The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - Essay Example

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Introduction Jerusalem holds immense religious importance among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. For Jews, Jerusalem is the capital of David and Solomon’s kingdom. For Christians, it is the location of the Passion and the Crucifixion. And for Muslims, it is the place from where Muhammad ascended to heaven during the historical journey known as Meraj. Due to its religious significance, the city has been a disputed region for decades and the struggle for control continues in the form of Israeli Palestinian conflict (Gelvin, 2007). Although the conflict has its historical roots in religious contexts, the rise of Zionism and Arab Nationalism has spurred the conflict between the two parties: Israelis and Arabs or Palestinians. The notion that the current conflict is a continuation of ancient feuds based on ethnic and religious disagreements is not only misleading but it also encourages biased and distorted judgments regarding the behavior of Arab Palestinians and Israelis (Tessler, 1994). The Bible often mentions the ‘Land of Israel’ and speaks about how the Kingdom of Israel was established by Jewish people over three thousand years ago. While the kingdom was established as fully independent, the growing influence of the neighboring Roman kingdom gradually incorporated the Land of Israel as one of its provinces. This invasion was followed by heavy taxation, intervention in religious practices, and a period of tyranny forcing many Jews to flee the land. The Jews revolted against the injustices and were eventually thrown out of the city. Although a great number of Jews still resided in the land, a significant number of Jews had been displaced who still held a strong sense of Jewish identity. The Jews did not lose connection and felt that they will soon be returned to their promised land when God leads them to the place they claimed to be theirs. Jerusalem remained a part of the Eastern Roman Empire, also known as the Byzantine Empire, until when the Roman emperors had turned to Christianity. Jerusalem started to become recognized as the birthplace of Christ holding religious significance for the Christians. Years later, the region was conquered by Arab Muslims shortly after the death of Prophet Muhammad. Under the Caliphate of Umar, Jerusalem was conquered and brought under the Muslim Empire. Soon Islam became the dominant religion in the region. The modern political movement of Zionism sought to establish an official Jewish colony in the region of Palestine. The Jews had been facing hardships in Europe due to feelings of anti-Semitism where the First Crusade resulted in mass killings, conversions, and displacements. The Jews were confined to ghettoes and many were forced to leave the land. Many Jews fled to the Ottoman Empire which was being ruled primarily by Muslim Turks. The Ottoman Empire spanned from South-Eastern Europe to South-Western Asia and North Africa and it inhabited large Christian and Jews populations. While the ruling Turks were Muslims and huge populations of Arabs also resided the region, there was a growing understanding of the diverse and distinct ethnicities which gave rise to Arab Nationalism. Thus after World War I, as Zionism aimed to establish a solely Jewish colony in the Palestinian region, the Arab nationalists began to demand for independent Arab states (Tessler, 1994). These feelings of nationalism among both parties stoked a conflict which claims their rights on the land of Palestine thereby resulting in the current struggle (Shafir, 1996). US Middle East Policy and Myths: A Discussion Bard (2012) points out several myths pertaining to the US policy in the Middle East in his book titled Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Here, I will present a discussion of each myth and how they came about. One of the most serious myths relating to the creation of Israel holds that Israel was created due to pressure from the United States. This myth articulates the US influence during the partition resolution which assisted Jews in gaining support for their movement. While the United States did play a vital role in the security of support for the partition resolution, many US leaders at the time were skeptical of the idea maintaining that the Zionist cause may come out as a threat for United States’ strategic position in the region and possible issues with the oil supply. There were some internal oppositions for the partition within the US such as many members of the Truman Administration and the Joint Chiefs of Staff who feared that the Arabs might align with the Soviets had they been abandoned by the Americans. When the matter was taken to the United Nations, President Truman overtly mentioned that they will not exert any pressure on the delegates to gain support for the partition (Bard, 2012). Another myth is that of the US favoring Israel over the Arabs in 1948 due to the Jewish lobby. As Bard (2012) proceeds to present the facts, he goes on to justify President Truman’s stance regarding Israel and the Zionist movement. He mentions how President Truman’s support for the Zionist movement stemmed from his beliefs that the international community felt compelled to fulfill the declarations of the Balfour Declarations and also, how he believed that the step would mitigate the dilemmas of the Jewish survivors of the Holocaust (Bard, 2012). Not only the president but the American civilians also supported the partition, a stand which was reflected in the congress where a resolution was adopted sowing approval for the Balfour Declaration. While there was a lot of pressure on President Truman from the Jewish lobby as he admitted himself, he did not give in and responded negatively to the pressure. Bard (2012) mentions other myths about the relations between Israel and the US claiming that the two countries have many commonalities which ties them into a close brotherhood. Another myth he mention is that of the US policy always supporting Israel and being hostile towards the Arab Palestinians. Here Bard (2012) considers the fact the Arabs rarely remember the contributions of the US in helping the Arab states achieve independence. He points out the firm stand for self-determination taken by President Wilson where US entry in the World War I paved the way for the separation of the Ottoman Empire and finally the independence of the Arab states. Arab leaders today insist that the US policy regarding the Middle East should be one where there are no gains and no losses i.e. a zero sum game. Also, that the US policy and their support for Israel is disadvantageous to them. In this notion, Arab leaders often try to force the United States to either support Israel or them. Although the US has close relations with Israel, it has also enjoyed friendly relations with many Arab states. Soon after the discovery of oil in the Gulf States in 1930s, American companies were the first to set up plants for the extraction of oil (Bard, 2012). Despite financial and other strategic assistance given to various Arab countries after the World War II, many Arabs blame