Peace For The Middle East

Peace for the Middle East: A change in tactics

Ryan Wulpi Indiana University-Purdue University at Fort Wayne

English W233-02 Professor Thomas Kaough

September 27, 2004

Jews, Christians, and Muslims have disagreed for thousands of years dating back to the Middle Ages. The Catholic Church in 1095 decided that they were departing for the “Holy Lands” to retake them from the barbarians. Therefore, the lands that are in dispute, continuously fought over for so long that people who are fighting now, are only fighting because that remains the only way that they know how to deal with the situation. There have been so many wars fought on these lands that it becomes a wonder that the ground does not stay permanently stained from the bloodshed. Even though these religions differ, they are also very similar and all have the same holy sites. Some of the key players involved have changed over the years, but the struggle lingers. Well, perhaps they have not changed as much as they have evolved. The tactics used today and the policies that existed 30 years ago are obviously not effective. The fact remains that change requires new strategies and avenues of diplomacy. The United States has taken a ‘big brother’ approach to the state of Israel that dates back to the conclusion of World War II. To understand where this thought comes from, one has to comprehend the viciousness of the attacks against Jews in Europe during the war. Nazi SS agents massacred over 6 million Jews during the four-year span of the war. It required the United States to enter the war to stop Germany from conquering Europe and eradicating the Jewish race. Had we not stepped in, who knows what could have happened. Ever since this war, the United States has prescribed towards a biased approach to Israel. Israel today inhabits a prime spot stuck in the middle of a hornet’s nest of hate. The fight today remains the “occupied” territories of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Israel confiscated these territories after the Six-Day War in 1967. The Arab countries

surrounding Israel stood ready to attack, but Israel beat them to the punch, attacking first and destroying the Egyptian Air Force before their planes could leave the ground. This constitutes some of the background into the open drain that the Middle East has become. Everyday you can read in the paper about the fighting that is still going on to this day over the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Almost 30 years ago, the Arabs stood ready to attack the Israel, but the Israelis decided that they should attack first. How can you be so hostile towards a group of people, want to fight, get beat so bad, then go running to the international community and whine that you are being oppressed and your lands occupied? How can you murder innocent men, women, and children in the name of your freedom and expect the world to feel sorry for you? The Israelis never annexed the West Bank and Gaza Strip, fully intending to broker a peace deal with the Palestinians, where they would trade land for peace. Unfortunately, Israel has let its citizens develop settlements on these disputed lands that are now at the very center of the fight. The Israeli’s have always wanted to peacefully coexist with their neighbors, but the Arabs have an ultimate goal of the eradication of Israel. The stated goal of Hamas is the purge of Israel, no peace, no negotiations just annihilation. The majority of Arabs uttered these words in the 1960’s, and it continues on today. How can anyone facilitate negotiations when there remains this violent cycle of hatred? The Palestinians need their own state; there cannot be a palpable argument against it. The change has to come from both sides. The Palestinians cannot haphazardly continue to kill innocent people. Israel on the other hand cannot keep building settlements on land that continues to exist in dispute. The change has to come from within the Palestinian and Israeli camps. The obvious hindrance comes from the sequence of hatred that exists on both sides. These lands have

been in dispute for over 1000 years. They carry on this fight because it continues to be the only thing that they know. It takes a brave person to stand up and admit that the status quo cannot sustain and that it has to stop. Both sides have to come up with a new approach of dealing with each other. Actually listening to grievances form each side would constitute a major advancement in the peace process. Our image in the world depends on whether or not we can take a non-partisan approach and assist these people in their quest for peace. For too long now, we have taken a strong-handed approach and nothing good has come of it. We need to be more unbiased in our advancement of the peace process. The view that the rest of the world has remains one of wariness, one that assuredly will not lead to peace. The Palestinians want their own state and rightfully so, they deserve one. However, it is an Arab goal for the elimination of the state of Israel. It is common knowledge that the stated goal of Hamas is the eradication of Israel. Therefore, the question remains how to negotiate with someone whose stated goal is your annihilation. The onus lingers on both sides to put down their past grievances and sit down at the table with a clean slate. The U.S. itself has to put away any bias for Israel and hold her accountable for her actions, something that does not happen with any regularity.