THE ARAB ISRAELI CONFLICT

The US, EU, UN and Arab League as well as Israeli and Palestinian leaders themselves have all endorsed the idea that the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict should be resolved by way of a two-state outcome. Realisation hinges on certain conditions.

At the end of 2013, ECFR launched an annual "Two State Stress Test", which provides a comprehensive assessment of the key issues that would make or break a two-state outcome between Israel and Palestine. Developments across seven different areas are serving to strain or sustain a possible two-state outcome for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The TSST is based on an innovative methodology that allows policy makers to assess the progress towards and the regression away from the goal of a two-state solution. Here the summaries of the 2013 TSST including a summary of the key findings, an explanation of the TSST methodology, a factsheet and a series of maps and graphs.
The question of Jerusalem

 

Peace starts with Palestine’s UN membership | World Court says Israel must take steps to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza | The question of Jerusalem | This far and further? (following a 2-Days seminar from the Owada chair at Leiden University on the issue of reconciliation, between nations, cultures and individuals) | the Gaza war and the crisis of the greater Middle East: impact on US foreign policy and transatlantic relations (F. Gregory Gause, III) | The Israeli-Palestinian conflict: A way Out? | the escalating violence in the Gaza Strip and Israel | the Holy Land Confederation | the Middle East and the future of Israel/the critical process in building each and every institution | Peace projects | HISTORY OF MIDDLE EASTERN POLITICS | chronological summary

 

  Peace starts with Palestine’s UN membership

On May 10, all member states should vote to admit the State of Palestine as the 194th member of the United Nations.

By Jeffrey Sachs and Sybil Fares
8 May 2024

The Arab world has repeatedly declared its readiness to establish relations with Israel within the context of the two-state solution. This goes back to the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative and has been reiterated in the 2023 Arab-Islamic Extraordinary Summit. On May 16, leaders of the region will gather for the 33rd Arab League Summit, where yet another plea for peace and stability will likely be made.

The way to end the war and normalise relations in the Middle East is clear. Admit the State of Palestine to the UN, on the 1967 borders, with its capital in East Jerusalem and with control over the Muslim holy sites. Then, diplomatic relations will be established and mutual security of both Israel and Palestine will be assured. The vast majority of the world certainly agrees on the two-state solution as it is enshrined in international law and UN resolutions.

Today, 142 of the 193 countries officially recognise the State of Palestine, but the United States has so far blocked Palestine’s membership to the UN, where statehood really counts. Israel continues to harbour its dream – and the world’s nightmare – of continued apartheid rule. Barbados, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago have very recently established diplomatic relations with the State of Palestine, and the General Assembly is poised to vote an overwhelming endorsement of Palestine’s membership. The unity of the global community for Palestine’s political self-determination is also reflected on college campuses across the US, United Kingdom and the rest of the world. Students know the torment of apartheid and plausible genocide when they see it; and are actively demanding an end to the torment.

According to Article 4 of the UN Charter, admission is effected by a decision of the General Assembly following a recommendation of the Security Council. On April 18, the Security Council’s vote on Palestinian membership was vetoed by the US, but with 12 out of the 15 council members voting in favour. The UK abstained, as if it’s not already made enough of a mess in the region. Because of the US veto, the General Assembly will take up the issue during an Emergency Special Session on May 10. This vote will show an overwhelming support of Palestine’s membership. It will then be taken up again by the Security Council. >>

 

  World Court says Israel must take steps to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza
THE HAGUE, Jan 26, 2024 (Reuters) - The World Court on Friday ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide as it wages war against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip. The court said Israel must ensure its forces do not commit genocide and take measures to improve the humanitarian situation for Palestinians in the enclave.

The court did not rule on the core of the case brought by South Africa - whether genocide has occurred in Gaza. But it recognised the right of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide.

