Palestinian Homeland; will it really make a difference - Research Paper Example

Palestinian Homeland; will it really make a difference? Introduction: The Middle East, especially the areas covered by the nations of Israel, Palestine, Jordan, and Iraq had always played a major role in world history. The area is home to the three major religions of the world, namely Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Hence this area has been a point of interest to many nations, both politically and by religious faith. It had always been an area of conflict due to these reasons, one of the most prominent being the creation of Israel out the traditional Palestinian Homeland. The Zionist movement, primarily due to oppression of the Jews in Europe resulted in the need for a piece of land they could call as their own. They zeroed down on an area which they believed to be the Promised Land and named it Israel. A mass exodus of Jews from many parts of the world, especially Europe and the United States took place, creating tensions between the local Muslim/Arab population and its Jewish settlers. The result was that the settlers who had been living in the land at the time of the creation of the new nation found themselves displaced and became a group of people with no homeland. The need for a politically recognized homeland of Palestine has, for ever since resulted in wars, negotiations, politics, diplomacy, and terror attacks. This paper argues for the creation of a Palestinian Homeland which will essentially make a difference in the living conditions and political rights of the different sections of the people living in the area. In the process, it will also look at the views of different affected groups like the Palestinians, Israelis, Lebanese, and Iraqi people. Brief history of the reason behind the issue at hand: Historians state that the main problem arose due to the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, primarily in Turkey. The country had sided with the Germans during the World War I and the subsequent defeat (of Germany) led to large areas becoming politically independent entities. “All but one of these Mandated Territories became fully independent States. “The exception was Palestine where, instead of being limited to "the rendering of administrative assistance and advice" the Mandate had as a primary objective the implementation of the "Balfour Declaration" issued by the British Government in 1917, expressing support for "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people" (Question of Palestine). In spite of such a declaration, the clear areas meant for each group has remained a question of debate which has not yet been solved peacefully and politically even today. Both sides have agreed to and backtracked on various negotiations and peace processes and have resorted to political negotiations, conquest, and terrorism in their quest for political identity and international acceptance of their respective territories. Viewpoints and arguments: The two main or primary stakeholders in the whole affair are the Israelis and the Palestinians and each of them have agendas which are sometimes common and sometimes conflicting. Palestinian demands range from complete ownership and control of the land involved, to a mediated settlement that covers a part of the area. In other words, they are willing to own a part of the originally disputed land in return for autonomy and self-rule. On the part of the Israelis, there are people who are against the creation of a Palestine state while others go along with a moderate view and are amenable to such a homeland alongside with Israel. Each of these viewpoints will be discussed, moving on to other secondary stakeholders mentioned in the introduction. One of the main issues that threatened the local population (due to the exodus of the Jews) was a primary threat to their ways of life followed on by centuries. According to an Arab scholar, “the emergence of the Zionist movement in the late nineteenth century coincided with the rise of nationalism in the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire. Form the outset the Arabs of Palestine viewed Zionism as a territorial colonist movement which threatened their national existence” (Kayyālī, 1978, p. 228). So, the argument regarding a ‘chosen homeland’ was not the primary issue involved in this case. The local population was simply perceived to be threatened by the new arrivals. But here again, many other factors also played a hand in creating the tensions that is seen even today. The area of the present Palestine and Israeli states was under the control of Great Britain during that time. Most Western powers including Britain and the United States were in favor of creating a Jewish homeland in the region. This was brought about by the Balfour Declaration in 1917 whereby a proposed home for the Jews in Palestine was approved by the British government. Arthur James Balfour in his letter to Lord Rothschild states that “His Majestys Government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country”(The Balfour Declaration, 1917). The point to note here is that the word used was ‘home’ and not ‘state’. The name ‘Israel’ was also not present at that time. The declaration also proposed that the rights of the local population should not be denied through the creation of the new state. It was as if those involved were desperate to provide a place for the Jews without looking at other political