The Middle East has proven to be a crucible, occasionally caused by tensions between two ethnic groups, including Jews and Arabs, and two different and incompatible monotheistic faiths, respectively, Judaism and Islam, since the end of World War I and the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Many experts view Israel’s ongoing hostility with Palestine as a major source of terrorist activity. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has dominated the spectacular setting of the Middle East for 70 years. International struggles have been avoided by a complete diplomatic solution, leaving some disappointed with the prospect of peace. Large-scale ferocity ebbs and flows, leaving neighborhoods vulnerable and allowing the conflict to linger as a rallying platform for terrorist groups while requiring increased attention from the United States and globally.
Given this short-term perspective, it remains possible to take steps for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. A developed Israeli and Palestinian public society framework strives for a just and lasting concord, and regional strategic changes will open up new possibilities to move towards Israeli-Palestinian and wider provincial conflict settlement.
The Israeli-Palestinian dispute is one of the most complex and insistent tensions in today’s world order. The’ war’ between the government residents of Israel and the Palestinian Stateless people is now part of an extremely violent and warped environment. The Israelis-Palestinian relationship is profoundly complex and therefore without a simple explanation or solution. The lack of a single answer has made it difficult for others to grasp the disagreement. Anybody who tries to analyze the problem typically does too many inquiries and not enough responses. This paper aims at defining the main characteristics of the dispute. Throughout the explanation of how Jewish-Arab connections have been changed and influenced by the circumstances throughout Israel and Palestine, the paper takes into account the historical and contemporary dimensions of conflict.
Dowty. States that the dispute between Arab and Israel is often characterized as one of the most violent, or even the most aggressive, battlefields in the world today. Scholars talk of “age-old ethnic hatreds” between Arabs and Jews, “thousands of years” and “the clash between faiths” which is at the very root of these hatreds between Islam and Judaism, as well as of the incessant cycle of violence, which feeds hatred and intensifies the fight, rendering it an eternal and insoluble problem. These characteristics pose a major problem (Dowty, 2012).
The author argues that is not an “age-old” war. The source lies in the 1880s when Jewish refugees from eastern Europe started developing a Jewish community in the ancient nation of Israel, which became part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. Only the 1947-9 war gave birth to a wider Arab-Israeli element.
Dowty. A argues that is not ethnic hatred-related conflict. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the identification of Arabs or Palestinians really began to develop, and the assertion of that name responded rather than as a consequence of confrontation with Jewish settlers. It was relatively new, but not universally accepted, for Jews to claim that the Jews constitute both an ethnic group and a religion-an affirmation that was necessary to establish a territorial claim in the ‘national land (Dowty, 2012).’
The author argues that is not a ‘clash of the faiths’ dispute. This certainly brought on religious problems as the war grew and the spiritual element became ever more relevant (Dowty, 2012). Judaism was, however, a non-proselytizing faith recognizing Islam as a true major religion (Lewis, 1984). Finally, the author states that is more argumentative, nor are there any grounds for declaring it insoluble, a conflict of constant violence. The struggles between Jews / Israelis and Palestinian Arabs have undergone various major changes in intensity and extent over the century and quarter of their existence. There have been times of relative stability and harmony, along with cycles of drastic and violent abuse. Not only are general wars like the two world wars, but other ethnic conflicts which have resulted in the killing of whole propulsions have damaged him (Dowty, 2012).
Seeing the conflict in this long-range perspective also provides the best evidence that it is not, in fact, insoluble. We see that the violence is not constant; there must be, therefore, some conditions under which the two sides exercise restraint. This is not simply an irrational eruption of hatred and hostility. In fact, contrary to the popular image, the gap between mainstream opinion on the two sides has actually narrowed over time. To show this, we must look at the board historical picture, which will focus on the
History of Israel and Palestine conflict
The war between Israel and the Palestinians, which started in the early 20th century, is the current dispute between Israelis and the Palestinian people. There is a large rivalry between Zionist Jishuv and the Arabs, who are now residing in Palestine below the Ottoman rule, and then British rule, in relation to the early stages of the same dispute. This comes as part of the larger rivalry between Arab and Israel. The main questions remain mutual recognition, security, protection, water rule, Jerusalem command, Israeli settlements, independence of the Palestinian community, and resolution of the refugee problem.
