Aaron David Miller on Why Peace Still Eludes Israel and Gaza
JUDJ-Prepared Summary from December 3, 2025 | Israel Update: Trump’s Plan – Breakthrough or Breakdown. The views and opinions expressed in this blog are those of the speaker.
In a recent America at a Crossroads discussion, Aaron David Miller, a veteran U.S. diplomat and one of America’s most experienced Middle East negotiators, joined host Madeleine Brand for a wide-ranging conversation about why, even after a ceasefire, a durable Israeli-Palestinian peace remains so difficult to achieve. Drawing on decades of experience—from the Oslo process through multiple administrations—Miller offered a sobering assessment of leadership gaps, Gaza’s unresolved future, and the growing strain on the U.S.–Israel relationship.
A Leadership Vacuum on Both Sides
Miller argued that one of the greatest obstacles to peace today is the absence of leaders capable of making existential decisions. Marking the 30th anniversary of Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination, he reflected on how Israeli politics—and global politics more broadly—have lost figures of historic stature willing to take profound risks for peace. Israel, he noted, is now a firmly center-right society, shaped by generations that never experienced the possibilities of the 1990s.
On the Palestinian side, the leadership crisis is even deeper. Without credible authority or unity, Miller suggested, Palestinian politics lacks the institutional capacity to deliver on any far-reaching agreement. Peace, he emphasized, requires leaders who are both “good and great”—a combination he does not see in the current moment.
A Tragedy of Competing Justices
Rejecting the idea that the conflict is a simple morality play, Miller framed the Israeli-Palestinian struggle as a tragedy of “competing justices.” Each side, he said, has legitimate needs that cannot be dismissed, which is precisely why the conflict has proven so resistant to resolution.
For Miller, a true “conflict-ending agreement” would require leaders on both sides to address the core issues—borders, security, refugees, Jerusalem, and an end to all claims—and to declare unequivocally that the conflict is over. That kind of finality, he argued, demands extraordinary political courage that is currently absent.
Gaza’s Three Unanswered Questions
Turning to Gaza, Miller laid out what he called the three questions any serious plan must answer: who governs Gaza, who provides security, and who delivers humanitarian aid and reconstruction. Of these, security is the most decisive—and the least resolved.
Gaza today, Miller explained, is effectively divided between Israeli military control and Hamas authority. Proposals for international or regional security forces face a fundamental problem: no Arab or Muslim peacekeeping force is likely to police Palestinians or enable Israeli military action. Without resolving security, Miller warned, discussions about governance and reconstruction are largely theoretical.
Why Hamas Remains the Central Obstacle
Miller described Hamas as hollowed out militarily but still dominant politically in Gaza. Efforts to disarm the group, he said, face a stark reality: unlike Northern Ireland, where decommissioning occurred alongside political integration, Hamas sees deweaponization as an existential threat. As a result, it has little incentive to comply.
Ongoing smuggling networks, remaining tunnel infrastructure, and continued financial support from regional actors further complicate any attempt to eliminate Hamas’s influence. In Miller’s view, this reality makes a viable Phase Two of any peace plan extraordinarily difficult.
A Relationship Under Strain
The conversation also addressed the growing stress on the U.S.–Israel relationship. Miller acknowledged that war crimes have occurred on both sides, while rejecting the idea that Israel acted with the calculated intent to eradicate an entire people. Still, he warned that Israel’s global credibility—and the foundations of the special U.S.–Israel relationship—are under unprecedented pressure.
That relationship, he said, rests on shared interests, shared values, and sustained bipartisan support in the United States. Today, all three are strained, with partisanship and generational shifts reshaping American views on Israel.
An Idealism Without Illusion
Despite his sober analysis, Miller ended on a note of cautious hope. He recalled how the trauma of the 1973 war was followed, just six years later, by the Camp David peace treaty. History, he suggested, teaches humility about predicting what comes next.
Quoting John F. Kennedy, Miller described himself as an “idealist without illusion”—committed to the possibility of change, but clear-eyed about the obstacles. For him, giving up on peace is not just impractical, but morally unconscionable.
About America at a Crossroads
Since April 2020, America at a Crossroads has produced weekly virtual programs on topics related to the preservation of our democracy, voting rights, freedom of the press, and a wide array of civil rights, including abortion rights, free speech, and free press. America at a Crossroads is a project of Jews United for Democracy & Justice.