The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a major problem in global peace discussions due to complicated historical, political, and cultural issues. It has influenced Middle Eastern politics, international relations, and human rights issues, and has implications for global security. The genocide began with the United Nations Partition Plan of 1947, which sought the formation of separate Jewish and Arab republics. The formation of the State of Israel in 1948 was a watershed moment, sparking the first Arab-Israeli conflict. It escalated with the 1967 Six-Day War, during which Israel considerably increased its geographical authority.
The Palestinian uprisings (Intifadas), the Oslo Accords, Hamas’ emergence, and recurring military engagements have all had a role in shaping the conflict’s trajectory throughout the years.
The Palestinian uprisings (Intifadas), the Oslo Accords, Hamas’ emergence, and recurring military engagements have all had a role in shaping the conflict’s trajectory throughout the years. Israel’s military victories resulted in territorial expansion and the displacement of large segments of the Palestinian population, resulting in a protracted humanitarian and political disaster.
Tracing the roots of Israel’s occupation of Palestine
Zionism is a Jewish nationalist movement that promotes the establishment of a homeland in Palestine, an area that was already home to a considerable Palestinian Arab population. This movement originated in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, laying the groundwork for the historical context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The early 20th century saw a notable increase in Jewish immigration to Palestine, influenced by Zionist objectives and the ongoing persecution of Jews in Europe, which subsequently led to heightened tensions between the two communities.
This aligned with the rise of Arab nationalism, as both factions pursued self-determination within the same geographic region. ‘One side has a state, the other one does not,’ said Dr. Serpil Atamaz, professor in the Department of History and Director of the Middle East and Islamic Studies Program at California State University, Sacramento while speaking to Abc10.
‘It’s not just about land, but it’s about having the right to self-determination. This is not a conflict between Jews and Muslims or Jews or Arabs. It doesn’t go back to the biblical times or the Old Testament at all. This is a relatively modern conflict.’ Dr. Serpil says. In 1947, the United Nations partition plan was an attempt to resolve the growing conflict.
The Jewish community accepted the partition, but the Arab community rejected it, leading to violent clashes. After the British left Palestine in 1948, the Jewish community declared the establishment of the State of Israel. Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, all nearby Arab states, launched an attack on Israel, sparking the first Arab-Israeli war. Israel won the conflict, forcing around 750,000 Palestinians to flee their homes. This event is known as known as the Nakba in Palestinian history. Tensions between Israel and its Arab neighbours kept mounting in the next decades.
The two-state solution for Israel and Palestine: a famework for peace?
For decades, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has lasted with several ideas meant to be resolved among which the two-state solution has been the most mentioned. The two-state solution calls for two sovereign countries—Israel, a Jewish state, and Palestine—to live side by side in peace. Incorporating negotiated land swaps to accommodate settlements and demographic changes, the plan mostly follows pre-1967 boundaries for borders. Jerusalem may be governed internationally or as a shared or split capital, East Jerusalem assigned to Palestine and West Jerusalem to Israel. Options for addressing the situation of Palestinian refugees encompass compensation, restricted return, or resettlement, aimed at resolving their displacement resulting from the conflicts of 1948 and 1967.
Options for addressing the situation of Palestinian refugees encompass compensation, restricted return, or resettlement, aimed at resolving their displacement resulting from the conflicts of 1948 and 1967.
Security agreements would encompass demilitarisation and the possibility of international monitoring to guarantee peace, whereas mutual recognition would involve the acknowledgement of Palestine as a sovereign state and the affirmation of Israel as a Jewish state.
Background of the two-state solution
Beginning with the United Nations Partition Plan of 1947, most specifically UN General Assembly Resolution 181, the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue emerged. Jerusalem was declared an international metropolis, this resolution suggested separating Palestine’s British Mandate into autonomous Jewish and Arab republics. Lewin and Sultany highlighted in their research papers that the proposal was a reaction to the rising tensions between Jewish and Arab populations in Palestine, heightened by the flood of Jewish immigrants escaping persecution in Europe and the ambitions of Arab nationalism.
Aiming to solve the competing national ambitions of both Jews and Arabs in the area, the partition plan stood as the first official international proposal for a two-state solution. Adoption of a partition proposal by the UN on November 29, 1947, with a vote of 33 in favour, 13 against, and 10 abstentions. Though Jews made up around one-third of the population at the time, the plan defined borders for the projected Jewish and Arab governments, assigning over 55% of the area to the Jewish state and 45% to the Arab state.
The rejection of the proposal by Arab governments and Palestinian leaders prepared the ground for the later conflict that broke out in May 1948 when the State of Israel was declared. Following the UN’s partition plan, Israel’s formation in 1948 resulted in the uprooting of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, a calamity known as the Nakba, which still resonates in Palestinian collective memory as mentioned by Ashraf in his research.
