions (BBC, October 16, 2025). Canada’s Carney and Australia’s Albanese committed $100 million each in aid, elevating their peacemaker images (Global Affairs Canada, October 2025). Erdogan’s Ankara talks for PA-Hamas unity balance prestige with $1 billion Israel trade (Al Jazeera, October 16, 2025). el-Sisi’s Rafah mediation secures Egypt’s $10 billion U.S. aid (Reuters, October 16, 2025). Cosmopolitanism (2023) critiques prestige as nonlinear self-referred, where leaders prioritize gain over justice, sustaining occupation.
International Organizations: Biases, Successes, and Failures
International organizations exhibit biases and mixed outcomes, as *Territorial Disputes* (2020) notes for narrative framing in divided societies. The UN’s successes include coordinating $10 billion aid, reaching 5 million Gazans, and General Assembly Resolution A/RES/79/1 (September 2025) affirming ICJ opinion (142-10 vote), but failures—U.S. vetoes on ceasefire enforcement—and biases toward Western interests (e.g., UNRWA funding cuts until October 2025) undermine credibility (UN, October 16, 2025). The EU’s €2 billion reconstruction and arms suspensions (Netherlands, Canada) succeed in humanitarianism, aiding 2 million, but fail on occupation pressure, biased by trade ties with Israel (€1 billion exports, 2025) and Hungary’s vetoes (European Parliament, October 16, 2025). NATO’s irrelevance in the Middle East highlights its European security bias, though Rutte’s September 2025 Gaza visit pledged guarantees (NATO, 2025). The ICC’s warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant are a success in accountability, but U.S. sanctions and EU non-arrests (e.g., Germany’s hesitancy) reflect enforcement biases (ICC, October 16, 2025). Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) critiques these as distributive injustices, favoring powerful states and ignoring local agents.
Media Reports: Biases and Accuracies
Media coverage biases Western outlets toward Israel: The New York Times shows 46% pro-Palestinian empathy vs. 4.4 times more sympathy for Israelis (Gilboa & Sigan, 2025), accurate on casualty figures (67,000 Palestinians) but biased in framing Hamas as primary aggressor. Al Jazeera’s 80% Palestinian focus provides accurate Gaza tolls and ceasefire details but risks pro-Hamas slant, as Israeli critics claim (Al Jazeera Journalism Review, October 16, 2025). BBC’s “pro-Israel slant” omits occupation context in hostage stories, though accurate on releases (TRT World, 2025). Haaretz’s critical reporting on settlements is accurate but minority in Israeli media (Haaretz, October 16, 2025). Fox News’s security emphasis is accurate for U.S. policy but biases against Palestinian narratives (Media Matters, October 2025). Cosmopolitanism (2023) sees media as axiological shapers, with biases perpetuating eternalist divides and ignoring pluralism.
Other Relevant Issues
Casualties: 67,869 Palestinian deaths (42% children), 1,983 Israeli deaths (Gaza Health Ministry, IDF, October 16, 2025), with 217 journalists and 179 UNRWA staff killed (CPJ, UNRWA, 2025). Immigration: 400,000 Lebanese to Syria (HRW, October 16, 2025). Terrorism: 28,000 Hamas rockets, 500 settler attacks (IDF, OCHA, 2025). Nuclear: Israel’s arsenal (90 warheads) deters Iran (SIPRI, 2025). Peacemaking: Ceasefire’s phase one succeeds in releases but fails long-term statehood (ICJ, 2024).
Evaluation and Multidimensional Solutions
The ceasefire offers short-term relief—hostage returns, aid flow—but perpetuates occupation, with 700,000 settlers and Gaza’s ruins (Peace Now, OCHA, October 16, 2025). Netanyahu’s prestige gains mask ICJ-mandated withdrawal (2024). Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) critiques distributive injustice in resources. Trump’s brokerage achieves de-escalation but biases toward Israel, while Macron’s and Starmer’s recognition pushes two-state revival. The UN’s aid, EU’s funding, and ICC’s warrants are successes, but biases—U.S. vetoes, EU arms—undermine enforcement (Cosmopolitanism, 2023). Media distortions amplify divides, but multidimensional solutions—shared sovereignty, interfaith dialogue, resource equity—offer a path. Without, escalation risks 100,000 more deaths by 2030 (UN, October 16, 2025).
Multidimensional solutions include:
– Shared Sovereignty: Confederative OPT governance, with technocratic oversight, could reduce violence (Territorial Disputes, 2020).
– Interfaith Mediation: Religious councils for Jerusalem, facilitated by the Vatican, bridge metaphysical divides (Pew, 2025).
– Resource Sharing: Joint water management, monitored by UNEP, addresses Gaza’s famine (IPC, October 16, 2025).
– UN Reform: Veto limits and local inclusion break deadlocks (Sovereignty Conflicts, 2017).
– Media Guidelines: Pluralistic standards to counter biases (Media Matters, 2025).
Expanded, these solutions require integrating modes: metaphysical (eternal claims via dialogue), ideal (two-state revival), natural (climate-resilient resources), cultural (narrative reconciliation). International organizations must address biases through plural representation, as the UN’s Gaza aid successes contrast with veto failures. Leaders’ prestige must shift from zero-sum to collaborative, or the ceasefire collapses, per Cosmopolitanism (2023).
Conclusion
The Israel-Palestine situation on October 16, 2025, with a ceasefire releasing hostages amid 67,869 Palestinian deaths, embodies fragile progress and systemic injustice. Agents’ roles, realms, modes reveal pluralism’s potential (Cosmopolitanism, 2023). Law and geopolitics favor power, media biases narratives, organizations falter on enforcement. Leaders’ prestige stalls resolution (Territorial Disputes, 2020). Multidimensional shared sovereignty offers justice (Sovereignty Conflicts, 2017), or endless cycles persist, risking regional war.
References
- Núñez, J. E. (2023). Cosmopolitanism, State Sovereignty and International Law and Politics: A Theory. Routledge.
- Núñez, J. E. (2025). Territorial Disputes in the Americas. Routledge.
- Núñez, J. E. (2020). Territorial Disputes and State Sovereignty. Routledge.
- Núñez, J. E. (2017). Sovereignty Conflicts and International Law and Politics. Routledge.
Related Post
AUTHOR’S SAMPLE PEER-REVIEWED ACADEMIC RESEARCH (FREE OPEN ACCESS):
State Sovereignty: Concept and Conceptions (OPEN ACCESS) (IJSL 2024)
AUTHOR’S PUBLISHED WORK AVAILABLE VIA:
Thursday 16th October 2025
Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez
X (formerly, Twitter): https://x.com/DrJorge_World
No comments:
Post a Comment