Israel and Palestine Conflict: the Solution Lies in Equality
The thesis of the Israel and Palestine conflict essay is that the International Community has failed the Palestinians. It needs to step up, putting pressure on Israel, like it did with South Africa, to adhere to basic human rights. The solution for Israel is a one state based on equality.
The Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most intractable and desperate world issues today. The conflict, essentially about contested claims to land and the practice of culture, is intergenerational and layered with grief that feeds on itself. Resolving it requires listening to the hard and fast facts, academic advice and findings out there. It is hard to confront the reality of the occupation without coming to the same conclusions if you respect the evidence. Israel is a state practicing aparthied, oppressing the Palestinians. The international community has a duty to put pressure on Israel to adhere to basic conventions of international law, through boycotting and economic divestment. The Aparthied Convection should be revived to support this.
Finding a solution is complicated by the complimentary roles of Palestinian 'outside' and 'inside' leaderships, plus the earnest and sometimes misguided offerings of major players from the US to the United Nations (UN). The best kind of change comes from a shared vision supported by a legal international framework designed to limit abuses of power and support human rights. This is why a new ‘One State’ model based on trust, respect and co-existence is the solution, followed by a new constitution that embeds such values.
Not to underestimate the complexity of this, but the conflict constitutes an unmet obligation of the organised international community to resolve a conflict partially generated by its own actions. The British took control of a region they called ‘The British mandate for Palestine”, where there was to be “Jewish national home”, equipping Jews with the tools to establish self-rule, at the expense of the Palestinian Arabs. Unsurprisingly, tensions on the ground rose between the settlers and the inhabitants. It represents the prolonged denial of Palestinian’s peoples right of self-determination by the United Nations, a body created to recognise just that.
A solution starts with recognition, recognition that Israel is practicing apartheid. A UN report (UN Report), published in 2017, refers to the crime of aparthied (beyond the regime that governed South Africa between 1948 and 1992) as a type of crime against humanity under customary international law (with Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court): “inhumane acts... committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime”.
Referring to “race” as a socially and politically distinct people. It concludes that Israel has deliberately fragmented the Palestinian people in relation to four demographic domains. The combination of civil law, permanent residency law, military law and a policy to preclude the return of Palestinains, refugees or living under conditions of involuntary exile. All violating basic human rights. Such a definition relies primarily on article II of the Apartheid Convention and this is why its reinstastement is vital to secure even more legitamacy. The report calls on the UN, the international community and civil society actors to see through the recommendations.
Responsively, the International community and its member States, have a legal obligation to act… “within the limits of their capabilities to prevent and punish instances of apartheid that are responsibly brought to their attention”. Through boycotting and economic divestment, tools which saw through the demise of South Africa’s practice of Aparthied, pressure on Israel to adhere to basic conventions of international law can be achieved.
The debate of a ‘One State’ or ‘Two State’ solution has been highly misunderstood. Both sides have become so entrenched, stuck and binary in their response. Arguments usually devolve into a blaming game, one which seeks to point out who is at fault for the failure of the two-state solution. These disputes miss the point. A rigid plan that sees partition as a means to a clear and fair solution is problematic, proving that a solution can’t come solely from politics.
Political tribalism too has reached a new peak, where US relations is not a neutral mediator, but a deeply interested party, a superpower whose position in the Middle East and around the globe is based on its economic and military strength. The solution discussion has been geopolitically tilted towards Israel, essentially trying to negotiate a peace based on inequality.
The intergovernmental framework that currently exists is not capable of creating a sustainable peace. As a spirit of equality is not a structure of hierarchy. Solution requires a real adjustment on the whole US-Israel relationship and the sense of how one can achieve peace in a situation of sustained conflict. Although Palestinian leaders still seek a seperate state, this needs to be redirected, as after years of failure and frustration most Palestinians no longer see that path as viable, in a state of fatalism.
One state is the viable path. Not a solution that Israelu leader Netanyahu and Trump puts forward; a conservative solution that enshrines Israeli dominance, seeking to ratify the status quo, but one that can bring about a spirit of equality, beyond a ceasefire. To quote the principle that saw through mutual recognition and co-existence, speaking to both parties interests, in China’s case; “There is only one China, and both Taiwan and inland China are inalienable parts of a singular China”. It would involve a truth-and-reconciliation process focused on restorative justice and for inspiration, looking to past efforts in South Africa, people learning to coexist in a sustainable way of mutual respect. Some will dismiss this vision as naive or impractical, but the same can be said for any of the alternatives. It would serve U.S. interests; finally stabilising the region and generating broader opportunities for economic growth and political reform. And it’s in Israel’s interest to understand that the occupation of Palestine isn’t sustainable.
Along with a new state, there should be a new constitution. What currently exists falsely embeds such practices like annexation as unremarkable and uncontroversial ideas among Jewish Israelis. There is a need for Palestine Liberation Organisation, the National Authority Corruption and the Israili leaders to address their insidious corruption, nepotism, ineptitude and overall violence. A new constitution would uphold the rights of all, recognising that the country would be home to both peoples who hold historical ties to the land. Fostering, acknowledging and recognition on both sides, and beginning a transition that would require trust along with justice.
Ethical law is a potent force used to help reconcile the realities on the ground, but it has to walk in a cultural and political context (in which opposing sides define each other in terms of the ‘Other’). Competing narratives and realities are at the crux of the issues. Legal frameworks and expectations do not stick without consensus about a shared vision. A genuine resolution also requires the international community to step up and adhere to what’s asked of them in international law, putting pressure on Israel to adhere to basic human rights and abolish a ruling of Aparthied. There needs to be a shift in how global governance digs its feet into political tribalism, and instead a cooperative approach that follows the legal footings that our international organisations are designed to promote. The solution required integrity seen by both Israelis and Palestinians in order to build trust. It is not easy, and it can’t be delayed. The response to the UN report has been utterly disappointing thus far. The authors of this report urge as a matter of highest priority that authoritative bodies be requested to review its findings as the sufferings of Palestinians cannot be ignored any longer.
Additional References
- Council on Foreign Relations. 2020. Unpacking Of China-Taiwan Relations. [online] Available at: [Accessed 18 June 2020].