 

 

the Gaza war and the crisis of the greater Middle East: impact on US foreign policy and transatlantic relations  
While the Israel-Hamas Conflict, like all conflicts, has its own unique history and immediate causes, it is also representative of a broader crisis that has characterized the Middle East for the past two decades. That crisis has its roots in the weakening and, in some cases, the collapse of state authority in the Arab world. That collapse empowered non-state actors to challenge state authority and struggle with their domestic rivals for control over the fallen Arab regimes. Some regional states had always been weak domestically, open to external intervention, like Lebanon. However, the beginning of the current crisis can be marked by the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the subsequent destruction, as a matter of policy, of the Iraqi state. It continued with the popular uprisings of the Arab Spring of 2011, which led to the collapse of regimes in Tunisia and Egypt and to civil wars in Libya, Syria and Yemen. The political vacuums created by the weakening and collapse of state authority invited outside interventions in these countries, as local groups sought allies in their struggles for power. Both the US and European states have been some of the most prolific interveners in the region, with doubtful results for their efforts. However, Iran most successfully extended its influence into these weakened states and civil wars, by developing strong links to non-state actors who were more than willing to act as part of the overall Iranian regional strategy.
The Israel-Hamas Conflict has all of these characteristics. The weakness of the Palestinian Authority permitted a non-state actor, Hamas, to gain power in the Gaza Strip. Hamas developed links with regional powers, most notably Iran but also Qatar, which helped it consolidate its control of Gaza. Both Egypt and Israel, while opposed to Hamas’ Islamist political project, dealt with the organization for their own purposes. As a non-state actor, Hamas did not have the same stake in the local or regional status-quo that existing governments have, and thus was willing to take dramatic and violent action to change that status quo (December 7, 2023, HCSS, Transatlantic Dialogue series)
The report

 

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict:

A way Out?

Brussels, October 15th,2023
 
Paul N. Goldschmidt, Director, European Commission (ret.); Member of the Advisory Council of "Stand Up for Europe".

 It calls for a re-foundation of the United Nations and the transfer of its headquarters to a rebuilt GAZA

Introduction:
 
Since the events of October 7th, governments, political authorities, experts and the media have unanimously agreed on a single conclusion:
 
"The unprecedented barbarity of the attacks and the taking by Hamas of Israeli and foreign hostages, as well as its own population, make any negotiation with a view to a lasting peace unthinkable for the immediate future".
 
The parameters defining the situation stem as much from Israel's history since its creation in 1948 (if not before) as from the conflicts themselves. These involve not only the primary responsibility of the belligerents, but also the ambiguous attitude - if not the lack of interest - of the Arab world and the international community as a whole, as well as the deliberate manipulation of national public opinions.  The latter are often mobilized for purposes unrelated to the underlying conflict, driven by imperialist ambitions for regional or world hegemony or by the desire to impose political ideologies or religious fundamentalism. This is why there is no point in arguing about any particular aspect of this issue, as each side will find ample justification for the theses it supports. A complete paradigm shift is required.

 
    comments on the Oct 7th attack

 

  the escalating violence in the Gaza Strip and Israel
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) organized October 12 a discussion on the escalating violence in the Gaza Strip and Israel, what it means for the Middle East, and what to expect in the coming days and weeks.

The conversation featured Steven A. Cook, Eni Enrico Mattei Senior Fellow for Middle East and Africa Studies and Director of the International Affairs Fellowship for Tenured International Relations Scholars, Council on Foreign Relations, Farah Pandith, Adjunct Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations, Ray Takeyh, Hasib J. Sabbagh Senior Fellow for Middle East Studies, Council on Foreign Relations, and Michael Froman,President, Council on Foreign Relations, Moderating

 

The recording

 

The Holy Land Confederation as a Facilitator for the Two-State Solution (2022)

    
The Economic Cooperation Foundation (ECF), an Israeli Polcy Think Tank - working towards peace, security and prosperity    

 

the Middle East and the future of Israel / the critical process in building each and every institution  
On the campus of the ASPEN Institute Israel Ambassador Michael B. Oren spoke frankly about the Middle East and the future of Israel. While Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad talked in 2009 about the critical process by which people must engage in building each and every institution that eventually makes up a viable state.
There were discussions about the issue of settlements, the need for Israel to be recognized as a Jewish state and examples of existential threats to Israel’s existence. Oren in discussion illustrated the need for the change in the hateful PA education and programming.

