Dying to Kill: The Allure of Suicide Terror - Case Study Example

In early January 2009, Israel launched a deadly assault into Gaza. It has been suggested that a two solution would end the conflict inGaza where Palestinians would have a separate state along Israel in the West Bank and Gaza strip. This paper will argue that to understand the suggested two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians, one must first understand the origins of the conflict. An overview of the history is presented between the Arabs and Israelis up until the present conflict. Arguing that intransigence and a legacy of rejectionism pose the greatest impediment to a resolution, this analysis explores how this protracted conflict can finally be resolved. The Arab-Israeli Conflict A Jewish state in the Middle East remains a divisive and controversial subject. In 2008 Jews around the world celebrated the 60 year anniversary of the establishment of the modern Israeli state but while people around the world celebrate its birth, others not only decry the policies of the Israeli government but also challenge the very existence of the state itself. Condemned by its neighbors as an unnatural colonial implant, Israel is frequently subject to international sanction and scrutiny. The status of the Palestinian people, seemingly on the cusp of statehood not long ago, remains increasingly complex and forever unresolved. The Palestinian community has also recently been fractured by the Fatah/Hamas split, adding a new and potentially explosive dynamic to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Despite decades of attempts at resolving this conflict, we are at an impasse and without a resolution in sight. What explains the persistence of conflict for more than a century? What role has Arab intransigence regarding a two-state solution – a persistent feature of the conflict since the days of the British Mandate in Palestine – played in the continuation of a conflict which seemingly could have been resolved years ago? Seeking to explore Arab intransigence and their continued rejection of a two-state solution to the conflict, this essay will chart and discuss Arab rejection of any solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The following will explore Arab intransigence chronologically and will argue that a legacy of unwavering rejection by the majority of the Arab countries in Middle East has been the major impediment to a resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Statement of the Problem The Palestinian-Israeli conflict remains one of the most enduring and complex disputes of modern times. Although many believe that current fighting began with the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, historian Benny Morris traces the origin of this conflict to early Jewish settlement in the Ottoman region of Filastin (modern day Israel/Palestine) as early as 1881 – 67 years before the state of Israel was created. As such, he describes the conflict as a Zionist-Arab dispute and not solely as a problem between modern day Israelis and Palestinians (Morris, 2001). In 1948, after the horrors of the European Holocaust had emerged and it became clear that the Jewish people, after more than a millennium in exile, needed a home. This home was established to protect the Jewish people from further discrimination and threats of outright annihilation. During the period of the British Mandate, the British Government tried to negotiate an agreement between the Arab and Jewish inhabitant of modern day Israel and come to an agreement towards a two-state solution in the British mandate of Palestine. The Arabs, foreshadowing all future negotiations on the subject, would make no concessions or compromises. Although the United Nations sent a Special Rapporteur to seek a compromise one year before the creation of Israel in 1947, the Arab representatives at the time were steadfast in their refusal to accept a Jewish home in any part of Palestine Mandate. A majority of the members of the special commission recommended the establishment of two separate states (one Jewish and another Arab), with Jerusalem as a neutral international territory. Although the Jews hesitantly accepted the compromise, on the whole the Arabs rejected the UN special commission’s recommendations. This partition plan was adopted by the UN General assembly on November 29, 1947 (Said 1979). Early Rejectionism and the War of Independence On 14 May, 1948 British Mandate came to an end and in less than 24 hours, the combined Arab armies of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt invaded the newly created State of Israel, threatening to annihilate the budding Jewish state. Israel’s War of Independence lasted 15 months and ended only with the Rhodes Conference establishing the Armistice agreement of 1949. During this Conference direct negotiations were conducted under UN auspices between Israel and each of the invading countries (Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon; importantly Iraq rejected the validity of the Conference and refused to participate). After the War, Jerusalem was divided under Israeli and Jordanian rule while the Old City remained