An important attempt at diplomatic peace-building, the 1990s Oslo Accords, signalled major turning points in the development of the two-state solution. Declaring the Palestinian Authority and offering a framework for future debates on major concerns such as borders, immigration, and Jerusalem’s status. Still, another significant turning point in the peace process was the 2000 Camp David Summit, called under U.S. President Bill Clinton. The conference sought to tackle unresolved final status issues from the Oslo Accords including borders, Jerusalem’s status, and Palestinian refugees. Eventually, though, the debates fell apart and the Second Intifada—a period of more intense violence and disturbance—started.
Evaluating the two-state solution’s viability
‘The two-state solution remains the only viable path to achieve a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians, with Jerusalem serving as the capital of both states, in line with international law and UN resolution,’ UN Secretary-General António Guterres said addressing the annual session of the Committee on the “Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People.” Widely supported in international diplomacy, the two-state solution is a workable model for peace allowing both Israelis and Palestinians to exercise self-determination inside their own countries.
Widely supported in international diplomacy, the two-state solution is a workable model for peace allowing both Israelis and Palestinians to exercise self-determination inside their own countries.
It fits international law and provides a logical approach to solving basic issues like borders, security, refugees, and Jerusalem’s position. Establishing conditions for cooperation and thereby reducing the likelihood of conflict would help to unleash economic growth and regional stability as well as support long-term peace.
‘The resolution to the Palestine issue lies in a comprehensive, humanistic and just approach that addresses the core concerns of both countries- Palestinians and Israelis, fostering peace, security, and dignity for all. This involves the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel (a two-state solution) based on pre-1967 borders, with mutually agreed land swaps to accommodate, demographic realities, and East Jerusalem as the common or separate capital of both states,’ says Dr. Hakim Singh, Assistant Professor, Lovely Professional University, Punjab while talking to FII.
‘A sustainable resolution must include the recognition of Palestinian refugees’ rights, possibly through compensation, resettlement, or limited return, alongside robust security guarantees for human security. International efforts must facilitate talks emphasizing human rights, ending slavery, and neo-imperialistic and colonialist policies or behaviour,’ he adds.
The two-state solution, however, faces several challenges that undermine its viability. The spread of Israeli colonies in the West Bank has split Palestinian land, therefore making a contiguous Palestinian state more difficult to create. Efforts are further complicated by the siege of Gaza and the terrible humanitarian crisis there as well as by strong political differences between Palestinian groups such as Hamas and Fatah.
Additionally, the unresolved issue of the Palestinian right of return and the contested status of Jerusalem remain major obstacles. Geopolitical shifts, such as the normalisation of Israel’s relations with some Arab countries under the Abraham Accords, have side-lined the Palestinian issue. At the same time, failed negotiations and the absence of trust between the two parties have fostered scepticism about the solution’s feasibility.
At the same time, failed negotiations and the absence of trust between the two parties have fostered scepticism about the solution’s feasibility.
As per a published article in the Centre for International Relations and Sustainable Development by Jean-Daniel Ruch, ‘The two-state solution is challenging due to significant obstacles. The presence of over 700,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem makes it politically unfeasible for Israel to withdraw from these territories. Complicating the matter even more in Israeli politics is settler violence and a turn towards the far-right. Israel’s security issues, especially about Iran, also help to explain its resistance to making territory concessions. From the Palestinian perspective, Hamas’s denial of recognition of Israel and its alliance with the Axis of Resistance exacerbates the deadlock and complicates peace talks‘.
References:
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2018/07/israeli-palestinian-peacemaking/camp-david-approach-2000
https://www.annefrank.org/en/topics/antisemitism/are-all-jews-zionists
https://www.hoover.org/research/conflicts-religious-and-secular
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/90717?ln=en&v=pdf
https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/israeli-palestinian-conflict#Background-0
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/arab-israeli-war-1967
https://embassies.gov.il/MFA/AboutIsrael/Maps/Pages/1947%20UN%20Partition%20Plan.aspx
Sultany, N. (2017). The legal structures of subordination. Israel and Its Palestinian Citizens, 191-237. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107045316.008
Lewin, E. (2016). The inevitable dead end of the arab-israeli conflict. Cogent Social Sciences, 2(1), 1227294. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2016.1227294
Ashraf, M. and Baqi, A. (2023). Analyzing the israel-palestine conflicts: assessing the impact and effectiveness of the involvement of islamic countries. Regional Lens, 2(1), 40-49. https://doi.org/10.62997/rl.2023a.25513
https://press.un.org/en/2024/sc15569.doc.htm
https://www.un.org/unispal/about-the-nakba
https://remix.aljazeera.com/aje/PalestineRemix/intifada.html
