Some

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a prolonged, deep-rooted conflict between identity groups that is now more than a century old. The origins of the conflict can be traced to the advent of political Zionism at the end of the nineteenth century (Halpern, 1967). The core of Zionist ideology was to establish a Jewish homeland and ultimately a Jewish state in Palestine. A result of this was the massive immigration of Jews into Palestine in the early decades of the twentieth century, purchasing land, building settlements and social institutions, and clearly intending to establish a Jewish homeland and ultimately a Jewish state in Palestine (Kelman, 1999).

In 1917 Britain issued the Balfour Declaration which was a classified formal statement of Britain's support for the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine without violating the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities (Encyclopædia Britannica, 2008). In 1920, Britain received a provisional mandate over Palestine, which based on the Balfour declaration, was formalized in 1922. national

home

institutions.

The

and

The British were to help the Jews build a promote

mandate

the

provided

creation "The

of

self-governing

Jewish

Agency

for

Palestine," that would represent Jewish interests in Palestine to the British and would promote Jewish immigration (Israel and Palestine: a brief history).

The Arab nationalists opposed to the Balfour declaration. In 1920, 1921 and 1929 serious attacks were committed against Jews (Gavron, 2004). This reaction reflected their fear that the Arabs of Palestine would be dispossessed. The years 1936-1939 mark a turning point in Jewish-Arab relations (Flapman, 1979). During this period, the Jewish immigrants clashed with the Arab population of the Palestinian land who were responding to the growth of Arab

nationalism and to the construction of a specifically Palestinian identity (Kelman, 1999). All the existing Arab political parties united in a common platform calling for an end to Jewish land purchases and immigration, the termination of the British mandate and the declaration of an independent state (Flapman, 1979). In 1939, the British government issued the White Paper, which supported the creation of an independent Palestinian state governed by Palestinian Arabs and Jews in proportion to their numbers in the population by 1949. A limit of 75,000 Jewish immigrants was set for the five-year period 1940-1944. The White Paper was defied by the “Jewish Agency for Palestine” which organised illegal immigration to Palestine from occupied Europe, as a response to the persecution of Jews by Nazis and to suspicions for their extermination. (Israel and Palestine: a brief history).

In 1947, The United Nations Special Commission on Palestine recommended that Palestine should be divided into an Arab state and a Jewish state (Gavron, 2004). The Jews accepted the UN decision, but the Arabs rejected it. The establishment of the independent state of Israel in 1948 was followed by war between the two parties (Flapman, 1979) which led to the displacement of a large segment of the Palestinian Arab population from their homes inside the part of Palestine that became the State of Israel (Kelman, 1999). Part of the Palestinian population remained in Israel and became

Israeli citizens. A large

segment of the

Palestinian

population lives in the West Bank and Gaza, the two parts of Palestine that remained in Arab hands after the 1948 war. Part of the population of the West Bank and the majority of the population of Gaza consists of refugees from the 1928 war and their descendants, many of them living in refugee camps. Between 1948 and 1967, there was no contact between Israelis and West Bank/Gaza Palestinians. This situation changed radically when Israel

took possession of these territories in the 1967 war. Since then, Israel has occupied the West Bank and Gaza. In 1993, the Oslo agreement was provided for the creation of a Palestinian Authority which would have the responsibility for the administration of the territory under its control (West Bank and Gaza strip). It also called for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from parts of the Gaza Strip and West Bank. Israel, however, remains in control and its military forces conitnue to guard movement across the borders between Israel and the territories, and to protect the Israeli settlements that have been built in the territories (Kelman, 1999).

After having attempted to briefly present the history and facts associated with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I would like to discuss my personal approach to the issue. Almost every time I have come across the words terrorism-terrorists in books, journal articles, on T.V., etc., I find out that they are linked to Arabs or Muslims in general or more specifically to Palestinians. I have never heard or seen these concepts associated with Israelis/Jews. At this point, I would like to refer to Saint Augustine’s story (cited in Chomsky, 2002): When Alexander the Great captured a pirate, he asked him how he dared molest the sea. The pirate replied: “How dare you molest the whole world? Because I do it with a little ship only, I am called a thief; you, doing it with a great navy, are called an Emperor”.

From

my

perspective,

Saint

Augustine’s

story

reflects

the

relationship between Israel and Palestine. Everything seems to come down to how we define the concept of “terrorism”. Let me be more specific. The term “terrorism” came into use at the end of the 18th century, primarily to refer to violent acts of governments designed to ensure popular submission (Chomsky, 2002). In 1937, the League of Nations defined it as “all criminal acts directed

against a State and intended or calculated to create a state of terror in the minds of particular persons or a group of persons or the general public”.

The UN further refined the definition in 1999, when they applied the term terrorism to “any criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes”. “unjustifiable,

whatever

the

They found such acts

considerations

of

a

political,

philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other nature that may be invoked to justify them” (Roberts, 2002).