Several efforts have been made to negotiate the two-state solution, including the creation within a sovereign Jewish state or the State of Israel (after the founding of Israel in 1948), of an autonomous Palestinian state. According to a number of polls, the two-state solution was favored over any other option in 2007 by the plurality of both Israeli and Palestinian people. Furthermore, the Palestinians ‘ appeal for an independent state is seen by a large majority of the Jewish community and Israel claims it can support the formation of such a government. Many Palestinians and Israelis regard West Bank and Gaza as an acceptable position in a two-state solution for the future Palestinian state. Nevertheless, the shape of any final agreement and the credibility level of the other side in upholding basic commitments exist in significant areas of discord.
The dispute creates a wide range of views and beliefs between Israeli and Palestinian communities. This underlines the deep divisions between Israelis and Palestinians, but also in any culture. For almost the whole of its existence, a characteristic of the war has been the degree of aggression. Traditional forces, paramilitary groups, terror cells, and people are responsible for combat. The deaths were not restricted to the military, with many civilian incidents on both sides. The dispute is affecting famous international players.
As an international problem, the roots of Palestine lay in developments at the end of World War I. Such developments led to the decision of the League of Nations to render Palestine a mandatory force under the League’s mandate scheme during Britain’s administration. It was in principle meant that the mandate was in the nature of a transitional period until Palestine became a fully independent nation, a status that had been temporarily recognized by the League Pact, but the historical trends of the mandate did not, indeed, result in Palestine emerging as an independent nation.
Cause of conflict
The center of the controversy between Israel and Palestine is the two peoples ‘ claims to the same ground. Through time, the conflict is, and is, between an Eretz Yisrael-the traditional state of Israel-a Jewish political movement, and an Arab / Palestinian political movement that describes the same lands as Filastin (Palestine) as an essential component of the Arab world, with other elements attached (Dowty, 2012). Israel’s proponents would like to describe the fundamental issue in quite a different language, claiming that it is Palestinians’ and other Arabs ‘ denial of accepting the presence of the Jewish State in the ancient Jewish homeland which is the root cause of the conflict. The core issue in Arab words is the denial of the Palestinian people’s natural right to self-determination in their ancestral home states. However, both of them opposed the defense groups with their own answers and agreed that this is a matter of contradictory claims on the same territory (Dowty, 2012).
The rivalry between Israel and the Palestinians is an ongoing fight that began at the beginning of the 20th century. There is a very large dispute between the Zionist Yishouv and the Arab population living in Palestine, under Ottoman rule, and the later British, also in relation to the previous phases of the same conflict. It is part of the broader conflict between Arab Israel and Israel. The remaining key issues are a mutual acknowledgment of the Palestinian people, borders, safety, water rights, the supervision of Jerusalem, Israel’s settlements, and freedom of movement.
Conflict-related violence has contributed to both domestic and global policies and other concerns regarding safety and human rights. However, conflicts also curbed tourism development in the area, which is full of historical and religious sites of significance for a large number of people worldwide.
The quest for a fair solution must be addressing the root cause of the violence as the sporadic fighting persists in the Middle East. The conventional wisdom is that even if the two parties are weak, the Israelis are misguided ‘terrorists.’ Nevertheless, we are of the opinion that the Palestinians really have a problem: their country was occupied during the creation of the state of Israel for over a thousand years, without their permission and mostly by violence. Each wrongdoing afterward inevitably follows on both sides from this initial oppression.
Both parties have used a prior incident as a pretext for a current act of violence, Irgun and Lehi soldiers killing innocent residents, including children and women, or suicide attacks carried out by Israeli civilians and Palestinian-based terrorist groups. This feels like it’s no longer right or wrong, despite decades of violence. And for the innocent, suffering did not cease to occur.
2030 Security Concept of Israel
Prime Minister Netanyahu plans to raise the defense budget by 6% of the country’s GDP for the expected risks over the next decade (MoFA, 2018). The budgetary supplement is dedicated to a number of issues, including enhancement of assaults, global digital power levels, strengthening in anti-missile defense, ongoing domestic safeguard steps, and the completion of the protection fences. Prime Minister believes that Israel will have security requirements that are far greater than any other state of similar size because of its limited area, population density, and multiple threats. The Israeli economy today is sufficiently powerful to support this addition. In all events, the increase is implemented while the budgetary framework remains responsible. In the previous two-decade, they have developed a free economy to meet national needs, particularly health. We are at a turning point in the light of the combined challenges. We are called upon today to spend more on safety to protect and preserve our accomplishments. In the hands of other nations, Israel’s role as a commodity in the mix of their security and economic capabilities would improve its political capacity (MoFA, 2018).
