Land for peace
Land for peace is an interpretation of UN Security Council Resolution 242 which has formed the basis of subsequent Arab-Israeli peace making. The name Land for Peace is derived from the wording of the resolution's first operative paragraph which affirms that peace should include the application of two principles; Withdrawal of Israeli forces (Giving Up Land), and Termination of all claims or states of belligerency (Making Peace). Since the resolution stipulates that both principles should apply they can be viewed jointly as giving up land for peace, referred to more concisely as 'land for peace'.
This interpretation is widely contested because it implies that Israeli withdrawal is linked to its neighbours' willingness to formally make peace. Competing interpretations of the resolution regard Israel as being obligated to withdraw unilaterally from all territories captured in 1967. Operative paragraph 1 of 242 reads as follows:
- 1. Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
- (i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
- (ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
When in 1976 Lord Caradon was asked about the concessions the Arab states would have to make to Israel as part of an overall settlement he said "Well, that's perfectly obvious if you read again the principles of 242, which have been accepted by Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia, and in effect by Israel. The provision is that if there is an adequate withdrawal, all states in the area must be free to live within secure and recognized boundaries, free from force and threat of force. So it is an acceptance that Israel has a right to exist, just as the Palestinians have a right to their homeland, and have a right to exist. This is the essential bargain that we are proposing. It's not a new thing, it's been going since 1967.
Peace Treaties 
Land for Peace was first used as the basis for Israel's peace treaty with Egypt in 1979, where Israel withdrew from the Sinai as part of a comprehensive peace agreement facilitated by economic assistance to both sides from the United States. In 1994 a similar comprehensive agreement invoking resolution 242 formed the basis of the Israel Jordan peace treaty whereby both sides redeployed to their respective sides of the agreed international boundary.
The forced eviction by Israel of its settlers and military forces in entirety from the ground territory of the Gaza strip has been put forth as a 'test case' of "Land for Peace" with the Palestinians.
- This 'test case' is argued by some to show the failure of the "Land for Peace" strategy with the Palestinians:
- Rockets launched against Israeli targets continued almost immediately after the Israeli withdrawal and have increased in the time since.
- The attacks from the Gaza Strip are continuing today
- The area is now being used to smuggle weapons into Gaza
- Tunnels are being built under the border for use in the smuggling of weapons, fighters and to kidnap Israeli soldiers 
- Is presumed that Hamas is the main organization behind the smuggling and tunnels, though other groups are likely involved as well
- Counter arguments
However, it is countered that the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip is not a valid test case because Israel is continuing its occupation, demolition of Palestinian property and erection of outposts and settlements in the West Bank.
- Israel still controls the airspace and water of the Gaza Strip, so the occupation of that territory alone still continues.
- Israel's limiting of trade relations and blockades with the Gaza Strip, the International Community's suspension of aid following the election of a Hamas-led government and the erection of the Israeli West Bank barrier might constitute a siege. However part of the Gaza Strip borders Egypt, so any siege would require Egyptian compliance.
- Under international law, the test for occupation is whether "effective control" of a foreign military can be said to exist. As Israel controls most of Gaza's borders and airspace, in addition to all imports and civilian institutions such as the birth registry and can invade the small coastal territory in a very short amount of time whenever it so chooses. It is thus the consensus among some international law experts that Israel remains the effective Occupying Power of the Gaza Strip,  while other law experts dispute this.
Arab-Israeli peace diplomacy and treaties 
- Paris Peace Conference, 1919
- Faisal-Weizmann Agreement (1919)
- 1949 Armistice Agreements
- Camp David Accords (1978)
- Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty (1979)
- Madrid Conference of 1991
- Oslo Accords (1993)
- Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace (1994)
- Camp David 2000 Summit
- Peace process in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
- Projects working for peace among Israelis and Arabs
- List of Middle East peace proposals
- International law and the Arab-Israeli conflict
- The United Nations Security Council
- An Interview with Lord Caradon, Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 5, No. 3/4 (Spring - Summer, 1976), page 147
- Palestinian terrorists in Gaza continue to fire Qassam rockets at Israeli civilian targets
- Al Jazeera English - News - Israelis Hurt In Gaza Rocket Attack
- FOXNews.com - Israel Warns Gaza Weapons Smuggling, Rocket Attacks Will Lead to 'Invasion' - Middle East Map | News | Crisis
- Bbc News
- DEBKAfile - Karni Tunnel as Hamas Hidden Arm into Israel’s Western Negev
- Israel/Gaza: Israeli Blockade Unlawful Despite Gaza Border Breach (Human Rights Watch, 26-1-2008)