Filistin-israil çatışmalarına ilişkin bm kararları ve iki devletli çözüm örnek olarak

This research aims to deal with UN resolutions and recommendations regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict within the framework of a two-state resolution through the lens of neorealism, which focuses on state power, security, and the anarchic international system and provides a framework to analyze the motivation, constraints, and consequences of United Nations (UN) efforts pertaining to the conflict. The research analysis includes the critical United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions, such as Resolution 242 (1967) and Resolution 338 (1973), and the subsequent structures, such as the Oslo Accords, all of which have been evaluated through neorealist assumptions with regard to primary emphasis placed on state sovereignty, balance of power, and the involvement of major powers in determining outcomes. The research investigates UN diplomacy along with the strategic interests of Israel, Palestinian authorities, and global powers, and evaluates the viability of a two-state solution from a neorealist perspective. The study argues that the continued power asymmetries, competing national interests, and the absence of enforceable mechanisms have undermined the UN's capacity to implement a sustainable resolution. These findings clarify the limits of multilateral diplomacy that drives conflict resolution, echoing the wider challenges that face the peace process within the Palestinian-Israeli context.