Each group denied the existence over the other and so ensued the struggle over controlling the same territory. Although the Arab-Israeli Wars brought drastic changes to the Arab nations by dispelling the idea of Arab unity, it had the most significant effect on Israel , because it turned Israel into a powerful nation and a force to be reckoned with by the surrounding Arab nations in the Middle East. Before the war of 1967, Israel was a small territory surrounded by members of the Arab League who backed the destroyed country of Palestine. These Arab nations did not recognize Israel as a nation in the Middle East , because they did not believe that Zionism could be used as nationalist movement . They saw the Zionists as Europeans and members of the Western world who were not Arab and did not have attachment to the territory.
After the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, the control of Palestine shifted from Muslim to Western powers. Britain promised Jews and Zionists the land in Palestine in the form of the Balfour Declaration. However, at the same time, there were already Palestinians living in that land. Even today, there is no correct answer as to who should have rightfully acquired the land; however, the Palestinian Arabs should have cooperated when the Jews immigrated to the Palestine. There are plenty of facts which support both sides.
The shift from classical religious Zionism to modern Political Zionism was a result of several events, intellectual, political, and religious. As European nations expanded political rights and economic opportunities to Jews there were three reactions among the intellectual elites. Some argued to remain with drawn from European society, others argued to become fully integrated, and accordingly many argued for compartmentalization or simply put, a compromise between the two extremes, which makes up the precursor for Political Zionism (Tessler). Anti-Semitism in eastern Europe intensified the push for an independent Jewish nation. Within that context some writers, such as Theodor Herzl pushed Jewish immigration to Palestine to fulfill biblical prophecy.
It was controlled by Arab states, Nasser in Egypt in particular. Yet defeat in the 6-day war in 1967 saw change, with Israel gaining a lot of land, such as Golan Heights, and so it was a great turning point for the Palestinians. After this defeat it became much more important. These events led to the Palestinians rethinking their relationships with the wider Arab world. Fatah fighters alone resisted an attack at Karama in Jordan by Israelis, encouraging more recruits, and the Fatah soon became dominant in the PLO.
The middle east conflict has many aspects to it and is quite a complicated argument. However, steps have been made to reduce violence such as treaties being signed between Israel and Egypt as well as Jordan. Although this is a step in the right direction the Middle east conflict in my opinion is far from being resolved. As long as the Hamas is ruling Palestine I can’t see any peace being made between the two sides.
The Israelis are afraid that the Israel state as a Jewish state will be destroyed. The Palestinians fear that Palestine as a viable state will never be created. The lack of a solution is not due to the fact that there is an obstacle for one, but rather that there is an absence of one. Arafat failed to achieve a solution, so it is up to Abbas to try and do what Arafat was unable to. I agree with the argument presented in Wallerstein’s article.
This armistice didn't help the 700 000 Palestinian Arabs who became refugees as they were forced out of Israel. The war was overshadowed by the assassination of the UN ambassador Count Folke Bernadotte. I believe this course of action just added to the problems that were already apparent in the Middle East. The Jews may have been satisfied by the proclam... ... middle of paper ... ...these countries. This gave them the equipment to fight with where as before they may have only protested but not violently.
I believe that the Palestinians must be given their rights. I fully understand that Israel is extremely concerned about it’s safety as it is mostly surround by enemy’s however I do not believe that the oppression and ultimate control of the Palestinians will bring this safety they long for, but do the very opposite instead. Works Cited (1986). Holy bible. (NIV ed.).
The Arabs were becoming over populated by the Jews, and when the Arabs began to notice this they started to fight back against them. Which in my eyes, I agree with. No one group should be able to come in and take over a land. When people are asked today about the terrorism of Palestine, most people will know nothing about it; it has been swept under the rug like just another day in the world. A land without people for people with land was one of the early propaganda used slogans of the Israeli state.
Civil Palestinians’ anger had also lead to Intifada (1987) and Second Intifada(2000-) that started after the Oslo Accords in 1993. The Israeli army has to protect themselves by preventing these to happen which makes a lot of people die. Many world organizations have struggled to find the resolution for this conflict. The core (root) issues/problems The root of the conflict can be traced back to when Jewish stated Zionism in which they buy land to form their own country and Britain’s takeover of Palestinian from the ottoman Turks in World War I. Britain promise to give back Palestinian their land when they formed an organized government. But during the World War II the Holocaust killed a lot of Jewish and the world sympathize them.