Most Israelis Again Said They’d Accept a Palestinian State. Can That Be True?

With a brewing UN showdown over recognizing a Palestinian state and advancing a two-state solution, I get shocked looks whenever I share ALLMEP’s recent poll findings, confirmed again in a new poll last week — that as many as 75% of Israelis would support, accept, or tolerate a Palestinian state as part of a broader regional peace deal. People ask: How is that possible? Everyone “knows” support for a two-state solution is at historic lows.

But a closer look shows a more nuanced picture. Multiple polls suggest two things at once. Yes, Israelis are wary of a vague “two-state” brand. But they are also open to other possibilities that include Palestinian statehood. There is a path forward most would support.

Surprise: Most Israelis Would Accept a Palestinian State

In three consecutive AI Pulse surveys, most recently last week, we asked a representative sample of Israelis: “How would you describe your view on full diplomatic, economic, and security cooperation with Saudi Arabia and the Arab world, which includes recognizing a Palestinian state?”

In April, 66% responded positively — calling it essential, desirable, acceptable, or tolerable. In May that figure rose to 75% and held steady (73%) in September (margin of error ranged from 4.5% to 5.9%). Only 25-27% called the idea unacceptable, and even most of those said certain conditions could increase their support.

This data is not an outlier. aChord recently found that 57% of Israelis agree “now is the time” for “a U.S.-backed regional political-security arrangement, including the establishment of a Palestinian state.” In January, 71% told INSS they’d support a regional, U.S.-supported deal with “a pathway to separation from the Palestinians.”

So, how do these polls square with the conventional wisdom that Israelis reject two states?

Embed from Getty Images

The Two-State Brand Is Damaged

For many Israelis, the phrase “two-state solution” evokes bitter memories, especially of the violent, extremist reaction to the Oslo peace process. They remember trauma, division, and disillusionment: the café and bus bombings in the 90s and Second Intifada, Rabin’s assassination, the collapse of Camp David, and years of violence since Hamas took over Gaza.

Ask Israelis about two states, and many hear: Do you want the policy that brought all of that?

People Want to See the Details

The difference between what many assume and this latest data is not just semantics; it’s substance. Many “two-state” poll questions are vague and lack the details people need to see how a plan could work. The Pew Research Center, for example, found only 21% support when it asked merely whether “Israel and an independent Palestinian state can coexist peacefully.”

But research shows that support can grow with specificity. Dr. Dahlia Scheindlin and Dr. Khalil Shikaki have found that when proposals describe specific security arrangements — like sharing intelligence and preventing terror attacks — nearly half of Israeli Jews who opposed a two-state package shift to support it. Palestinians opposed to two states have shown a similar positive change when given the details.

Israelis Learned Not to Go It Alone?

All the recent polls finding widespread acceptance of two states also had a very particular detail in common: they described something much broader and more robust than simply Israel and Palestine side-by-side. Each involved a regional and international framework — Saudi normalization, economic incentives, regional security cooperation, and/or U.S. backing. 

Maybe this reflects a lesson learned. After decades of failed bilateral efforts, many Israelis may now believe peace is more likely to succeed if reinforced with outside guarantees and third-party mechanisms for accountability and trust. Perhaps, these details help skeptical people see how an agreement could actually work.

Reassurance and a Roadmap

These lessons should offer both reassurance and a roadmap for policymakers hoping to advance a peace process. They highlight three key takeaways.

First, Israeli attitudes are less bleak than assumed. Israelis remain cautious, but not closed. With the right regional structure and international guarantees, large numbers could support or accept a two-state deal. 

Second, there’s a dangerous gap between perception and reality. The recent New York Declaration offers the very kind of regional framework that should inspire confidence. But opponents have had success in branding it as “unilateral recognition” — erasing from public awareness the mutual, regional, and international elements most likely to win Israeli support.

Third, sustaining a peace process requires a serious ground game to engage both peoples. Including civil society in the process ensures that it can help both to develop and explain the details that matter, building the public confidence leaders will need.

Polls showing Israelis could accept a Palestinian state may surprise us, but they aren’t wrong. They cut through the slogans to offer a higher-resolution picture: not rejection, but conditional openness. 

That is both a challenge and an invitation. If leaders, supported by civil society, can present workable details and credible guarantees, Israelis may be more ready for peace than many assume.