The Middle East Today: Arab-Israeli Conflict - Dissertation Example

The Middle East Today: Arab-Israeli Conflict Introduction The conflict involving the Arabian fraternity and that of Israel has been one of the longest continuing conflicts in the arena of international politics. Though, the present formation of the state of Israel has been recently in the year of 1948, the conflict in the region has continued since ages. The commencement of the conflict had been since the fall of Ottoman Empire during the World War I years. The present conflict has been more of political in nature with the state of Israel and that of the Palestine Liberation Organisation while the other Arab countries are no more directly involved in disputes with Israel though still they support the claims of the Palestinians. The long – lasting conflict has many underlying reasons. Among the wide range of issues, the subject of religion holds supreme importance. The conflict has mostly taken shape keeping the religion of Zionism in the middle. Also, in order to analyse the reasons of such prolonged conflict, special emphasis has to be put on the 1948 war and the subsequent wars among the contesting parties. The repeated failure of talks and the peace process cannot be undermined and it is pretty clear that the real conflict resolution can come up only if the conflicting parties take lessons from the previous happenings. The role played by Bill Clinton, the former President of the United States of America also holds prominence in this regard. The chapter discusses the various resolution techniques that the international community has presented to the issue in order to resolve the dispute. Over View There is little doubt that the Arab - Israeli conflict is one the most obscure disputes in the modern history of international relations and there are numerous agendas that have actively contributed towards such dispute like that of differences in religion, philosophical disparities and the role of the neighbouring states. All these factors have added complexity to the conflict. A careful analysis of the history of the conflict suggests that the role of the various nations of the world, especially in the region, has been crucial in every stage of the development of the conflict. Weijan has rightly observed that the conflict among the Arab countries and Israel is one of the most intractable as well as most spectacular that the modern international community is facing in the present day i.e. in the outset of the 21st century (Weijan, 2002). It has been experienced that the peace-keeping processes initiated by the international community have incorporated various parties that are taking side with any of the conflicting nations which is indeed unfortunate in terms of conflict resolution. Significantly, the international contingent known as the Quartet on the Middle East (or simply, the Quartet) has been concerned with the official negotiations in order to resolve the conflict. The body has incorporated the international big powers like the United States, Russia, the European Union, and the United Nations. Such measures to involve the big international players and the international bodies have both merits and demerits. While the international bodies like that of United Nations might try earnestly to resolve the issue of conflict, the superpowers can look for their vested interests in the region which invariably would affect the entire conflict resolution mechanism in a major way. Arab League has been another important participant in the conflict resolution in between Israel and Arabian countries especially that of Palestine. The League has come up with alternative peace plans for the resolution of the various issues in the region in the different phases of the prolonged dispute. Similarly, Egypt, which was a founding member of the Arab League, has played an essential role in the settlement of the disputed issues in the region but with little success. It is fundamental to undertake an exploration of the short history of the conflict resolution efforts to determine the role of international actors in the conflict resolution. Such an analysis confirms that the Arabs and the Israelis, in the next sixty years since the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, have made considerable progress in resolving the conflicts between them but still there are phenomenal disputes within the two parties. Prior to assessing various conflict resolution techniques, it is prudent to analyse the various issues that have resulted in the conflicts between the authorities of the Palestine and that of the state of Israel. Conflicting Issues Some of the several conflicting issues that have resulted prolonged conflicts in between Arabs (or the Palestinians in particular) and the Israel are as follows: Territory of Jerusalem – The prime matter of dispute in between the Israel and the Arab fraternity has been upon the issue of control over the territory of Jerusalem. Jerusalem has been a typical holy land in terms of religion as the three prime religions of the world have erupted in and around the city namely Judaism, Christianity and that of Islam. The present population structure of the city has more of the Jew populace than that of Muslims. The fact is that the Jews primarily stay in the western Jerusalem while the Muslims in the eastern part. The Palestine Authority and the Arabian fraternity have been demanding the territory of Jerusalem under Palestine control but Israel has been opposing it. Presently, the Palestine Authority demands only few of the areas of the eastern part of the city that was under Palestine control before the war of the 1948 but Israel is unmoved as it believes that the security of the city would have major issues, especially for the Jewish population, under any Palestine Authority. Refugees of War of 1948 – This is another important matter of contention in between Palestine Authorities and that of the Israel. The refugees of War of 1948 are those who have stayed in lands of Palestine in between June 1946 to May 1948, prior to the occupation of the land by Israel. Palestine Authority and the Arabian world have repeatedly demanded citizenship status of those war refugees from Israel but the Jewish state did not pay heed to such demand. It was more hurting when Israel allowed Jews from all over the world to get citizenship rights in the country but not to the original inhabitants of the land. Under repeated persuasion from the authorities like that of United Nations, the state of Israel agreed to the Palestine Diaspora but still the country did not provide consent to let in the Palestinians in the region citing the reasons of internal security (Erlanger, 