Current situation of the Peace Process
The Israeli government, currently headed by a right-wing alliance, is not trusted by Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas. Expansion of settlements is one of the fundamental reasons: with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the building of settlements hit its high seven-year rate. During Netanyahu’s time in government, Abbas saw the rapid extension as a strong sign that Israel is trying to make a Palestinian state unlikely. Even though the Palestinians requested a complete moratorium, Netanyahu just sat down to talk during the 9th month while Jerusalem was being broken down everywhere except for ten months from November 2009 onwards (Beauchamp, 2018).
Over decades, Netanyahu opposed a two-state solution to the conflict, and while expressing support for one technically, most argue that his commitment is not sincere. He’s the first member to support a two-state solution while in office amid intense US scrutiny in 2009 for Likud, Israel’s main right-wing party.
But Netanyahu declared that there was no Palestinian state under him when campaigning during the 2015 Israeli parliamentary elections that his party won very resoundingly. It is a suggestion that he wanted to go, but one that demonstrates his long-established belief that Palestinians cannot be expected to be friendly neighbors.
There are real reasons behind Israel’s Palestinian distrust. The Hamas-Fatah rift is one of the main issues. Israel was afraid that, because Hamas had taken control of Gaza, any peace deal with the Palestinian Authority, which it had little real control, would not be lasting in Gaza. This is particularly worrying for the government of Israel despite Hamas ‘ open contribution to the destruction of Israel (Beauchamp, 2018). It is also not clear that Abbas could sell Palestinians for the concessions that he would inevitably have to make to enter into a deal with Israel.
The main reason for the breaking of US Secretaries of State John Kerry’s peace push, in April 2014, is the two sides’ fundamental skepticism of their desire and their capacity to build peace. From that point on, the Palestinians have pushed toward a pressure center to condemn Israel domestically and to force the Israeli government to peace.
In conclusion with more and more proposals for the two-state solution, the concept of independent Israel / Palestine was an option. Several Israelis, especially Benvenuti, claimed that, as early as 1967, a second Israel state had been established and put into effect through the creation of Israeli settlements with the occupation of the West Bank as well as the Gaza Strip, the question had to be turned into a truly democratic state through expanding the nationality and the vote to the Palestinians (Benvenisti, 1987). Even those who proceed to ardently push for two-state solutions to save Israel from nationalism have sometimes been forced to recognize that it is probably too late (Baskin, 2008). At least a couple of Palestinians begin contemplating a constitutional state’s option. This implies embracing Israel as a reality, but only as a starting point for the democratization of historical Palestine: that is to say, by achieving equality for itself and eliminating the historically Jewish state (Tareq Y. Ismael, and Glenn E. Perry, 2013). The political class of a largely autonomous state even if Israel continued to dominate in a way analogous to the Bantustans formed by the Apartheid government in South Africa as a response to this country’s racial problem had a strong interest in Palestinian politicians. Finally, I have argued that the Arab States need to fall from the front line and if Palestinians came to communicate for themselves, the conflict was abridged to the core geographic level. We must perhaps concentrate on causing the confrontation to its core and remove the accumulated wrath and alienation, to resolve the fundamental problems.
- Ataöv, T. ‘. (2004). On Arab-Jewish State; The Ottoman Experience And After. The Turkish Yearbook of International Relations 35, 107-115.
- Baskin, G. (2008, December 15). Encountering Peace: The Emerging Bi-national Reality. Retrieved from Jerusalem Post: https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Encountering-Peace-The-emerging-bi-national-reality
- Beauchamp, Z. (2018, May 14). How do the current Israeli and Palestinian governments approach the conflict? Retrieved from Vox: https://www.vox.com/2018/11/20/18080092/israeli-palestinian-conflict-current-governments
- Benvenisti, M. (1987). The Second Republic. Journal of Palestine Studies 16, no. 3, 197-201.
- Dowty, A. (2012). ISRAEL / PALESTINE, Third Edition, Fully reserved and updated. Cambridge, United State of America: Polity Press.
- Dowty, A. (2012). ISRAEL / PALESTINE, Third Edition, Fully reserved and updated. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Lewis, B. (1984). The Jews of Islam. Prinston University Press.
- MoFA, I. (2018, August 15). PM Netanyahu presents the ‘2030 Security Concept’ to the Cabinet. Retrieved from Israel Ministry of Foreign Affair: https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/PressRoom/2018/Pages/-PM-Netanyahu-presents-2030-Security-Concept-to-the-Cabinet-15-August-20180816-2202.aspx
- Tareq Y. Ismael, and Glenn E. Perry. (2013). The international relations of the contemporary Middle East: subordination and beyond. London and New York: Routledge.