UN Security Council Resolution 242 was adopted unanimously on 22 November 1967, five months after the Six-Day War of June 1967 in which Israel captured the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Drafted principally by British Ambassador Lord Caradon (Hugh Foot) and adopted under Chapter VI of the UN Charter, it emphasised "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" and called for "a just and lasting peace in the Middle East." The resolution rests on two interlocking principles: (i) withdrawal of Israeli armed forces "from territories occupied in the recent conflict," and (ii) termination of all states of belligerency and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every state in the area, including their right "to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries." This bargain became known as the "land-for-peace" formula.
The resolution's most contested feature is a deliberate textual ambiguity in its withdrawal clause. The authoritative English text reads "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied," omitting the definite article — Israel and the United States read this to mean withdrawal from some, not all, territories, leaving final borders to negotiation. The equally authoritative French text ("retrait des forces armées israéliennes des territoires occupés") implies withdrawal from all the territories, the Arab reading. Resolution 242 also affirmed the necessity of guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways (a reference to the Straits of Tiran and the Suez Canal) and called for "a just settlement of the refugee problem" — notably referring to refugees generically rather than specifically to Palestinians. Secretary-General U Thant appointed Swedish diplomat Gunnar Jarring as Special Representative to mediate, though the Jarring Mission ultimately failed.
Resolution 242 was reaffirmed and operationalised by Security Council Resolution 338 (22 October 1973), adopted during the Yom Kippur War, which called for a ceasefire and implementation of 242 "in all of its parts." Together, 242 and 338 form the agreed legal basis ("terms of reference") for nearly every subsequent peace effort: the Camp David Accords (1978) and the Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty (1979) under which Israel returned Sinai; the Madrid Conference (1991); and the Oslo Accords (1993-95). As of 2026 the resolution remains unimplemented regarding the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, and it is routinely invoked alongside Resolution 478 (1980, on Jerusalem) and Resolution 2334 (2016, on settlements) in debates over occupation and final status.
For competitive exams, Resolution 242 is a high-frequency item. In CSS Islamic Studies and Pakistan Affairs it anchors the Palestine question and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation's diplomatic positions. In world-history and international-relations papers (UPSC GS-II, FSOT) it tests the "land-for-peace" principle, the English-versus-French ambiguity over "territories," and the linkage between 242 and 338. Examiners commonly ask candidates to state the year (1967), the triggering war (Six-Day War), the drafter (Lord Caradon), and to distinguish 242 from Resolution 181 (1947 partition plan) and Resolution 194 (1948 refugee right of return). The textual ambiguity is a favourite analytical question.
Example
After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger used Resolution 242's land-for-peace formula to broker the disengagement agreements that led Egypt's Anwar Sadat to the Camp David negotiations in 1978.
Frequently asked questions
The English text says withdrawal 'from territories occupied,' without a definite article, implying some but not all territories; the equally authoritative French text ('des territoires occupés') implies all the territories. Israel adopts the narrower reading, Arab states the broader one.