2007). Israeli Settlements – In the decade of 90’s, the Israel troops captured many parts of the West Bank area that was under Palestine occupation and were destroyed in the previous conflicts of 1929 and 1948 which was vehemently opposed by the Arabian nations. Israel built settlements in those areas and occupied the land. Even, the international community comprising the countries like that of United States and the United Kingdom that have been supportive towards Israel; opposed this move. Many of the scholars of the subject sincerely believe that this move of having Israeli settlements in the regions of West Bank have been a major hindrance in any measure of conflict resolution among the contesting parties. Security Matters – The accused association of the Palestine Authority with that of the Hamas has been presented as an act of terrorism by the Israeli authorities. Also, the guerrillas of the Palestine Liberation Organisation have been attacking the military as well as civil life of Israel and vice – versa. Israel has always maintained that the conflict resolution processes have failed because of the attacks on the internal security of the country by the Palestinian activists and the country views Palestine Liberation Organisation as the major threat. Natural Resources – The conflict over the natural resource of water has been another area of dispute. In the Middle – East, water is scarce. Palestine complained that Israel conquered most of the water wells and also did not provide the Palestinian dominated areas with requisite supply of water. Though, this dispute is likely to be solved for now with the Oslo Accords, yet the chances of further dispute always prevail. International Status – The international status of the Palestine land has been under close inspection of both the parties. Israel has repeatedly tried to ban Palestine Authority from having any sorts of import and export activities. Also, it has demanded to have access with the countries like that of Jordan and Egypt through the land of Palestine which was highly objectionable for Palestine Authority. The status quo for both the parties was achieved through the declaration of three different categories of land namely Part A, Part B and Part C. But it is far from being a permanent solution. Conflict Resolution The conflict between the Arab countries and that Palestine Liberation Organisation has affected the international politics by great extent. It would not be wrong to say that the superpowers of the world like that of the United States, Russia or other members of the United Nation Security Council have been actively involved in the conflict resolution initiatives along with the international bodies like the United Nations, the Arab League and the European Union. Among the various initiatives, the Oslo Accords hold supreme importance. Formally known as, Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, the Oslo Accords was the first face – to – face meeting in between the conflicting parties of Palestine Liberation Organisation and the government of Israel. The agreement was formally signed in the 1993 September in the capital of the United States, though was completed at Oslo of Norway and so was known with the name of the Oslo Accords. It was these accords that for the first time provided the long demanded Palestine National Authority. The Accords provisioned for the Palestinian rule in the territory that was controlled by them. Most importantly, the consensus was build up for the removal of the Israeli forces from the disputed parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The Oslo Accords was signed between the PLO and the Israel in the presence of the foreign ministers of the United States as well as Russia and therefore it held considerable importance in terms of dispute resolution (Jewish Virtual Library, 1993). Though the Oslo Accords had substantial significance in the conflict resolution initiatives as all the major powers of the international politics made their presence felt, yet it did not achieve the desired success. In order to make up for the lags, the Interim Agreement was signed in the year of 1995 which is also known as Oslo 2. The Oslo 2 or the Oslo II was even stronger in terms of the approval from the international fraternity as it was not only signed in the presence of the President of the United States but also of the representative of the European Union, Jordan, Norway, Egypt and Russia. The Oslo II predominantly deals with the future of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Apart from these two crucial agreements, the role played by the then United States President, Bill Clinton is undeniable in the peace process in between Arab and Israel. The experts have repeatedly stated that numerous formal as well as informal meetings in between the leaders of Palestine Liberation Organisation and Israeli government would not have been possible in the last decade of the last century, if President Clinton would not have exhibited interests to resolve the issue. In the recent past, the role of European Union has been instrumental in the conflict resolution of the Arab and Israel. Though it was long realised that the two conflicting parties are ought to be advised and help externally in order to resolve the conflicts, but the involvement of the international bodies like European Union are recent in nature. The recent trends suggest that there has been an important evolution in the approach of the European Union towards becoming an international actor that wants to make difference in the resolution in the international conflicts. But the prime disadvantage that European Union faces is that of the criticism that it does not play a very formative role in the settlement of the issues in the region. In this regard, Jensehaugen noted that though EU could have a major role in the Israel-Palestinian conflict resolution by inculcating diplomatic, economic and political pressure upon Israel, but the fact is that EU mostly goes with the policies of the United States and does not vouch for independent policies (Jensehaugen, 2008). The experts of the subjects believe that because of this characteristic of the European Union, no much pressure could be applied to resolve the conflict and most of the peace processes initiated by the European Union fell flat. The other important fact is that the countries of Europe have been responsible, both historically as well as morally for the emergence of the Israeli State. There is little doubt that the major agenda of the European Union is to develop the economic, commercial, social, political and religious ties between the two shores of the Mediterranean Sea. The scholar in the particular