Resolution or Revenge? Rethinking Sanctions in the Israel–Palestinian Conflict

One of the biggest problems with the way the Israel–Palestinian conflict is handled is the complete lack of coordination and structure. As it stands, there is no serious international framework in place to bring Israel to the negotiating table with a proposal it would actually consider. What we have instead is a patchwork of governments acting independently, often reacting emotionally or politically to events on the ground.

Sanctions are sometimes debated, sometimes imposed, and often lack clarity. When they are imposed, it is rarely clear under what conditions they will be lifted or within what timeframe. This ambiguity weakens their force and dilutes their purpose.

The way sanctions are currently used raises a fundamental question: Are they about resolution, or are they about revenge? Because the distinction matters.

Resolution is about achieving a just and lasting peace. It means using diplomatic, economic and political tools to steer behaviour toward a negotiated settlement that addresses legitimate grievances and brings about stability. Revenge, on the other hand, is reactive. It is emotional, punitive, and often escalates tensions rather than resolving them.

The way we apply sanctions today often blurs the line between the two. When sanctions are imposed with no clear roadmap for removal, or when they come in waves with no coordinated strategy, they begin to look more like expressions of outrage than instruments of diplomacy. This undermines their legitimacy and leaves the affected party more isolated, more defensive, and more dangerous.

It is also ineffective. The boiled frog analogy comes to mind: if you slowly raise the heat, the frog adapts until it is too late. Israel, hit with sanctions here and there over time, becomes accustomed to them. The pressure is never sharp enough to force a change in course, and the country learns to live with the consequences instead of responding to them. Sanctions that do not bite all at once lose their sting.

What we need instead is a broad coalition of nations to establish an Israeli–Palestinian conflict resolution task force, with a clear mandate and real authority. This task force should be empowered to impose and lift sanctions as a bloc, with all member states committing in advance to automatic compliance. That way, when sanctions are triggered, they are applied swiftly and with full weight. Just as importantly, when progress is made, relief can be delivered just as quickly and visibly.

Such a structure would give sanctions real strategic power. It would turn them from scattered signals of frustration into a unified tool for diplomacy. It would also make the intent clear — that the goal is not to punish for the sake of punishment, but to resolve a conflict that has persisted for far too long.

Until the international community acts with this kind of coordination and purpose, the cycle of violence, isolation and mistrust is likely to continue.