Ambassador Oren made reference to his article: … “The State of Israel copes not only with one but with at least seven existential threats on a daily basis. These threats are extraordinary not only for their number but also for their diversity. In addition to external military dangers from hostile regimes and organizations, the Jewish State is endangered by domestic opposition, demographic trends, and the erosion of core values.

Israel Ambassador Michael B. Oren
Leaders in politics, economics, history and culture were gathered to discuss and debate the Middle East, with a special emphasis on comprehending the current challenges to peace. Viewed were ideas and initiatives now underway - such as new policies, reforms, negotations and economic development proposals - that could ease tensions, strengthen relationships across borders and perhaps even help effect a lasting peace. 'In fact the kind of state that we want to have, that we aspire to have, is one that would definitely espouse high values of tolerance, co-existence, mutual respect and deference to all cultures, religions. No discrimination whatsoever, on any basis whatsoever.

"An oppressed nation has the right to say it has been enough. You may not expect from nobody who put up with injustice, certainly not the Palestines, who suffered from occupation decennia long. Is that not where Gandhi stand for, where Martin Luther King stand for?" (Ha'artez, 2-4-2010).

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad talked during the Aspen Ideas Fest in 2009 about the critical process by which people must engage in building each and every institution that eventually makes up a viable state.

Salam Fayyad: I think what he has is the benefit of the experience of the past attempts at making peace in the Middle East. I mean, style is always an integral part of the equation, certainly. But the substance of it, I believe, and what I believe is driving it is the benefit of experience of nearly 16 years of trying to do this unsuccessfully. And I say this analytically. And I say this because of what I perceive to be as a matter of very sharp focus on what I call elements of success, rather than just on the grand picture of getting there.

As one of my professors in economics was fond of saying, you need to have potatoes to make potato chips. The potatoes from the Palestinian point of view are the institutions capable of delivering good governance to the Palestinian people—the institutions of the Palestinian state in the making: … security, law and order, justice, public finance, economic management, welfare, all of the functions that any responsible state should feel obligated to deliver to its citizens in all spheres of governance. This is about building toward statehood.

 The Middle East: in conversation with Salam Fayyad in 2009

You know, the Americans [and] the international community asked that the roadmap report: They want these reforms, they want the PA to do all of these things. And my message all along to people was: The world wants us to have a good public finance system, but is that against our interest? What’s wrong with that? Let’s do that. I mean, we need to do it.

Ladies and gentlemen, every time we take a step in the direction of having a function of a state perform competently, … with every step that we take in the direction of institution building, that’s a step closer to our freedom, to our statehood; that’s what it is about. Therefore, that’s what really drives this process. These happen to be our potatoes, so to speak. These happen to be our obligations under the roadmap. The roadmap is about security. It’s about security for Israel; but it’s about security for Palestinians, [too]. It’s about governance. It’s about ensuring the capacity of Palestinian people to govern themselves in all facets and spheres of governance, including security. That’s what this is about. And that’s why we took it upon ourselves—particularly after what happened to us in 2007 with the fall of Gaza to Hamas, with the West Bank being under such a state of complete and utter lawlessness—to actually be serious about state-building, get people to rally around the cores of state-building. You know, if this is about statehood, then let us build toward that.

I do not need anyone to remind me that we’re doing it under occupation. I know that. But we are doing it because we are under occupation, in spite of the occupation, to end it. We [have to] create the state as a fact on the ground in a positive way—in response to adversity, in spite of the adversity, to end the adversity. So that two years from now, … I hope it will not be difficult for anyone to look toward us and come to the conclusion: Indeed the Palestinians do have a state, but for the occupation. … If we do that, we’ll have succeeded. That’s our message. It’s a progressive message, it’s a positive message.