domain of the conflict resolution in between Israel and Palestine, Gianniou noted that, “The study of Europe’s action towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict highlights two pertinent observations: the affirmation of the European edifice as an international actor and its contribution to the conflict as a political actor” (Gianniou, 2006). The process of conflict resolution in between the Arab and the Israeli authorities involves various central aspects of the issues at hand and it is indeed important to understand and recognise the role of international community in arriving at a complete end to the long confrontation. The specific nature of the conflict emphasises the need for an effective guarantor of the peacekeeping and reconciliation process in the region. It is heartening to note that only the one superpower, the United States of America, has accepted the role of conflict resolution for the last twenty years in between the troubled bodies of Israel and Arab. Barkan and Karm rightly commented in the year of 2006 that “Unfortunately, the overall perception of public opinion in the Arab Middle East is that the United States is not an unbiased and fair broker in the Arab-Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Although Arabs appreciate the ideal of an unbiased, Even-handed mediator, their conception of the preferred third party emphasizes the role of the principled guarantor who ensures a settlement based on equality and just compensation” (Barkan & Karn, 2006). Relation with Iran The relationship between the Iran and the Israel has been one of the most dramatic in the field of international politics. Till the time of the Iranian revolution in the year of 1979, Iran thought Israel as a close confidant and ally. The happy days survived till Pahlavi dynasty’s rule in Iraq. The countries maintained such a close relationship that when, after the completion of six – day war, Israel suffered from the lack of oil, Iran provided the requisite supply of oil to the Jewish state. The relationship dramatically changed after the Islamic revolution in the year of 1979 under the leadership of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The Khomeini government not only severed all ties with the Israeli authorities but also denied to recognise Israel as a separate independent country as it said the government to be a ‘Zionist Regime’, while the land was identified as ‘Occupied territories’ by the Iranian authorities. The leaders of Iran have always used well – chosen adjectives for the Israeli authorities after the revolution. Earlier, Ayatollah Khomeini had identified Israel as the ‘Little Satan’ and the ‘Enemy to Islam’. One step higher, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei referred Israel as the ‘cancerous tumour’ and viewed that it should be ideally removed from the map of the world. The most astonishing fact has been that Israel had thought Iran as a non – Arab ally in the Arabian region in the years prior to revolution when they received various sorts of cooperation but soon it was observed that Iran changed its stance by one hundred eighty degree as the country declared that the “Palestine belongs to Palestinians, and the fate of Palestine should also be determined by the Palestinian people” (Edalat, 2007). The recent confusion over the possession of the nuclear weapons has further intensified distrust among the two countries. As Iran has doubted about Israel’s capacity to have nuclear weapons, Israel retaliated to the issue by stating that Iran lies within the range of the missiles possessed by Israel. It would not be wrong to say that the relation of the two countries are undergoing toughest phase and there is no chance of improvement in the near future whatsoever. This rough relationship has indeed affected the prolonged conflict in between Arabian countries and that of Israel. Conclusion The essay provides deep insight over the various issues that have resulted in the prolonged dispute among the Israel and the Arabian countries especially with that of Palestine Authority. The role of the international fraternity has also been minutely studied. There is no denying of the fact that the roles of the United States, Russia, United Nations and European Union have been instrumental for whatever success that has been achieved till date. But the underlying fact that has been pretty clear is that the outside countries or entities can only help externally but in order to resolve the conflict, the onus lays upon the two involved parties i.e. the Israel government and the PLO. The moves from the international fraternity are definitely welcome but the real initiative should be from the parties that have been in war for years. In order to resolve the conflict, at the outset, it is required to remove the mutual distrust among PLO and Israel and to initiate discussion with an open mind. References Barkan, E. & Karn, A. Taking wrongs seriously: apologies and reconciliation. Stanford University Press, 2006. Edalat, A., 2007. The US can learn from this example of mutual respect. The Guardian. [Online] Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/apr/05/comment.military [Accessed April 16, 2010]. Erlanger, S., 2007. Olmert Rejects Right of Return for Palestinians. The New York Times. [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/31/world/middleeast/31mideast.html?ex=1332993600&en=0a6af99036c2a9b8&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss [Accessed April 16, 2010]. Gianniou, M., 2006. The European Union's involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: An active paradigm of European foreign policy? Bilgi University. [Online] Available at: http://www.jhubc.it/ecpr-istanbul/virtualpaperroom/045.pdf [Accessed April 16, 2010]. Jewish Virtual Library, 1993. Declaration of Principles On Interim Self-Government Arrangements. The Library. [Online] Available at: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/dop.html [Accessed April 16, 2010]. Jensehaugen, J., 2008. “The EU could play a major role in the Israel-Palestinian conflict. The Euros. [Online] Available at: http://www.theeuros.eu/IMG/article_PDF/Jorgen-Jensehaugen-The-EU-could,2028.pdf [Accessed April 16, 2010]. Weijan, L., 2002. Cultures and the Arab-Israeli conflict. Cultural impact on international relations. Xintian Yu. CRVP. Bibliography Feste, K. A. Plans for peace: negotiation and the Arab-Israeli conflict. Greenwood Publishing Group, 1991. Quandt, W. B. Peace process: American diplomacy and the Arab-Israeli conflict since 1967. Brookings Institution Press, 2005. Stewart, D. J. The Middle East Today: Political, Geographical & Cultural Perspectives. Taylor & Francis, 2008. Read More