Straightforward: The Simplicity of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

BY HENRY CLEMENTS

The American media tend to portray the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as hugely complicated and mired in controversy.  The situation is deadlocked, we are told, and no one agrees on the components of a final settlement. In reality, beyond U.S. borders, there exists hardly any disagreement at all. Indeed, there is close to unanimous international agreement on all the conflict’s major issues.

Since 1974 the United Nations General Assembly has voted annually on a series of resolutions concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And, every year, the resolutions pass with the vast majority of nations voting in favor of a two-state solution, and the extreme minority voting in opposition. The teams don’t change. Virtually the entire world votes in favor of these resolutions, while Israel, the United States and a handful of others protest. Let’s look at the major issues and voting records:

Borders: In the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, Israel captured the Gaza Strip and Sinai (then under Egyptian control), East Jerusalem and the West Bank (Jordanian control), and the Golan Heights (Syrian control). With the exception of the Sinai, returned to Egypt in the 1979 peace treaty, these territories have since been under Israeli occupation. The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 forbids the acquisition of territory by war, and the international community overwhelmingly believes that a resolution to the conflict requires an Israeli withdrawal to its pre-1967 borders. In 2012, at the U.N. General Assembly, fully 163 member states voted to pass a resolution reaffirming the necessity of a two-state solution within these borders. Six member states voted in opposition: the United States, Israel, Canada, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau.

Jerusalem: Both Israelis and Palestinians claim this holy city as their respective nation’s capital. Since capturing East Jerusalem from Jordan during the 1967 war, Israel has claimed the united city as its capital and constructed a Berlinesque wall separating East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank. In 2012, at the U.N. General Assembly, 162 member states voted to pass a resolution condemning Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem, urging Israel to return control to the Palestinians. Seven member states voted in opposition: the United States, Israel, Canada, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, and Palau.

Refugees: During the 1948 Palestine War, 750,000 Palestinians were forcibly removed from their homes in what scholars now widely understand to have been an ethnic cleansing. United Nations Resolution 194, passed in 1948, resolved that uprooted Palestinians should be permitted to return to their homes. In 2012 at the U.N. General Assembly, 163 member states voted to pass a resolution stressing “the need for a just resolution of the problem of Palestine refugees in conformity with its resolution 194 of 11 December 1948.” Six member states voted in opposition: the United States, Israel, Canada, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau.

Settlements: Since the annexation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem during the 1967 war, Israel has carried out continued and systematic construction of Jewish settlements in these Occupied Palestinian Territories (O.P.T.). While Israel dismantled its settlements in the Gaza Strip in 2005, there remain approximately 500,000 Israeli settlers living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In 2012, at the U.N. General Assembly, 169 member states voted to pass a resolution reaffirming the illegality of Israeli settlements in the O.P.T. Six member states voted in opposition: the United States, Israel, Canada, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau.

The international consensus is clear: a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza neighboring an Israel within its pre-1967 borders. Jerusalem is to be divided, the settlements dismantled. A just solution to the refugee problem is to be found. If the international community agrees upon a solution, why has the Israeli-Palestinian conflict yet to be resolved?

First, this conflict is one of many that evoke the greatest shortcoming of international law – the lack of adequate mechanisms of enforcement. Second, throughout its history, Israel has skirted the international arena for conflict mediation, preferring bilateral negotiations with individual Arab states. Indeed, Israel has found itself better able to achieve its goals when dealing directly with the weak Palestinians. The current negotiations are no exception.

I am pessimistic about peace talks. As long as Israel can exclude external actors from negotiations with Palestine, they will prefer the status quo to peace, leaving the conflict unresolved while continuing to grab Palestinian land with impunity. Recently, the European Union enacted a ban on economic dealings between Israeli settlements and the EU. This was the first time that the international community turned its long held opposition to Israeli policy in occupied Palestine into concrete sanctions.  If the world wants to see an end to this bitter and protracted conflict, more actions like this are needed to bring Israel to the negotiating table in earnest.