and religious ramifications of the decision. There are also views that the Christian world wanted to get rid of the Jews who were then economically very powerful, out of the way. It is also interesting to note that the Arabs of Palestine at that time were primarily nomadic without an organized political setup or any form of proper governance. But this declaration resulted in a nationalist movement as mentioned earlier and still continues to this day. Over a period of time, a sense of urgency and cooperation was established by the local people. By the end of World War II, the United Nations had been formed and the organization tried to bring about a peaceful political settlement for the issue. The United Nations Special Commission on Palestine (UNSCOP) proposed two independent states, one for the Arabs and one for the Jews. The charter also proposed that Jerusalem, a city holy for both religions be put under international administration. It was acceptable to Jews, but not to the Arabs. It should be noted that support of the Muslim world had grown in support for Palestine primarily due to religious reasons. Consolidation of Muslim nations through the formation of the Arab League in 1945 also created problems for Israel. They sought out both political and military solutions to pay the way for an independent Palestine. Within two years of its formation, they publicly supported the creation of an independent Palestine. One of the paragraphs in its Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine in 1948 is as follows – “The Pact of the League of Arab States declared that Palestine has been an independent country since its separation from the Ottoman Empire, but the manifestations of this independence have been suppressed due to reasons which were out of the control of its inhabitants. The establishment of the United Nations shortly afterwards was an event about which the Arabs had the greatest hopes. Their belief in the ideals on which that organization was based made them participate in its establishment and membership” (Arab League Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine, 1948). Matters reached a stalemate without any real decision being taken. Over the next two decades, Israel became a strong military power as well and survived several Arab attacks. The country had consolidated its position by holding on to large parts of the area primarily through capturing lands belonging to neighboring Jordan. By 1967, the Palestine Liberation Organization was formed and its first official charter demanding the rights for the whole area was published. This charter, published in 1968 and containing thirty three articles states political, religious, social, and tradition as reasons for ownership of the land. One of the articles reads as follows – “The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong” (The Palestinian National Charter, 1968). The charter also called for armed struggle and international support for achieving its aims. This could well be the first official declaration of intention by the people of Palestine at that time. The Arab League also officially gave membership to the PLO in 1976. The formation of the Palestine Liberation Army headed by the late Yasser Arafat formed its militant wing while the PLO became the political arm for achieving their aims. Over the intervening years, the strong stand taken by the different political and military wings of the Palestine State have toned down. In a landmark declaration in 1988, Arafat who then headed the PLO recognized the State of Israel. It should be noted that this came about to a large extent due to pressure from countries like the United States. The same year, the official declaration of Palestinian independence was also released by the PLO which was written by the well-known Arab poet, Mahound Darwish. The Israelis still did not reciprocate. The Middle East Publications, an organization of Israeli and Palestine moderates regularly publishes articles voicing opinions of both sides through the Palestine Israel Journal. In one of their publications, the moderate view of the Palestinian side is provided in some detail. The Annapolis Peace Initiative in 2007 brought about some hopes of a solution. Both Israel and Palestine have agreed in principle to the two nation theory. The Arab League also welcomed the plan. The PLO even agreed to the 1967 situation of Israeli occupation. This plan provides an area occupied by Palestinians to become the official Palestine Homeland. But here again progress has been stalled due to Israeli fears as given below. The peace initiative will provide a separate piece of land for the Palestinians. This could pose a threat to the country with many hostile people as neighbors. Many of the Palestinians fled Israel over the years to neighboring countries. The peace initiative states that they should be allowed to return or paid compensation for their losses. Hardliner Israelis fear that too many of them would return making Israeli population an Arab majority. This could undermine the political stability of the state in the future. Moreover, Israel had to give up the areas occupied after 1967. Daoud Kuttab, who was a former professor at Princeton University, is an influential award winning journalist and media person. Born in Jerusalem, this moderate Palestinian feels that “what is needed, as suggested in the Arab Peace Initiative and a number of Palestinian-Israeli peace initiatives, is an agreed-upon