The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Is There a Solution?

“You created this country so that the Jewish population could live in peace. Where are you now?”

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict reached new heights yesterday as Israeli ground forces with air support and artillery entered the Gaza strip following a series of  missiles launched into Israel by the militant Palestinian faction, Hamas.

The offensive is clouded in controversy as many civilians are killed including women and children. Also the alleged use of phosphorous and cluster bombs contradict International Law and have incited UN investigations into the humanitarian state of the Gaza Strip.

Why?

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an ongoing dispute between the state of Israel and the Palestinians. The hostility comes from the conflicting Arab and Jewish aspirations for the region. In 1947 the UN approved the move to split the region into two states; one Jewish, one Arab. However, the Palestinian Arab leaders who were also supported by the Arab League rejected the split and civil war broke out, resulting in the Israelis quickly gaining the upper hand and thus, on May 14 1948 declared its independence. However many Arab league countries refused to accept Israel’s sovereignty, notably Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, many of whom have stayed hostile to Israel to this very day. This was the start of a long and bloody conflict abundant in humanitarian and social issues that have been raised especially those due to the high level of civilian casualties sustained. 

Core issues

Jerusalem is hugely important to both the Israelis and the Palestinians; it is the epicentre of the Jewish-Arabian culture clash- a vast amount of tension and conflict culminates around who should have possession of this city. This is largely due to religion; Judaism, the major Jewish religion, mentions Jerusalem is in its texts and is seen as an important religious and historical setting, especially important to the ’Holy Land’.  However, Jerusalem is also mentioned in Islamic texts and consequently is seen as an important city for the Arabs, who are predominantly follow Islam. At the moment the city is divided, and both Israel and Palestine claim Jerusalem as the area for their intended seat of government.
Wealth is another important issue, Palestine is relatively poor, with its main export being primary goods, such as citrus. Conversely, Israel has strong economic ties with the west, and its main exports are computer software, military equipment and chemicals: all far more profitable exports.

Humanitarian situation

The humanitarian situation in Gaza is one that is very politically sensitive, and has affected the hearts and minds of people not only in the middle east, but also in the west where much of it contradicts international law and the UN, and in particular America are politically very involved. Of course, journalists are banned within the Gaza strip, but the BBC managed to speak to a palestinian civilian through an inside reporter: when questioned about his opinion on the attack 

“It is slaughter. The Israelis, they condemn Hamas for attacking their civilians, yet they themselves have been doing the same thing here but with more terrible and destructive weapons! How can this be just?  It does not matter whether the Israelis say they are only after Hamas Militants, they suspect everyone and anyone, and if their guns and bombs do not kill us, then we shall surely starve instead!  They have no right to be here, this is and was and shall forever be Palestinian land!” 

“this is no war- it is genocide. My family were not armed militants. They had never harmed an Israeli in their life, yet now they are dead.”

The critical humanitarian situation in Gaza has invoked Humanitarian groups to survey the situation; the main element of concern being the killing of civilians in the densely populated region. However, this brings about the question of what constitutes a civilian? According to International Law what constitutes a civilian is based simply upon distinction between “combatants” and “non-combatants”. Israel has stated that it is operating fully within Humanitarian law, yet the intense bombing of the Gaza strip (that is also claimed to have included the use of the banned chemical – ‘White’ Phosphorous) has caused Human rights groups to express their fear that Israel is stretching the boundaries.
The question over who is a civilian was first brought into International focus with the highly publicised bombing of police stations across Gaza, in particular the strike that killed 40 trainees who were on parade. Israeli intelligence say that the police force often link up with rocket squads, however, no details have been given about the meeting sites, or the targeted individuals. Human rights groups argue that the whole operation is legally flawed, because even if some police members did double as Hamas fighters, according to International law they can only legally be attacked when participating in military activities.

“You question US over what constitutes a civilian? I will tell you what constitutes a civilian: a civilian is an innocent Israeli dying from a Hamas or Hezbollah missile attack. We are NOT the aggressors. Think. You would do the same.”

“It is all very well for you to judge us, sitting in your comfy Western chairs in your spacious Western houses, without the daily threat of death and destruction, and the imminent news that yet more of our people have been murdered by the Arabs. We fight so that there may be peace.”

International Law

Many of the soldiers interviewed expressed a negative attitude towards international law, this poses the question as to how far can we trust and adhere to international law, and can it ever apply on a truly International basis. An argument against international law is that the worlds countries and cultures are so strikingly different that there can never be a completely global law, because whilst it may adhere to one countries politically and socially acceptable ’guidelines’ it is inevitable that it will be in conflict with another countries.

Should the United Nations ‘intrude’, and take sides?

As it is the UN who is responsible for much of the framework of International law, it would be their responsibility to intervene in Israel, if they find sufficient evidence to suggest that International law has been broken. However, some people are critical of the aims of the UN, and America in particular. America is an integrated part of the United Nations, and the recognition of the state of Israel was largely down to America and the west. America was keen to have an ally in the middle east, as it had no sphere of influence in that area, and saw Israel as a prime opportunity to expand its influence, thus being able to exploit the resources and trade available form the middle east. Israel could also effectively act as a Americas spy, giving information on the Arab countries that America and the west had limited intelligence on. Therefore, it is unlikely that America would intervene on the subject of international law against Israel, because of its close ties. Consequently, this leaves many of the Arab countries feeling ever more threatened by Israel, who to some of them appear to be Americas ‘watchdog’.

For now though, missiles are still being fired into Israel, Israeli bombs are still dropping in Gaza, and a solution to the conflict in which both sides unconditionally believe they are right has no foreseeable end.