Nature of Arab – Israeli Conflict, its Intractability and Prescriptions for Resolution (Term Paper Sample)

Nature of Arab – Israeli Conflict, its Intractability and Prescriptions for Resolution Introduction Israel's relationship with the Arab nations presents a situation of protracted conflict. Many reasons have been put across on why this conflict seems to be persistent. Literature on the historical roots and progress of the conflict focuses more on the building of antagonistic and inflexible identities as a core motivating factor fueling the conflict and deterring any substantial progress towards peace. Certain issues that are seen as both a constant impediment to peace and a driving force behind the conflict include, among others, the uncompromising status of Jerusalem, the right of return for Palestinian refugees, the independence and security of each country, the continuing redefinition of boundaries and the expansion of Israeli settlements. In the case of the on-going Israeli - Palestine dispute, the relevant literature suggests that identity dynamics and characteristics could be a key barrier to effective peace negotiations. While the identity construction can be applied to individuals, it is just as important to understand it through the viewpoint of national identity construction, since this has played a pivotal role in hindering lasting peace. Additionally, it is important to evaluate why repeated attempts at peace have failed. While concerted efforts have been made towards peace, no peace negotiations have resulted in long-term, lasting peace, for several reasons, including among others the influence by external actors and regional and international interests. The main and interrelated themes of this paper are the contrasting identities asserted in relation to the ongoing conflict by Israel and Palestine, and the recognition of a permanent Palestinian statehood. Of particular interest is how these differing constructions of identity contribute to the intractability of the conflict and an analysis of the failed attempts at peace and a prescription towards a sustainable outcome. The question of identity and identity creation is viewed mainly as a social phenomenon. Researchers on identity politics note that identity is generally understood to be created by encounters with or against other people and communities. By social interactions, attitudes, norms are internalized. It is argued that this allows individuals to obtain physical and psychological security[Brown, R. (2000). Social Identity Theory: past achievements, current problems and future challenges. European Journal of Social Psychology 30 (6), pp. 745-778.] The Israeli Palestinian Conflict Background and historical overviewFor more than a century now, the Israeli-Palestinian dispute has been going on. It is, in essence, a conflict identified by the conflicting desires of two identity groups to create national identities in a disputed territory . It is then a nationalist struggle rooted in the fight to create Palestinian nationalism and a Jewish national identity over the right to self-determination, statehood and justice, if we are to approach the conflict in this way.[Kelman, H. (1999). The interdependence of Israeli and Palestinian national identities: The role ofthe Other in existential conflicts. Journal of Social Issues 55(3), pp. 581-600.] The roots of the current conflict can be mapped back to the late nineteenth century and the emergence of Zionism, a political ideology founded on the basis of religious doctrine. Zionism advocated the creation of a Jewish state in Israel on the basis of a religious narrative. Zionism today advocates the establishment and defense of a Jewish national identity within the State of Israel through Israeli citizenship. The creation of a Palestinian statehood is in sharp contrast to this, as current conceptions of Palestinian identity have been greatly influenced by the emergence of Arab nationalism. Notions of Arab nationalism began in the late 19th century, largely influenced by the Ottoman era. Arab states in the region wanted to promote their autonomy, and concepts of self-determination and the creation of a unique identity began to gain traction in order to achieve this. In fact, pan-Arab ideologies during this period dominated the discourse for creating a Palestinian identity. The concepts of Palestinian nationalism in recent decades have been associated with common Western conceptions of national identity and the creation of an independent Palestinian state.[Kelman, H. (2005). Interactive problem solving in the Israeli-Palestinian case: Past contributionsand present challenges. In Fisher, R. (ed). Paving the way: Contributions of interactive conflictresolution to peacemaking. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books] [Muslih, M. (1987). Arab politics and the rise of Palestinian nationalism. Journal of Palestine Studies16(4), pp. 77-94.] In 1917 the Jewish Zionist movement had gained the formal support of the British government for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This was documented as the Balfour Declaration and in 1922 Palestine became a protectorate of Britain. It was during this time that waves of Jewish immigration (aliyah translated literally as "ascen”) into Palestine set in motion the intention to establish a Jewish homeland (and ultimately a Jewish state; the State of Israel) Israeli settlement expansion and the formation of social institutions was facilitated through the purchase and acquisition of land. The growing presence and entrenchment of Zionist Jews in Palestine was perceived as a threat by the existing Arab populations, who were looking to develop themselves as an Arab nation and construct a Palestinian identity. This is integral to our understanding of the conflict even in the contemporary context, because amongst large segments of Palestinian and Jewish communities, “an acceptance of the other identity would negate their own case and identity” . In this way, acknowledging the right for self-determination of the competing national identity would be an acceptance of that identity’s establishment of a nation state, which would consequently be weakening their own claims over the same land. Thus, the fundamental nature of the conflict is based on territorial claim for the establishment and survival of a national identity.[Ibid] [Bar-Tal, D and Salomon, G. (2006). Israeli-Jewish narratives of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:Evolvement, contents, functions and consequences. R. I. Rotberg (ed.), Israeli and Palestiniannarratives of conflict: History’s double helix. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 19 -46] [Ibid] The British mandate over Palestine came to an end in 1948. The United Nations General Assembly proposed a partition plan which sought to divide the land into both a Jewish and an Arab state. It championed the idea of a two-state solution, which was largely accepted by Zionist leadership. However, the Arab leadership rejected the partition plan because it was seen as a violation of the rights of the Palestinian majority with regards to the way in which the land was allocated. It was seen as being biased against the existing Palestinian population residing on the land.[Ibid] [Anon. (2003). Chapter Two: The plan of partition and the end of the British Mandate. The Question ofPalestine and the United Nations. Available: http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/palestine/ch2.pdf[Accessed 20 April 2016]] In May 1948, once the UN resolution was passed and British forces withdrew, Israel was declared an independent state; as a direct result of this, the region witnessed an escalation in conflict: the initial dispute between Israel and Palestine ultimately developed into an interstate war between neighboring Arab states and Israel. In July 1949, Israel and the neighboring Arab states signed the Armistice Agreement, which officially declared and demarcated the borders of the state of Israel. However, this agreement did not prove successful as the conflict persisted despite the agreement. During this time, two-thirds of the Palestinian population were displaced from their homes within the newly defined borders while others continued to reside in The West Bank and Gaza (which remained under Arab leadership) or gained Israeli citizenship within certain parts of Israel.[Ibid] [Ibid] The historical progression of the conflict is also largely defined and influenced by the 1967 Six Day War between Arab states in the region and Israel. Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza and effectively gained control over the two remaining Palestinian territories. This war is significant in terms of the historical context of the conflict, because it was during this event that Palestinians decided to regain control of their struggle for self-determination and the establishment of a Palestinian statehood. Prior to this, the conflict had been defined as a struggle by Arab states to maintain control of the region and avert Israel’s encroachment (Barak, 2005). Defining Israeli identity Israeli and Jewish identity has become intertwined with the politics of national identity. Domesticidentity politics has repeatedly been identified as a critical factor underlying the failures of the peaceprocess. The construction of an ethnically Jewish state as the basis for Israeli citizenship has placed an emphasis on Israel’s Jewish identity and constructed any non-Jewish political and national identities as a fundamental threat to the persistence of a Jewish Israeli state. Throughout history, Jewish populations have been persecuted, as a consequence of which the Jewish identity has been regarded as one constantly under threat and thus requiring protection. Informed by this, the Jewish Israeli identity is born out of the need for preservation, especially as it is located in the context of insecurity and a hostile geo-political environment. The presence of communities identifying themselves as anything other than Jewish and Israeli, such as Arabs for example, is deemed a threat to the desired demo...