Fayyad: You know, I can only hope so. And I really would hate to think that the politics from either side would continue to drive this process forever in the wrong direction, because a good part of the failure is due to that and is due to time wasted on speculating whether or not there is a partner here or there is a partner there. … Let’s all measure up; let’s all do what we all have to do. And each focus on those requirements—look, the roadmap did not say who begins what first when. It said, You Palestinians have to do this; you Israelis have to do that. A lot of time was wasted on who goes first and who goes second and all of that. And we all paid dearly for it; Israelis and Palestinians alike. … Indeed, the world at large. So I call on Israeli leadership to basically do what has to be done. I call on us to do what we have to do. And what I like about the new paradigm, if it is that and I hope it is, is for us both to be expected to deliver. … The bar has to be raised. We both should act with much greater sense of urgency. We both should feel accountable. Look, we can’t do it alone.

 

PEACE PROJECTs
 
FOUNDATION FOR MIDDLE EAST PEACE
 
A SELECT BRIEF OF HISTORY OF MIDDLE EASTERN POLITICS
Till WW-I the greater part of the Middle East belonged to the Ottoman empire, governed by the Turkish sultan in Istanbul. In 1914 the sultan choosed German side. For more understanding of the historical context, Cushing Academy submitted 25 February 2011 A SELECT BRIEF OF HISTORY OF MIDDLE EASTERN POLITICS.

 

chronological summary
East Jerusalem contains holy places for Jews, Christians and Muslims. The main ones are: - the Wailing Wall (Western Wall), remnant of the Jewish Temple - the Temple Mount with the mosques
- the Holy Sepulcher Church - the Mount of Olives - the Garden of Gethsemane - numerous old churches, mosques, yeshivas

ca 1000 BC King David conquers Jerusalem from the Jebusites, his successor King Solomon builds the First Temple

destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar

return of the Jews from Babylonian captivity, rebuilding of the walls under Ezra and Nehemiah and the temple

destruction of the Temple by Titus

Muslims conquer Jerusalem, build Al Aksa mosque under Caliph Omar

Crusaders conquer Jerusalem, Godfrey of Bouillon

1915: Sir Henry McMahon, British High Commissioner in Egypt, offered Sherif Hussein of Mecca an independent Arab state if he would help the British fight against the Ottoman Turks. Hussein's interest in throwing off his Turkish overlords converged with Britain's war aim of defeating the Ottomans

1916: Sykes-Picot agreement: partition of the regio in French and British spheres of influence

1917: Balfour declaration: a jewish national home in Palestina

1918 Jerusalem falls into British hands

1920: Treaty of San Remo: Syria and Libanon became a French mandate, Palestine, Joran and Iraq British mandate (Egypt was already in the hands of the British, Northern Africa for the greater part French and the Arabian peninsula independent)

1922: English treaty mandate, which provided to ensure Jews throughout Palestine, when Israel and the West Bank, would have the right to close settlement

1945: the Quincy meeting, that means a determination to assert US influence in a zone which is strategic to America security, the strengthening of energy security, the fight against terrorist groups, a determination to contain Iranian influence and a firm commitment to Israel's security

1947 According to the UN partition plan of Palestine, Jerusalem and the surrounding area must become a corpus separatum, freely accessible to Jews, Christians and Muslims 1947:

1948-1949 Israel conquers West Jerusalem and Trans-Jordan conquers East Jerusalem, the international community accepts the status quo. After the proclaim of the state of Israel the Arab states attacked, followed by the independence war, during which Israel extended their territory. Jordan captured the West Bank and Egypt the Gaza strip. Armistice Agreements ended the official hostilities of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established armistice lines between Israel and the Jordanian-held West Bank, also known as the Green Line.