under Jordanian control. The Coastal Plain, Galilee and the entire Negev where under Israel’s sovereignty, while Judea and Samaria, regions know today as the West Bank were under Jordanian rule. Furthermore the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian rule and in 1949 Israel took its seat as 59th member of the United Nations. The Rhodes Conference concluded with the Arabs getting a significant area of land including the Old City of Jerusalem, and the biblical lands of Judea and Samaria. Despite this the Armistice agreement did not appease Israel’s Arab neighbors and Arab rejectionism continued (The Economist 2008). Arab Violence and Rejectionism: 1956-1967 Despite high hopes, the Armistice agreement of 1949 failed to pave way to lasting peace and was constantly violated by Arabs. Arab nations actively prevented Israel-bound ships to pass through the Suez Canal to bring goods to Israel, thus impeding important maritime traffic. In addition to the blockade of Israeli-bound ships, terrorist squads made frequent incursions into Israel to commit both murder and sabotage. By October of 1956, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan signed a tripartite military alliance agreement. Following the tripartite agreement the Israeli Defense forces moved to capture Gaza and the entire Sinai Peninsula during the Suez Crisis of 1956. Although relative peace and prosperity were the modus operandi from 1956 to 1967, Arab terrorism escalated leading up to this period including cross-border incursions from Egypt and Jordan and shelling from Syria’s Golan Heights region. Feeling threatened and under assault, particularly after Egypt moved back into the Sinai Peninsula and ordered UN peacekeepers to leave in May 1967, Israel launched a pre-emptive strike on Egypt, Syria and Jordan in response to their massive military buildups. After 6 days of fighting and a miraculous victory, Israel controlled the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights while Jerusalem was reunified and the Red Sea was once again open to shipping (Bloom 2005). 1967 to Sadat’s Assassination Following the cessation of hostilities in 1967, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 242 which called for an “acknowledgment 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…” This was wholly rejected by the combined Arab governments at the time, most explicitly at the Arab Khartoum Summit in August of that year. Accordingly, the Khartoum summit from called for “no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, and no recognition of Israel…” Later in September of 1968 Egypt launched the “War of Attrition” along the Suez Canal paving the way for the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Leading up to the Yom Kippur War of ’73 one of the most notorious acts of terrorism was committed by Palestinian terrorists at the Munich Olympic Games. 11 Israeli Olympic athletes were gunned down in cold blood; a horrendous act of sheer violence and orchestrated terror. On Yom Kippur 1963 – the Day of Atonement, the holiest day of the Jewish year - the concerted armies of Egypt and Syria launched a coordinated surprise assault against Israel. At the same time, the Egyptian army invaded by crossing the Suez Canal while Syrian troops invaded through the Golan Heights. This War lasted three weeks and resulted in neither a victory nor loss for Israel, although the Jewish state managed to maintain its territorial integrity despite the onslaught from its hostile neighbors. Following the Yom Kippur War, Israel and Egypt secretly began a peace process aimed at ending the acrimonious relations between the two regional powers. In November of 1977 Egyptian President Anwar Sadat visited Jerusalem and addressed the Knesset. By September 1978 the Camp David Accord contained a framework for a comprehensive peace, including a detailed proposal for self-government for the Palestinians. In return for Israel’s withdrawal from the Sinai peace was achieved between these two warring parties on March 26th 1979 in Washington DC. What was the result of this peace treaty? First and foremost, Egypt was immediately expelled from the Arab League. Secondly, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat was assassinated on the 6th of October 1981 and not member state of the Arab League attended his funeral. Furthermore, Sadat was assassinated by Islamists who disagreed with the Israel-Egypt peace process, despite it including a plan for Palestinian self-government. Continued Violence and Rejection Arab intransigence and total rejection remained prominent features of the conflict following the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981. The 1980s welcomed the First Lebanon War in 1982 in which the IDF fought to remove the PLO from Lebanon. By 1987, the First Intifada erupted leading to a mass uprising and violence directed at Israel. This is also the year in which Hamas was founded. That year Hamas included in its Charter the call for the total destruction of the modern state of Israel. In 1993 the Oslo Accords were signed by Israel and PLO, as representatives of the Palestinian people. Despite potential major gains for the