Hello again, my readers!
Now that the religious holidays are over, I have decided to put my monthly large post up today. As noted in the title, I will be explaining my views on the widely known Israel-Palestine debate. It is a very controversial topic (at least around here it is), and therefore requires special attention. This week's quote comes from the novel A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess, a wonderful book about a world dominated by youth crime where a character known as Alex is taken into a "reform" program. I won't say more, but it has an amazing language scheme, and is well worth anyone's time. To avoid trouble, I should note that it is a very mature book, and nobody of young age should be anywhere near it. And that is all I have to say on that.
To start with, we need to examine the very origins of the debate before I go further on how I feel about it. I view the problems as starting in the 20th century, and coming into focus through the two world wars and the time between them. During the First World War, anti-Semitic treatment of Jews by Axis powers became apparent, as well as by some Allied and neutral powers (http://www.jewishhistory.org/world-war-i-and-the-jews/). While barely noticed then, taken into context this was the beginning of the proposed need for a safe Jewish homeland. Between the wars, most of my readers should know the world went to hell. The 1920s may have been nice for America, but not for everyone else. Nothing got better for global populations when the US economy tanked. As huge pressures rode on multiple societies to find solutions to the economic crises, an overwhelmingly right-winged authoritarian response took place. While the US chose to elect a left-winged leader four times who rode on the principle of fixing the laissez-faire structure of the economy to blame for the crisis, the rest of the world wasn't so lucky. We must remember that these were desperate times, and that other places had it even worse than us. Many countries chose to blame groups of people rather than accept that their systems, which they had designed, may have had some fault to them. And after World War 1, some places had the deck stacked in favor of radicalism anyway; the Treaty of Versailles punished Germany harshly for the war, putting resentment in place of each dollar paid (deutschmarks, in this case). At this point, anti-Semitism was already a lurking force, so blaming Jews was no problem in central Europe. While not as rampant in Italy, after a fascist leader rose to power and brought down the Weimar Republic (Hitler, duh), the propaganda sprang up all over the place, with little internal opposition that had any power. While Hirohito Japan didn't have this problem, they also had no Jews, and didn't do anything about the Holocaust. After World War 2 ended, 6 million Jews had died, approximately 60 to 65 percent of all Jews at the time (http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/holocaust.htm).
And here is where the Palestinian place comes into play. While most people concern themselves with the amount of Jews dead, a larger total estimate of Muslims was killed. While not as huge percentage-wise, it is a significant point. Both religions suffered harshly in the war. When it was over, it became increasingly obvious to world powers that in order for Jews to even survive in this world, they needed to have some country to call their homeland and someplace to be safe. After the UN was formed, the organization gave the UK a Middle East mandate to occupy much of the region for a few years until everything was stabilized and ready for the formation of states. And in 1948, both Israel and Palestine were formed. It was believed that the division of lands would suit both peoples and allow for a long-awaited peace that the world had lacked for decades. The world got no such peace. Upon creation of the two states, Palestine and other Middle Eastern countries rejected the right for a Jewish state to exist, and shortly afterward small attacks on Israel began.
World powers were shocked. They had assumed the two religious groups would get along at least with tolerance (at this point, most anti-Semitism came from Christians and/or Europeans). They assumed this hatred of the Jews as the main sticking point for the new problem. While certainly not the main root of the problem, it is undeniable that hatred exists on both sides and drives the struggles along. As remaining British-mandate countries gained independence, most sided with Palestine strongly on the issue. The UK and US swore to protect the tiny state of Israel and its denizens from attacks, with America providing the brunt of weaponry and economic support to the resource-dry country. Palestine didn't react well, to say the least. At this point, small numbers began the practice of Jihad upon Israel, a well known practice in modern society. The push for liquidation of Israel continued to build until the Arab-Israeli War in 1967, known commonly as the Six Day War. Egypt, Syria, and Jordan formed a military alliance and launched attacks on Israel in the hopes of "liberating" Palestinians and destroying the country altogether. Other countries of the Middle East declared support for the aggressors. What follows is the reason this debate still exists. During the war, Israel had pushed into Gaza and the West Bank against enemy troops, both for defensive and offensive reasons. When the war ended, the occupation didn't.
Arab nations were infuriated. Not only had the effort to wipe Israel out failed, but now Palestine appeared to no longer exist. It was undeniable that the problems had only just begun, and that the situation was more serious now than ever. Things improved slightly when Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip in 2005, but the issue remains. The two sides are currently as follows: the "pro-Israel" side, which advocates an eventual creation of a Palestinian state, but not at the current time for various reasons. Extremists here often call for a permanent Israeli state that envelops Gaza and the West Bank, as well as its current territory. The other side, the "pro-Palestine" side, calls for an immediate creation of a democratic Palestinian state in wake of decades of poor existence. Extremists here still call for the end to Israel and the takeover of lands by Palestinians. And now, what you all have waited for, my side.
In an earlier post, I noted that I am pro-Israel. To be more specific, I do believe that a Palestinian state must be created due to the conditions endured by its people. I see a need for a country named Palestine if there is ever to be long-lasting peace in the region. And currently, I am fine with the PA (Palestinian Authority) leadership in the West Bank. The reason I don't see a Palestinian state rising soon is due to Hamas. As is well known, Hamas is a militant political faction which won majority power in the Gaza strip during elections in 2005 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4214375.stm). Hamas is also known for being the main source of suicide bombers towards Israel, along with being hard-lined towards the very country at certain times, generally when pressured. While it may have support there, I fear the omen they bring with them. Were Palestine to become a state, both leadership from the West Bank and Gaza would take over the new country. And with a faction that bears the brunt of current attacks on Israel in a true leadership role, the hope for peace would be slim. It's hard to know exactly what would happen due to speculation, but I have fear about the worst. In a good scenario, Palestinian leaders would hold true to peace between the two countries and the world could move on from one of its most tantalizing issues. On the other hand, upon independence Palestine could also declare war on Israel, receiving support from Arab allies and others. The US and some other powers like the UK would side with Israel, forming another horrible war in the Middle East this world really can't handle. Things could get progressively worse from there. While racial and religious hatred would once again brew between the two original combatants, the war could bring tensions between the US and its adversaries to surface, possibly leading to a third world war. While this is not my main fear, I am a pacifist, and any war at all is unfavorable to me.
While I know most people would say it is a bad thing to live in fear, it is something that drives my opinion, at least in this issue (and rarely in others). Until I see better prospects in Gaza leadership, I cannot endorse the creation of Palestine due to trepidation over war. The last thing I want to hear about these days is that wholesale military efforts are being taken between Palestine and Israel. Believe me; I want nothing more than peace. And the day Hamas loses majority, you can count me pro-Palestine. However, until that day comes I will favor those who oppose immediate Palestinian independence. And while I don't always agree with the arguments my peers make for my side, I have little choice until the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip put a less militant, more negotiable party into strength. As such, this is my view of the issue.
That is all for this week, and I hope I have given a comprehensive analysis that fulfills all of what my readers desired from me on this topic. If you feel that you have a question, comment, et cetera you can leave it in the comments here. I also have a Facebook, an email (zerospintop@live.com), and a twitter if you would prefer those modes of communication instead. This is SuperJew McLovin signing off, and Happy New Year!
No comments:
Post a Comment