1956: Suez crisis. Egypt (Nasser) nationalized the Suez Canal. After that there followed a combined attack by Israel, United Kingdom and France. Under great pressure by the US and USSR the attackers had to pull back

1967 Israel conquers the West Bank including East Jerusalem. The rise of Palestine nationalism (international terrorism)
June 6-Days war. The barrier by Egypt of the Street of Tiran for Israelian shipping is the motive for an Israelian attack on Arab neighbourhood-states. Israel captured on Egypt the Sinai desert (till the Suez Canal) and the Gaza Strip (Palestinian), on Jordan the West Bank including East Jerusalem, on Syria the strategic Golan Heights
Israel is expanding the municipal boundaries from 6 to 65 square kilometers and announces that it will no longer leave the city
June 27 Israeli law is declared applicable to Jerusalem
November 22 UN resolution 242

1970: Jordan civil war

1973: October Jom Kippoer war. Unexpected attack by Egypt and Syria to re-capture Sinai and Golan. During the war Arab oil states causes the so called first oil crisis. The war ends by the intervention by the Great Powers in a militairy deadlock

1975: start of Libanon civil war

1977: in the occupied territories the Likoed governments (Begin) started to build jewish settlements. The historic visit to Jerusalem of the Egypt president Sadat directed to the Camp David arrangements

1979: peace treaty between Egypt and Israel

1980 de facto annexation

1981 The Knesset declares Jerusalem the "eternal and indivisible" capital of Israel. The international community does not honor the annexation and all foreign embassies in West Jerusalem were closed. Condemnation by the UN Security Council

1982: June Extended Israelian invasion in Libanon directed to the siege of Beirut, the retreat of the PLO (to Tunis) and massacres in Sabra and Chatilia

1985: Israel's pull back from Beirut, except the security line in the South

1987: December the start of the Intifada (Palestinian revolt) in the Gaza Strip

1991: after the Gulf war (Iraq attacks Israel with scuds) the Madrid conference was arranged under pressure of the USA. The result of this was a separate peace deliberation between Israel and the Arab states

1993: after secret negotations in Oslo, Israel and the PLO signed in Washington in September an agreement of principles

1994: Arafat settled in Gaza a Palestinian National Authority and Israel and Jordan signed in September a peace treaty

1995: Rabin murdered in November

1996: stagnation in the peace process till 1999 (Netanyahu)

2000: Camp David summit (July/August) between Barak and Arafat failed. A visist of Sharon in September to the Temple Mount leads to the second Intifada (Palestinian attacks by self murders and Israelian recaptured of Palestinian territory)

2003: Roadmap to the peace of the Quartet (USA, EU, Russia and the UN), to stop all settlement-activities

2007: Annapolis agreement, which confirmed the obligation from 2003 to stop all settlement-activities

Changes in Jerusalem since 1967
- in East Jerusalem in 1967, 90% of the land was in private Palestinian ownership. In 1967, almost 90% of the land was controlled by the Israeli government. - a dozen new Jewish neighborhoods have been built in a ring around Jerusalem - 39,000 homes were built for Jews by the government, no homes for Palestinians, 88% of which were built in Jewish neighborhoods, 12% in Palestinian neighborhoods, Palestinians usually do not receive a building permit
- in 1967, no Israeli citizens lived in East Jerusalem, now(in 2009) 170,000. About 50,000 Palestinians have left East Jerusalem since 1967, with 166,500 remaining - a large number of yeshivas have arisen - the old Jewish quarter in East Jerusalem has been completely renovated - many Orthodox Jews in particular settle in Jerusalem and increasingly determine the cultural climate and social life, especially in Orthodox neighborhoods such as Mea Shearim

2012: UN voted on a resolution to upgrade the status of the Palestinian Authority to a non-member observer state

2013: launch Two State stress test, a new online tool that provides a comprehensive assessment of the key issues that would make or break a two-state outcome between Israel and Palestine

2020: Israel and the Arab World Are Making Peace (Abraham Accords Peace Agreements)

2023, Oct 7th: Israel - Hamas war

2024: on April 14, Iran directly attacks Israel. The attack is a "response to the numerous crimes committed by the Zionist regime," the Iranian Revolutionary Guards said. The immediate reason was the Israeli bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus on April 1.
12 August 2024: Statement by leaders of the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy
2024, October 1st: Israeli army invades Lebanon