What are the current borders of Palestinian territories?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The term “Palestinian territories” commonly refers to the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem — areas widely described in UN, UK and humanitarian maps as the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) [1] [2]. These territories do not have universally agreed, final international borders: many states and UN resolutions refer to the 1967 lines as the basis for a future Palestinian state, but “no internationally agreed borders” currently exist [3] [4].
1. What people mean when they say “Palestinian territories”
When governments, international organisations and most media use the phrase they mean the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem — a set of non‑contiguous areas on the eastern Mediterranean coast and inland that are commonly grouped as the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) [1] [5]. Humanitarian and mapping bodies routinely publish “location maps” that delineate Gaza and the West Bank (and note East Jerusalem) for operational and legal purposes [2] [6].
2. The geography and neighbours: who borders whom
The West Bank lies between Israel and Jordan; its eastern frontier is with Jordan while most of its other land borders are with Israel. The Gaza Strip is a narrow coastal territory whose primary land borders are with Israel to the north and east and Egypt to the southwest [5] [4]. Relief and UN maps show these adjacencies clearly for humanitarian planning [2] [6].
3. De facto control vs. internationally recognised lines
Control on the ground is fragmented: Israeli forces retain significant security control over large parts of the West Bank and have exercised control over Gaza’s borders, airspace and waters at various points; Palestinian authorities exercise limited civil governance in parts of the West Bank and Hamas has governed Gaza internally since 2007 — though the exact status and checkpoints are a matter of ongoing contestation and change [7] [5]. Official reporting and travel advisories note closures and restricted crossings out of Gaza tied to military control and security decisions [8].
4. The 1967 lines and the political claim to borders
Political debate centers on the 1967 lines (the armistice lines before the Six‑Day War) as the basis for a future Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. Many diplomatic proposals and UN language reference those lines, but they are proposals for final status, not settled international borders today [3] [4]. The UK briefing states that recognitions and proposals since 2024‑25 used language referring to lands occupied in 1967 as provisional borders when recognising a Palestinian state [1].
5. Recognition and international practice
Recognition of a Palestinian state varies worldwide. By late 2025 many countries recognise Palestine in some form, but recognition does not produce a universally agreed, mapped border; international organisations — including the UN and humanitarian agencies — continue to use the OPT framing for operational maps and legal discussion [1] [2] [3].
6. Maps and datasets: tools and limits
UN OCHA and humanitarian data providers publish 2025 location maps and administrative boundary datasets used by aid agencies and researchers; these maps are practical tools for relief and reporting but they do not settle sovereign borders — they reflect on‑the‑ground administrative divisions and internationally sourced geodata [2] [7]. Amnesty and other NGOs explicitly note they base map borders on UN geospatial data and that this is a functional, not a political, determination [9].
7. Where reporting disagrees or leaves gaps
Sources agree on the three territorial components (Gaza, West Bank, East Jerusalem) and on the absence of final, internationally agreed state borders [1] [3]. Available sources do not mention a single, currently enforceable map that all parties accept as sovereign borders of a Palestinian state; instead, they document differing claims, provisional recognitions and humanitarian mapping for operations [1] [2] [3].
8. Why the distinction matters now
Border definitions affect diplomacy, aid delivery, border crossings and security arrangements. Travel advisories and humanitarian reports note how border and crossing control (for example, closures at Rafah or Allenby/King Hussein Bridge) change access and aid flows in real time — an operational reality separate from political negotiations over final borders [8] [10]. Policymakers and relief agencies therefore rely on up‑to‑date maps even while political borders remain unresolved [2] [7].
Limitations: This analysis uses only the supplied sources; it does not attempt to adjudicate competing legal claims beyond what those sources state.