final status, something like the 1967 borders, and a process to implement terms that will be agreed to by all parties. Otherwise, this and future summits will continue to fail” (Kuttab, 2007). The views of other groups in this crisis is mainly supports the creation of the Palestinian state. Iraq and other Muslim nations of the areas once wanted the total destruction of Israel and the whole area be given back to its local Arab inhabitants. But the general consensus is that a solution has to be found through the acceptance of the 1967 status. But the attitude of Iraq Muslims towards the refugees from Palestine leaves much to be desired with regard to good relationships. About seven hundred of them had to flee to the Syria-Iraq border due to prosecution. The attitude of the Christians in Lebanon (and nearby areas) may not be friendly towards Israel, and may openly support the creation of a Palestinian state. Palestine once had a vibrant and old Christian community. Like the Arabs, large numbers had to flee as the Jews took over the land. The Christian population was around 20% of the total and has now come down to around 2% now. “Of those who have remained in the region, most live in Lebanon, where they share in the same bottomless misery as all other refugees, confined to camps where schools are under-funded and overcrowded, where housing is ramshackle, and sanitary conditions are appalling” (Strindberg, 2004). There is worldwide support for the creation of a Palestinian Homeland and pressure on Israel to provide a solution. Now, nearly one hundred nations acknowledge Palestine and are supportive for its aim to be an official nation state. Israel is also under mounting international pressure on alleged war crimes and also for stopping building of new settlements on the disputed territory. The whole issue is now primarily in the hands of Israel since they are the ones refusing to do so take a final decision. Even the Catholic Church, through Pope Benedict, has come out openly for its creation as a final solution for the conflict. It is imperative that Palestinian Homeland be provided with official recognitions with clearly demarcated borders. The PLO is an established force with its own administrative setup. It even has an administrative capital in Ramullah. The area primarily comprising of the West Bank and Ghaza strip is now governed by the Palestine National Authority. This body which was formed by the PLO in 1994 was supported by the Israeli government also. It was intended by both sides as an interim body formed to govern Palestine until a final settlement be made on the issue. Conclusion: When Israel came into existence in 1948, there was widespread condemnation by Palestine Arabs and other Muslim nations to evict the settlers. But it has come to such a stage that Israel is now seen as permanent presence in the region by most of its former detractors. The tables have now turned and the pressure is now on Israel to recognize and demarcate Palestine as a country. Even the Palestinian National Authority and the PLA only want a nation status alongside Israel based on the 1967 occupation status. Mounting pressure from many quarters is now against Israel to provide a lasting solution to the issue. Many negotiations and acts of violence have taken place in spite of assurances by both parties that an agreement will come into force. It should be stated that the existence of Israel had resulted in the displacement of more than 700,000 Arabs and Christians into neighbouring countries and also to other territories now seen as a part of Palestine. The Palestinians do have a right to form their own government and live as a recognized nation state. The main argument is that they were the inhabitants of the place for centuries. Another reason is that the tension between Jews, Muslims, and Christians will continue to fester until a settlement takes place. This is needed to bring in peace to a volatile region. Otherwise, there will be acts of violence from both sides resulting in the injury and deaths of innocent victims. It is not an easy solution, but Israel will need to cooperate in finding one that is acceptable to both sides. Otherwise it will have to bend to international pressure to do so. But there is no doubt that the creation of a Palestinian Homeland is essential for peace and prosperity in the region. References Arab League Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine. (1948). Jewish Virtual Library, Retrieved October 02, 2009, from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/arab_invasion.html The Balfour Declaration. (1917). Encyclopedia of the Middle East, Retrieved October 02, 2009, from http://www.mideastweb.org/Middle-East-Encyclopedia/balfour_declaration.htm Kayyālī, A. (1978). Palestine: A Modern History. Routledge Kuttab, D. (2007). Mid East Web Opinion Forum, Retrieved October 02, 2009, from http://www.mideastweb.org/peace_conferences_not_enough_cg.htm Question of Palestine, (n.d.). United Nations. Retrieved October 02, 2009, from http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/ngo/history.html Strindberg, A. (2004). The American Conservative, Retrieved October 02, 2009, from http://www.amconmag.com/article/2004/may/24/00013/ The Palestinian National Charter. (1968). United Nations Information System on the question of Palestine, Retrieved October 02, 2009, from http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/B508C2071B4377DB85256CED00716FA3 Read More