Arab-israeli Conflict Analysis Essay Example

acceptable, it can hinder efforts to deter such actions. This is particularly evident in attacks like the bombings of refugee camps and September 11th, where objectives are prioritized over the impact on others, making it difficult to discourage terrorism. To accomplish their goals, Arabs and Israelis have resorted to forceful measures such as using missiles to target Hamas militants.

Despite multiple efforts, including the 1978 treaty and Oslo Accord, peace remains elusive in the Middle East. This has led some individuals to resort to violent means to accomplish their objectives. Favorable conditions for potential Israeli-Arab harmony emerged during the 1990s due to factors such as Israel's political party, weakened USSR power, international criticism, global economics and the Gulf War.

Several actions were taken to promote peace in different ways, including the Gulf War. This war played a crucial part in tipping the balance of power towards America, which enabled them to prevent Israel from attacking Arab countries. Iraq's attempt to start a major conflict by invading Israeli territory was met with intervention from America, who managed to persuade Israel not to retaliate and thus avoid war, establishing a peaceful atmosphere.

The Gulf War demonstrated how America's influence could potentially prevent future conflicts, particularly in regards to Israel's attacks on Arab nations. As the leading superpower and main supporter of both Israel and moderate Arab states, being on America's bad side would result in a loss of resources for either side.

The key to achieving peace is America's capacity to sway Arabs and Israelis. Additionally, Yitzhak Rabin-led Labour Party holds significant importance in driving efforts towards peace.

Yitzhak's status as a patriotic figure allowed him to effectively negotiate peace,

despite not being universally adored. His backing provided him the flexibility to make compromises in order to achieve his goals. Even though he was tragically assassinated, the Labour Party has continued to embrace his legacy.

Despite facing international criticism for the violence, the Labour Party in power holds significant sway in the push for peace. To maintain popularity and stay in power, they must prioritize stopping the violence and striving for peace. It is essential for everyone to support this effort, as peace is the obvious solution to the ongoing conflict.

The public has been critical of recent events, such as the bombings of three American cars in transit and the Hamas group, as seen in the sources for question one. Additionally, on October 22nd, it was noted that Indonesia and Malaysia, which are Far East countries, hold a biased view towards America.

According to their perspective, Muslims and Palestinians believe that America has a bias against them. To effectively wield their influence, America must work towards altering this perception. This is tied to their ability to exert power, as America needs to establish a favorable reputation among all groups. Without the respect of Muslims in particular, they cannot leverage their capabilities. The decrease of the USSR additionally creates an impetus for peace. The association between the decline of the USSR and the ascent of America is that prior to this shift, each side had a different superpower supporting them.

Russia, formerly known as the USSR, lacked the power to compete with the USA and thus didn't possess an equivalent level of influence. The absence of a challenger now grants America even greater influence as it serves

as the financial backer for both parties. With the exclusion of the USSR, achieving peace should become easier. Unfortunately, Israel's economy suffers significantly from its excessive expenditure on defense and military measures.

This may not appear to directly contribute to peace, but if warring parties understand the detrimental impact they are causing on their economy, they may reduce military spending, leading to less fighting and reduced need for military funding. As Israel's current state is resulting in a significant loss of income from tourism, redirecting funds from military spending towards improving access to clean water could greatly benefit the population.

Although the Road Map (April 2003) and Oslo Accord (1993) were intended to bring about peace, they have not been successful due to a number of hurdles. The main obstacles that led to their failure include the occupied territories, refugees, extremists from both sides, as well as the role played by political leaders. Israel's continued occupation of Gaza, West Bank, Golan Heights and Sinai along with unresolved refugee crisis have remained persistent issues that hindered the implementation of these agreements.

Despite attempts at compromise through agreements, the desire of both Arabs and Palestinians to reclaim their land conflicts with United Nations resolution 242, which mandates Israel's withdrawal from occupied territories. For Palestinians, this resolution forms the basis of their claim to the land, while Jews view it as the Promised Land containing the only remaining Temple and Zion City of God. With steadfast claims on both sides, there seems to be little chance for enforcement or further concessions.

To achieve successful agreements, it is vital to compromise on the matter of refugees settling in territories occupied since 1948. The

number of refugees has increased significantly over time, with Gaza seeing an increase from 190,000 to 500,000 and the West Bank from 280,000 to 800,000 by the year 1988. Nevertheless, not providing citizenship for these refugees results in complications.

Despite some refugees having found settlement since 1948, others decline citizenship due to the implication that they accept the occupied territories as not belonging to them. This connection between refugees, settlers, and the occupied territories is evident as recognizing Israel as a state and becoming integrated into it would be interpreted as surrendering. Consequently, remaining refugees is viewed as a means of circumventing this admission of defeat. The outcome has led to an impasse where neither Palestinians nor Israelis are willing to relinquish control over the occupied territories.

It is evident that the Oslo Accord and the Road Map will not be accepted due to the major controversy surrounding the occupied territories, refugees, and settlers. Extremists are a significant obstacle for any agreements. They are uncompromising and will stop at nothing to have things their way, including preventing compromise. This is particularly evident with regards to the occupied territories, as extremist groups such as Islamic Jihad, Hamas and Isbola are opposed to any form of compromise. Moreover, these groups cause chaos and come from refugee camps.

Refugee camps have become fertile grounds for terrorists as bombings lead the inhabitants to seek revenge and new extremists are born. The building of a wall by the Likud political party between Israelis and Palestinians is an extreme action that only widens the divide and does not foster peace. The wall divides the land meant for the Palestinians, making any potential agreements or

peace unattainable.

Palestinian farmers are restricted from accessing crucial water resources by the wall, which also serves as a painful reminder of the Warsaw Ghetto's confinement of Jewish residents during WW2. These actions do not aid in peace efforts. Furthermore, Israelis feel vulnerable and insecure due to recent occurrences such as targeted killings of Palestinian militants and a 2002 suicide bombing at a Passover celebration that resulted in the loss of 29 Jewish lives. This heightened sense of insecurity makes it improbable for Israel to give up control over occupied territories.

The return of occupied territories can only be considered once a sense of security is established, as implementing peace agreements such as the Oslo Accord and Road Map becomes impossible without it. Political leaders have an important role in promoting peace, but parties like the Likud hinder rather than facilitate it. Ariel Sharon, leader of the Likud Party and former commander of Israeli invasion forces, is widely distrusted due to his encouragement of the slaughter of numerous Palestinian women and children in Sabra outside Beirut in Lebanon.

Receiving the moniker "The Butcher of Beirut" is not conducive to achieving peace. Individuals such as Ariel Sharon who take actions that hinder peace make attaining it and implementing the Oslo Accord and the Road Map challenging. These circumstances clearly demonstrate that security makes it impossible to implement the Oslo Accord and the Road Map. If Israel feels insecure, reaching an agreement will be unattainable, as evidenced by these factors.