Israeli-Palestinian Peace Breakthrough? 7 Powerful Reasons This Grassroots Summit Could Change Everything

In May 2025, Jerusalem hosted a landmark grassroots summit uniting thousands of Israelis and Palestinians to rekindle hopes for peace. Organized by over 60 Jewish and Arab coalitions, the event blended cultural exchanges, panels, and personal testimonies, emphasizing solidarity over vengeance. Bereaved families, including an Israeli who lost parents on October 7 and a Palestinian whose brother died in custody, shared stages to advocate dialogue, declaring, “Revenge perpetuates cycles of pain.”

Former leaders like Ehud Olmert and Nasser Al-Kidwa reignited debates around a two-state solution, proposing Gaza as part of a Palestinian state under reformed governance, with territorial swaps and shared Jerusalem capitals. While praised internationally, the summit faced stark realities: Hamas’s grip on Gaza, Israeli settler resistance, and a lack of current political will. Despite hurdles, its power lay in showcasing civilian demand for change, urging leaders to prioritize negotiated peace over endless conflict. The gathering underscored a fragile truth—lasting resolution requires both grassroots courage and bold political action. 

Israeli-Palestinian Peace Breakthrough? 7 Powerful Reasons This Grassroots Summit Could Change Everything

In a divided region weary of conflict, Jerusalem recently hosted an unprecedented gathering—the People’s Peace Summit—marking the largest civilian-led anti-war initiative in Israel since the traumatic Hamas attacks of October 7, 2023. Organized by It’s Time, a coalition of over 60 Jewish and Arab organizations, the event drew thousands to envision a future beyond violence. Here’s why this summit matters and the challenges it must confront to turn hope into reality.  

The Summit’s Vision: Unity Amidst Division 

The two-day summit blended cultural events, expert panels, and personal testimonies, emphasizing grassroots collaboration. Attendees included Knesset members, peace activists, international leaders, and bereaved families from both sides, all united by a shared mantra: “The pains of peace are preferable to the pains of war.”  

Key themes emerged:  

• A Rejection of Vengeance: Maoz Inon, an Israeli who lost parents on October 7, and Aziz Abu Sarah, a Palestinian whose brother died in custody, shared a stage to advocate for dialogue over retaliation. “Revenge breeds endless cycles of suffering,” Inon stressed.  

• Women’s Leadership: Groups like Women Wage Peace highlighted the urgency of including women in negotiations, citing research that their participation increases the durability of peace agreements.  

• Youth Engagement: Workshops for educators focused on fostering tolerance in schools, recognizing that lasting change requires reshaping future generations. 

Political Proposals: Old Ideas, New Momentum? 

The summit revived discussions around a two-state solution, a framework often dismissed as stagnant. Former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert and ex-Palestinian FM Nasser Al-Kidwa presented a joint vision:  

• Gaza’s Future: Olmert unequivocally stated, “Gaza is Palestinian,” proposing it become part of a Palestinian state under a reformed PA-led administration, with interim security to block Hamas’s resurgence.  

• 1967 Borders with Adjustments: Territorial swaps and shared Jerusalem capitals were suggested, echoing past negotiations like the 2008 Annapolis Summit.  

• Immediate Steps: A ceasefire, hostage-prisoner exchanges, and resuming political talks with the PA. 

While lacking formal authority, their plan signals rare bipartisan alignment. Yet critics argue it sidesteps thorny issues: Hamas’s influence, Israeli settler resistance, and the PA’s legitimacy crisis.  

The Elephant in the Room: Can Grassroots Efforts Influence Policy? 

The summit’s strength—its civilian-led, apolitical nature—is also its limitation. Governments and armed groups remain the primary decision-makers. However, history shows public sentiment can shift political trajectories. The 1978 Israel-Egypt peace process, for instance, followed mass protests demanding change.  

MK Gilad Kariv (The Democrats) encapsulated the summit’s ethos: “Return the hostages, end the war, and renew dialogue—these are the pillars of a decent society.” Yet with Israel’s current coalition leaning hawkish and Hamas still entrenched in Gaza, translating optimism into action seems daunting.  

International Reactions: Support with Caveats 

French President Macron praised the summit’s “courage,” reflecting global weariness with the conflict. However, international backing often falters when confronting hard choices, such as pressuring Israel on settlements or isolating Hamas. The proposed “interim security force” for Gaza would require multinational buy-in, a complex ask amid competing global priorities.  

The Road Ahead: Cautious Optimism 

The summit’s significance lies not in immediate solutions but in its demonstration of latent solidarity. Over 5,000 attendees and global live streams suggest a hunger for change, particularly among younger generations. Yet obstacles loom:  

• Leadership Void: With Olmert and Abbas figures of the past, new leaders must emerge.  

• Security vs. Sovereignty: Balancing Palestinian statehood with Israeli security remains unresolved.  

• Healing Trauma: October 7’s scars and Gaza’s humanitarian crisis demand acknowledgment before reconciliation. 

Conclusion: A Foundation, Not a Finish Line 

While skeptics may dismiss the summit as idealism, it rekindles a crucial narrative: peace is possible when ordinary people lead. As the event concluded, a mural of slain peace activist Vivian Silver reminded attendees, “The way forward is built by those who choose hope over hatred.” Whether this spark ignites lasting change depends on translating dialogue into daring political steps—and the world’s willingness to listen.