David Newman and Ghazi Falah's article "Bridging the Gap: Palestinian and Israeli discourses on autonomy and statehood" helped clarify the history of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict for me. Israel's power, as a nation-state, over Palestinians, who make up a stateless nation, has weakened due to the end of the Cold War and increasing demand by world superpowers, such as Norway and Egypt, for the acknowledgment of Palestinian interests, which have been formulated by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). At the same time, the interests of Palestine have gone from a demand for the return of the entire Israeli territory (former Palestine) to the acceptance of only part of this territory.
As the PLO has become willing to acknowledge the state of Israel, their demands have in turn been given more attention by world powers, and thereby Israel (which is looking out for its evolving global economic interests). It seems that in order to advance and end the violence, Palestinians must forget the painful past and the Israeli invasion and takeover of Palestine is seen as water under the bridge. This is, if the the Palestinians are given a say at all. Only after the Madrid conference in 1990 were Palestinians involved in the territorial decision making process. Israel, faced with pressure by the new, post-Gulf War American commitment to end the conflict, was ready to acknowledge the PLO. This willingness of Israel to negotiate rather than enforce will be key in Palestine's progress toward becoming a state again.
It seems that Palestinian history and human rights have fallen into a gap, created and misunderstood by Israel and other superpowers whose colonial interests dictate the final territorial and political outcome. Letting Palestinians enter the playing field has been a consequence of external economic affairs, not compassion. Also, their entrance into the discussion of their future does not guarantee that their interests will be realized, especially while Israel continues to dominate militarily, territorially, and politically.
Great map! I find it interesting and appalling that for the longest time Israel did not consider Palestine a "state" problem but rather a refugee problem. My next question however, is where are we now? What has happened since 1996 that has continued the prevention of peace or the creation of the state of Palestine?
ReplyDeleteI was thinking exactly what you wrote about Israel only acknowledging Palestine as a result of external pressures. The article made me feel like Israel doesn't really want to deal with the Palestinians, considers them vastly inferior, and wants to get rid of the "problem" as long as it doesn't involve giving Palestine any power.
ReplyDeleteI agree 100%! It seems like all of Israel's agreements for peace negotiations are mere lip service. The continuous bombardment of Israeli settlers within Palestinian territory offers Israel a claim to the land while simultaneously denouncing any power that they afford to Israel. If territorial negotiations are never upheld on Israel's behalf, where will peace come from?
ReplyDelete