Palestinian VS. Israeli debate - Research Paper Example

Palestinian vs. Israeli Debate of the of the Concerned July 12, Palestinian vs. Israeli Debate What is indeed admirable is the ability of the Israeli side to always resort to the right type of classification, to use just the right verbal tags and to unleash the right type of propaganda while explaining the Palestinian side of the conflict (Abourezk, 1980). It goes without saying that Israel to a great extent has been successful in dubbing the entire Palestinian struggle for independence as a terrorist movement, not to mention the much support and aid extended to Israel by the Western powers (Abourezk, 1980).

In that context the proposal extended by the Israeli side is a two edged sword in the sense that it not only seeks cooperation of the Palestinian side, but also in a very sophisticated manner labels the genuine acts of armed resistance on the part of Palestinians as “Palestinian acts of terrorism and violence”. The very act on the part of the state of Israel to dub the just and right freedom struggle of the Palestinian people as acts of terrorism is objectionable and unacceptable. The contemporary wars are fought in media newsrooms.

The best way to compromise the legitimacy of any freedom struggle is to brand it as being Islamist and Jihadist. Just throw the right words and soon the world will distort acts of legitimate resistance into what will be looked as acts of terrorism and violence. It’s the time that Palestinians agree to the fact that Israel certainly has a better PR infrastructure as compared to them. But, it is also time for the Israeli side to agree to the fact that just because they dub each and every act of Palestinian resistance as being jihadist or terrorist will in no way stop the Palestinian people from carrying on with their struggle for independence.

So a request is being forwarded to the Israeli side to reframe their question into something sounding like “Would a staged, planned and agreed upon removal of security checkpoints be sufficient to compel Palestinian’s and their leadership to cease Palestinian acts of armed resistance?” If the killing of the innocent children, women and the aged amounts to acts of terrorism and violence then the Israeli side is no less open to the aspersions of being terrorists, for they too have much blood on their hands.

Undesirable labels set apart, so far as the question of ceasing Palestinian armed resistance in response to the removal of security check points by Israel is concerned, the answer is no. The reason Israel is willing to remove the checkpoints is because they have failed to blunt the impact of the Palestinian resistance. Hence, the proposal under consideration only benefits the Israeli side. Any negotiations for peace need to be broader based and holistic, which should also aim at discussing more disturbing questions such as removing Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, restarting of the “land for peace” talks as envisaged in the Oslo Accord, a commitment to cease hostilities against the Palestinian civilians in future engagements and the like.

So the answer is no. References Abourezk, James. The Relentless Israeli Propaganda Machine. New York: Arab Information Centre, 1980.