Palestinian cause including 90% of the territories and ‘occupied’ areas would be given to Palestinians and autonomy would be granted incrementally, Arafat and the Palestinians refused this framework for peace. In 1994, the implementation of Palestinian self-government in Gaza and Jericho a began in earnest and later that year Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres and Yasser Arafat were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Although a resolution to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians seemed to be finally on course, fundamentalist Arab terrorism against Israel progressively escalated. Although Israel and the PLO signed the Wye River Memorandum to facilitate the implementation of the Interim Agreement towards self-rule, Arab intransigence continued unabated (Parker 2003; Bloom 2005). By 1996, Israel retaliated against Hezbollah terrorist attacks on northern Israel. Four years later in 2000, the Second Intifada erupted and an early casualty of this unrestrained violence was the Israeli Minister of Tourism, who was assassinated. Further violence and unwillingness to accept a resolution led to the Second Lebanon War in 2006, in which Israel carried out military operations against Hezbollah terrorists from southern Lebanon following missile attacks and the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers. Following Hamas’ violent takeover of the Gaza Strip, Israel declared Gaza a hostile territory while Hamas fired thousands of rockets into Israel. Following the invasion, a unilateral ceasefire was first declared by Israel, then Hamas. As of yesterday, Hamas had broken the conditions of ceasefire and continues to launch - day after day after day - more rockets into Israel (Brynan 2000; Central Intelligence Agency 2008). Concluding Remarks Recognition, mutual respect and redress for past injustices must factor into a settlement of this conflict. Palestinians must be given the opportunity to realize their dream of statehood and receive land of their own as well as compensation for land lost during 1948. Israel must be recognized as a legitimate political entity with legitimate rights, including the right to security and peace. Only by addressing the issues of land and competing national ideologies can a settlement be brought to fruition (Said 1992). Israel’s Arab neighbors have refused to accept a two-state compromise despite losing many military campaigns and being offered ninety percent of the disputed Palestinian land. Israel’s neighbors have attacked and challenged her sovereignty from the first 24 hours after independence to January of 2008, almost 61 years. After more than six decades, Arab intransigence remains the most important impediment to peace in the region. In fact, Arab rejectionism and intransigence have been features of the conflict since the days of the British Mandate. Recognition and mutual respect must factor into a settlement of this conflict. Israel must be recognized as a legitimate political entity with legitimate rights, including the right to security and peace. Israel’s Arab neighbors have refused to accept a two-state compromise despite losing many military campaigns, and being offered more than ninety percent of the disputed Palestinian land. The deceased head of the PLO faction, Yasser Arafat consistently rejected all proposals put forth at Camp David and the violence continues today. As the conflict between Israel and Hamas heats up in the Gaza Strip, a resolution unfortunately seems further and further away (Brynen 2007; Khater 2004). References Bloom, M. (2005). Dying to kill: the allure of suicide terror. New York: Columbia University Press. British Broadcasting Corporation (2002). Arafat defiant after Bush speech. Retrieved February 14, 2009, from BBC online http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2064733.stm Central Intelligence Agency (2008). Israel. Retrieved January 04, 2009, from The World Fact Book https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/is.html Brynen, R. (2000). A very political economy: peacebuilding and foreign aid in the West Bank and Gaza. Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press. Brynen, R. & El Rifai, Roula. (2007). Palestinian refugees: challenges of repatriation and development. London: I.B. Taurus. Central Intelligence Agency (2008). Israel. Retrieved May 27, 2008, from The World Fact Book https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/is.html Gelvin, J.L. (2005). The modern Middle East: a history. New York: Oxford University Press. Huntington, S.P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon & Schuster. Khater, A.F. (Ed.) (2004). Sources in the history of the modern Middle East. New York: Houghton-Mifflin. Morris, B. (2001). Righteous victims: a history of the Zionist-Arab conflict. New York: Random House. Parker, R. (2003). The politics of miscalculation in the Middle East. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. The Palestinian territories: chicken and eggs. (2008, April 26-May 2). The Economist, p. 65-66. Said, E.W. (1979). Orientalism. London: Vintage. Said, E.W. (1992). The question of Palestine. New York: Vintage. Read More