Can the Oslo Accords model still deliver peace after October 7?

The viability of the Oslo Accords' model for peace is being questioned in the current regional and international environment, particularly after the events of October 7. The core principle of the 1993-1995 accords was the resolution of all outstanding issues through direct negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians.

This commitment was formalized in exchanges between PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat and Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, and embedded in the Declaration of Principles (Oslo I) and the Interim Agreement (Oslo II). The framework aimed to end confrontation, recognize political rights, and pursue peace through an agreed process, aligning with UN Charter principles and Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. A key element was the agreement not to take unilateral measures that would alter the territories' status pending negotiations.

However, three decades later, a confluence of international, regional, and local developments has made a return to this framework increasingly difficult. The rise of Iranian-backed extremism and jihadist movements has fueled instability, pressuring moderate Arab voices that once engaged with Israel. Even states that signed the Abraham Accords in 2020 operate in a strategic landscape shaped by ongoing Iranian influence and uncertainty regarding Western responses to regional threats. The article suggests that the foundational assumptions of trust and direct engagement, crucial for lasting peace under the Oslo Accords, are now under severe strain.