The current implementation deadlock might be broken through carefully designed confidence building measures demonstrating mutual commitment without requiring immediate resolution of fundamental disagreements. Small, achievable steps could create momentum and trust necessary for tackling larger issues.
Potential confidence building measures include expanding humanitarian access, establishing joint committees for implementation monitoring, releasing additional prisoners, or allowing limited economic activity. These steps provide tangible benefits demonstrating peace dividends while requiring limited political risk. Success builds constituencies supporting further progress.
However, confidence building approaches face the criticism that they merely postpone difficult decisions while allowing parties to pocket gains without fulfilling fundamental obligations. Critics argue that incremental steps exhaust political capital without achieving conflict resolution, leaving parties in worse position when they eventually must confront core issues.
The effectiveness of confidence building depends partly on designing measures that create interdependence rather than merely parallel actions. When each side’s benefits depend on the other’s continued cooperation, incentives align toward maintaining progress. Independent actions that parties can complete separately provide fewer guarantees of reciprocal cooperation.
Gaza’s situation might benefit from confidence building focused on security improvements that benefit all parties. Reducing violence through better monitoring and force separation serves Israeli security interests while protecting Palestinian civilians. If such measures demonstrably improve security, they could create foundation for tackling more contentious issues from a position of reduced fear and greater trust.