This conflict was known as the Arab-Israeli conflict. The main issues were; border disputes, security, the control of Jerusalem, recognition as well as Palestinian freedom of movement. These issues are what spear headed the intensifying of the conflict thus it became as part of day to day activity between the two states. The Zionists believed that Palestine was their land as according to them it was part of their historic homeland- Land of Israel. The Arabs however already inhabited the place and so there was a misunderstanding between two races.
Israel had the military might and international support to control this region (see appendix c). Under Yasser Arafat the country was brought together as he declared Palestine to be a State (Al Jazeera 2009). He worked to negotiate peace, yet his rule was marred with corruption and discrimination. So while he worked to move Palestine forward as a State there was resistance from the internatio... ... middle of paper ... ...e potential to lower the unemployment rate by increasing demand. Additionally, there is an advantage to making trade agreements with regionally as it will allow Palestine to be seen as an independent State (Botta and Vaggi 2012, 226).
Israel-Palestine Conflict: Achieving a Two-State Solution This paper will investigate the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians and seek to find the most effective way of solving this conflict. Although these groups have religious difference, it is not the main source of the conflict. The conflict between Israel and Palestine is over land this conflict is less than a century old, as the years past the conflict has only become more complicated and more hostile. A two state solution would be the best way to achieve freedom for the Palestinian people and ensure that each country would have its own state. This conflict of land ownership between The Palestinians and The Jews started with the collapsing of the Ottoman Empire and the many conflicting deals and agreements that the western power made with the Israelis and the Arab people.
These issues are what guided the intensifying conflict therefore it became part of day to day activity between the two states. The Zionists believed that Palestine was their land and according to... ... middle of paper ... ... Judea and Samaria. It will happen by the support of Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Though intense considering in academic circles, this approach has remained outside of official efforts to resolve the conflict as well as main analysis, where it is eclipsed by the one-state solution. The one-state solution was most recently agreed upon by the government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority at the November 2007 Annapolis Conference and remains the main basis for negotiations given by the administration of U.S. president Barack Obama.
Proceeding from a simplistic perception of regional stability, Washington utilized the surrogate strategy to control the outcomes of regional interactions in the Middle East and chose Israel to play the role of regional surrogate. But Israel, in many cases, instead of maintaining regional stability on behalf of the US, served its own interests which were not always consistent with US interest in regional stability. The Israeli violations, however, were either condoned or even approved by the US administrations. These reactions comprised what this chapter addressed as a pro-Israel model of intervention. The pro-Israel intervention represented the US foreign policy reaction when the violation to regional stability was committed by Israel.
The thesis of this article is an examination of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and both the things that have prevented it from being resolved as well as potential solutions or measures directed at establishing peace. The Author’s major arguments in this article start with Israel and how they feel that they have a Biblical right to occupy the areas of the West Bank. The author then goes on to discuss how the Palestinians also feel that they have a right to this land as a birthright because they have occupied this land over time as their own. After discussing why both sides feel as if they deserve to call the land in conflict their own he discusses neither side is happy with what is going on. In this section he discusses how the Israelis face three choices, none of which are beneficial in one way or another.
The Haganah, the Irgun, and the Lehi were different Zionist military underground movements that were active during the duration of the British mandate. Their goal was to establish an independent Jewish state in Palestine. These movements fought hard and used particular strategies in order to reach their goal. However, many of the strategies they used to deal with the British and the Arabs during the period of the mandate are frowned upon by some and even viewed as acts of terror. In my opinion, the movements were definitely effective in attaining their goal of establishing an independent Jewish state as Israel currently exists; the methods the movements used to reach their goal can be viewed as immoral at first, but some of the movements' actions were justified whereas others were not.
In the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this thesis on the salience of norms matters in understanding why Palestinian people feel the right to a state in the first place. Dowty ties this sentiment to norms accepting Arab Nationalism, which argues the right to a Palestinian state, and a global push following the World War to recognize self-determination (56, 58-59). With these international sentiments, Palestine had tools with which to justify their own state. Beyond that, they were likely emboldened by this sentiment. All together, these three factors of perception, history, and norms must be viewed in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to fully understand each sides’ motives and decisions.
“Palestinians do not control their own fate but instead live under the power of other states” (82, Yambert). The one state that directly controls the fate of Palestinians in the occupied territories is Israel and for the Palestinians who do not reside in Israel, other governments control them. The history of Palestine and how Israel came into existence is essential to understand in order to break down the present day conflict. The most dominant and important player in the Palestinian – Israeli conflict has been the United States of America, which has completely shaped the predicament in order to fulfill its interests. Before delving into the role of the United States, it is essential to go back in time and familiarize with the history of Palestine and Israel.
The British could not control their anger and sought for help from the United Nations. Furthermore, the British were told that one part of the country would be given to the Arabs and the other part to the Jews with the help of the UN General Assembly Resolution 181. The UN General Assembly Resolution 181 was one of the most significant milestones in the history of the struggles between both countries. It was a baseline use... ... middle of paper ... ...tine was considered to be more of a threat to the United States, and other possible countries who disagree with the Palestinian people than the Israeli people. There was also a strong hope for regional stability and peace in Israel (“History of Palestine”).