What is Ehud Barak's stance on Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations today?

Checked on November 25, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Ehud Barak currently advocates for a negotiated two-state outcome — a viable, demilitarized Palestinian state alongside Israel — and urges Israeli leadership to pursue a postwar political process to that end [1] [2]. His public interventions since 2023–2025 stress reviving diplomatic frameworks and mobilizing international and regional backing for a “day after” strategy that ties Gaza’s future to a broader two-state roadmap [1] [2].

1. Veteran security hawk turned two‑state advocate

Barak’s public posture combines his credentials as a former general and prime minister with explicit support for a negotiated two‑state solution: he tells TIME that “two states is the only path out of the abyss” and insists Israel must not abandon the objective of a Palestinian state even during intense conflict [1]. In Foreign Affairs he outlines a vision in which a postwar political process — backed by Arab states and the U.S. — leads to a viable, demilitarized Palestinian state living side‑by‑side with Israel behind agreed and secure borders [2].

2. Practical, conditional roadmap — not unconditional idealism

Barak frames his position as practical and conditional. He supports U.S. and regional proposals that tie Gaza’s postwar administration and security arrangements to a political track toward statehood, but he emphasizes Israeli reservations and security guarantees as prerequisites [2]. He argues for a process that includes international and Arab-state involvement to ensure security and viability rather than unilateral or purely symbolic steps [2].

3. Public warnings about domestic politics and leadership

Barak links the prospects for peace to Israeli domestic politics: he has criticized Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership and argued that current political choices make adopting a two‑state process harder, while urging Israelis to decide where the country should head and who should lead it [2] [3]. His interventions warn that backsliding at home — whether from far‑right coalitions or institutional erosion — will undermine any chance for a durable settlement [2] [3].

4. Historical credibility — Camp David and the 2000 negotiations

Barak’s current stance is framed by his role as the Israeli leader who came closest to offering a Palestinian state in 2000 at Camp David; that history bolsters his claim that a negotiated settlement is feasible but politically difficult [1] [4]. Critics and commentators continue to dispute how generous or final those offers were and whether Camp David’s failure proves intransigence or limits of compromise — a debate reflected in analyses that reassess the “generous offer” narrative [4] [5].

5. Differences in emphasis among his recent statements

In interviews and op‑eds across outlets, Barak is consistent about two states but varies in emphasis: TIME quotes him urging resurrection of the peace objective even amid violence [1], while Foreign Affairs offers a programmatic, postwar political plan tied to U.S. and Arab backing [2]. Later interviews reported in 2025 media reiterate his insistence on compromise by both sides and openness to conditional frameworks that might look different from past formulas [6].

6. How opponents frame Barak’s stance

Opponents use Barak’s Camp David legacy to argue both that he was once willing to concede too much and that past offers undermine Palestinian claims of unfairness; others on the Israeli right view two‑state advocacy as risky in the current security environment [4] [5]. Conversely, supporters say his security background makes his two‑state advocacy more credible, not less, because it is tied to specific security arrangements and regional guarantees [2] [1].

7. What available sources do not mention

Available sources do not mention any recent formal negotiation role for Barak as an Israeli government negotiator after 2013, nor do they report him leading a new official Israeli peace delegation; his current role appears to be that of a public intellectual, commentator, and advocate (not found in current reporting). Sources also do not provide a comprehensive transcript of every 2024–2025 interview, so specific phrasing and tactical prescriptions may vary beyond the cited pieces (not found in current reporting).

8. Bottom line for readers

Ehud Barak today speaks from a position of security credibility while urging Israelis and international partners to revive a conditional, negotiated two‑state path as the only realistic long‑term solution; he ties success to postwar arrangements, regional backing, and Israeli political change [1] [2]. The debate over how generous past offers were, and whether conditions now permit renewed negotiations, remains contested in the record [4] [5].

Want to dive deeper?
What has Ehud Barak said about renewed Israeli-Palestinian negotiations since October 2023?
How does Ehud Barak assess Benjamin Netanyahu’s approach to peace talks and territorial concessions?
What role, if any, has Ehud Barak played in back-channel diplomacy or advisory efforts recently?
How do Ehud Barak’s current views compare with his 1999-2001 positions on land-for-peace agreements?
Which Israeli and Palestinian leaders endorse or reject Barak’s proposals for a two-state solution today?