the United States for their failure in wars fought against Israel. While assistance had been offered by the US many times, for economic prosperity or during war, most Arabs are skeptical of US intentions to help and often see them as pro-Israel. Bard (2012) rejects this fact by pointing how the United States, despite being a critical ally of Israel, has acted against the wishes of the Jewish state. The United States has tried to remain neutral and balance the support between Israel and the Arab states. President Truman, in particular, exhibited indecisiveness on the matter of partition and campaigning for trusteeship. When Israel was invaded by the neighboring Arab countries, the US maintained an arms embargo which prevented the Jews from resisting attack. At several incidents, the United States has acted against Israel. For example, during the tension over the Suez Canal, the Arabs were allowed to get away when they blockaded the Suez Canal and when they imposed a boycott on Israel. When an anti-Israel resolution was passed in the United Nations in 1972, the United States did not use its right to veto the resolution. During the Suez War, the United States under President Eisenhower stood against France, Britain, and Israel. The United States also pressurized Israel to withdraw from the places it had conquered. Bard (2012), points out several occasions where United States acted against Israel. Ronald Reagan suspended a strategic cooperation agreement after Israel took control of Golan Heights. President Bush called a press conference to delay the providence of financial aid to Israel in order to help it incorporate Russian and Ethiopian Jews. Even Bill Clinton who is considered to be a supporter of Israel was critical of Israel. During the Palestinian War, US placed an arms restriction because it did not want Israel to use the arms in targeted killings. Even Barack Obama was Israel’s policy and demanded a stop in the construction of settlements. Because of this a poll conducted in Israel revealed distrust of American backing and the President’s commitment in Israel (Bard, 2012). Another myth of the American policy in the Middle East is that the US ensures that Israel has a certain qualitative military advantage over the Arab Palestinians. While the United States has on several occasions helped Israel in terms of arms providence, Bard (2012) claims that the arms were limited in enabling Israel to gain an unfair edge over Arabs. Many Arabs also believe that the US military aid has often been in favor of Israel in a manner which can be called ‘one sided’. Although a large amount of financial aid was given by the US to Israel, most of it was in the form of loans. Also, a large number of Arab States have also received aid from the US although most of them were capable of supporting themselves without aid. Following the Arab Spring of 2011, the Arab countries have been facing an unstable positioning and until and unless the future of these countries is known, it remains a threat for Israel for which it requires military assistance from the US. Countries such as Iran show open hostility towards Israel. It is also popular knowledge that US military subsidizes the defense contractors of Israel at the expense of its industry however Bard (2012) itemizes that only twenty five percent of the aid it receives can be spent on military acquisitions. Israeli-Palestinian Peace and the Myth behind It Among the five countries that waged war with Israel when it declared independence, two of them including Egypt and Jordan have signed peace treaties with Israel. Although many matters pertaining to the conflict are still unresolved, Israel has recognized the need for an independent Palestinian state and has even established a local Palestinian government known as the Palestinian Authority. A large number of countries including Arab countries and the US, are determined to resolve the conflict by means of a negotiated solution, the hopes often come to an end abruptly when tensions increase. Kelman (1987) proposed pre-negotiation process which includes official and unofficial diplomacy to create an environment for a peaceful negotiation. Unfortunately, the peace initiatives have not gone very well. Bard (2012) explains another myth about Israelis not wanting peace which he explains as baseless as Israelis want peace more than anyone in the region. While a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may settle the regional conflicts between Arabs and Israelis, it is myth that peace is the solution to all problems originating in the Middle East. This notion is false and misleading as Ross and Makovsky (2010) reject the notion as false. The reason is that although peace may settle the conflicts between Palestine and Israel, Middle East is a volatile region and the unstable conditions in the region have increased following the Arab Spring in 2011. The Arab Spring overthrew a great number of rulers in various Arab countries in the hopes of restoring democracy however as mentioned by Ross and Makovsky (2010) the peace process is unaffected by the restoration of democracy and demands other adjustments. References Bard, M. G. (2012). Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Chevy Chase, MD: American Israeli Cooperative Enterprise (AICE). This book by Bard comprehensively provides the minute details of the Arab-Israeli conflict that has happened. The book extensively covers the myths that surround this conflict along with the other details. Gelvin, J. L. (2005). The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gelvin has portrayed the entire picture of the conflict between Israel and Palestine since it has started. He has given out the minute details of the history of the conflict and has then outlined a probable solution to the conflict. Kelman, H. C. (1987). The Political Psychology of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: How Can We Overcome The Barriers to a Negotiated Solution?. Political psychology, pp. 347-363. Kelman in his article has outlined the Israeli conflict and has provided details as to how a solution can be proposed to overcome the casualties that may arise because of this conflict. Ross, D. & Makovsky, D. (2010). Myths, Illusions, and Peace: Finding a New Direction for America in the Middle East. New York: Viking. This book takes on a different perspective by involving America in the workings of the Middle East. It has given details regarding the myths that surround the whole Israeli conflict along with a probable solution. Shafir, G. (1996). Land, Labor, and the Origins of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 1882-1914. Berkeley: University of California Press. Shafir has provided with the details which co-relate to land and labor as per the Israeli Conflict. He has outlined the events that took place from the year 1882-1914. Tessler, M. A. (1994). A History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Tessler gives the history of the Israeli Palestinian Conflict as it started in the early days. The roots of the cause are also outlined in the book through which a solution can be sought to curb the problems that it is posing to the whole world. Read More