Title: The Impact of Language on Middle East Peace Efforts

In the complex landscape of Middle East peace negotiations, the nuances of language have played a pivotal role. The establishment of Israel in 1948 on 77% of Palestinian territory, followed by its occupation of the remaining 23% during the 1967 Six-Day War, set the stage for ongoing conflict. The United Nations Security Council's Resolution 242, which addressed the inadmissibility of acquiring territory by war, became a focal point of contention due to differing interpretations in its English and French texts. The English version called for a withdrawal from "territories occupied," while the French version referred to "the territories occupied," leading to significant implications for peace negotiations. This linguistic discrepancy allowed Israel to pursue a partial withdrawal strategy, fostering the "land for peace" framework that underpinned treaties with Egypt and Jordan. However, the Israeli-Palestinian agreements of the 1990s, which recognized Israel without obligating it to withdraw from occupied territories, further complicated the situation. Successive Israeli governments have consistently undermined Palestinian sovereignty, limiting the authority of the Palestinian Authority and intensifying settlement activities in the West Bank. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has declared the Israeli occupation unlawful, emphasizing that the Occupied Palestinian Territory should be viewed as a single unit. This perspective challenges Israel's fragmented approach to governance in the region, particularly regarding Gaza, which has faced a blockade since Hamas's takeover in 2007. The ICJ's use of singular terminology highlights the need for a unified understanding of the territory in the pursuit of lasting peace.