The above definitions make sense to me and I assume to most people. However, we should not ignore, the first point I made in this essay, that in order to understand a conflict, one needs to know the socioeconomic and political context in which the conflict occurs. Along the same lines, in order to understand an extreme action of violence such as suicide bombing, one needs to be aware of the socioeconomic and political conditions in which the perpetrator lives. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has a history of more than one hundred years. It started with the illegal immigration of Jews in Palestine and it gradually led: to an Independent Israeli state which occupies the land whose major part used to belong to Arab people; to the displacement of a large number of Arab people from their homes inside the part of Palestine that became the State of Israel; and finally to the military occupation of West Bank and Gaza, which were the only pieces of land that legitimately remained in Arab hands after the Oslo agreement (1993).

Before I make my personal comments, I have to refer to the comments of the senior UN relief official, Jan Egeland, and Jan

Eliasson (2006), then Swedish foreign minister:

“Access by air,

sea, and land has been virtually cut off for Gaza. The movements of goods and peoples have practically ceased. Supplies of electricity and water, interrupted by Israeli Defense Forces attacks on electric power

stations,

are

irregular

and

insignificant.

Civilian

infrastructures have been affected. Gaza today remains dependent on outside sources for its food and commercial supplies. Hygienic conditions are deteriorating, while access to potable water is inadequate. With a Palestinian economy in continuous freefall, we must expect a more severe deterioration in sanitary conditions. Imagine: You are a mother or a father in Gaza, living in a space inferior to a quarter of that of greater London (1,620 sq. km) with a population the size of Leeds (1.49 million inhabitants). You cannot leave this territory, nor import nor export products. Your children live in continuous fear of violence. Shortages of essential goods, including water, increase the propagation of contagious illnesses and reinforce the problems of daily life. Every day, as many as 185 artillery shells strike your territory. Every night, you witness blind rocket attacks on Israel by militant groups. You know that when the reprisals come, you and your family will not be spared their effects”. And then they suggested: “A cessation of hostilities must be accompanied

by

freedom

of

movement

for

civilians

and

humanitarian workers. For the Gaza population, the perception of being trapped, confined, of living in a cage is intolerable and feeds the feeling of despair. The November 15, 2005, agreement on movement and access must be wholly carried out”.

Two years after, nothing seems to have changed. Palestine is still a “huge cage” for Arab people. Psychological theories may be able to explain to some extent the perpetuation of the discussed conflict, but a deeper understanding requires an awareness of the political and socioeconomic conditions that gave rise to this conflict and

have been sustaining it. To conclude, I want to put forward the following questions and challenge everyone involved in this conflict as well as everyone not involved, to come up with an answer. Since, any peaceful means have not provided a solution and the Israeli state keeps on defying International conventions and associated agreements by occupying a piece of land which does not belong to them (a fact that has the consequences described above), what kind of a peaceful choice is there left for the Palestinian people in order to gain their right to live a descent life in their country under conditions of security and peace? Moreover, based on the above definitions of terrorism, why is it only Palestinian suicide bombers who are characterized as terrorists? What about the Israeli attacks on Palestinian civilians (Pilger, 2007) that, apart from adults, have killed hundreds of children as well? I assume it’s because Palestine reflects the “pirate” and Israel reflects “Alexander the Great”…

References Arafat, Y., (1974). Speech by Yasser Arafat: United Nations General Assembly, New York 13 november 1974. [Online] Available: http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/cahier/proche-orient/arafat74en/ [6/3/08]. Arian, A. (1989). A people apart: Coping with national security in problems in Israel. Journal of Conflict Resolution. 34 (4). 605-631. Bar-Tal, D. (1998). The Rocky Road Toward Peace: Beliefs on Conflict in Israeli Textbooks. Journal of Peace Research. 35 (6). 723-742. Chomsky, N. (2002). Pirates and emperors, old and new: International terrorism in the real world. London: Pluto Press.

Cohen, A. (1985). An Ugly Face in the Mirror: National Stereotypes in Hebrew Children's Literature. Tel Aviv: Reshafim Publishing House. Davis, J., H. (1959). A formal interpretation of the theory of relative deprivation. Sociometry. 22. 280-296. Egeland, J., & Eliasson, J. (2006). The human catastrophe of Gaza is a time bomb. [Online] Available: http://67.com.au/PERSPECTIVES/GAZA/EGELANDELIASSON28Sept06.pdf/ [6/3/08] Encyclopædia Britannica, (2008). Balfour Declaration. [Online] Available: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9011963/BalfourDeclaration/ [2/3/08]. Flapman, S. (1979). Zionism and the Palestinians. New York: Harper & Row Publishers. Gavron, D. (2004). The other side of despair. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Gibson, J. (1992). The political consequences of intolerance: Cultural conformity and political freedom. American Political Science Review. 86. 338-56. Gordon, C., and A. Arian. (2001). Threat and decision making. Journal of Conflict Resolution. 45.196-215. Halpern, B. (1969). The idea of the Jewish state. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hermann, R., P. Tetlock, and P. Visser. (1999). Mass public decisions to go to war: A cognitive-interactionist framework. American Political Science Review 93 (3. 553-73.

Israel and Palestine: A brief history. Retrieved March 6 2008 from mideast web site: http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm Israel’s declaration of independence. Retrieved March 6 2008 from Israel Ministry of foreign affairs website:

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace%20Process/Guide%20to%20the %20Peace%20Process/Declaration%20of%20Establishment%20of %20State%20of%20Israel

Kelman, H., C. (1999). The interdependence of Israeli and Palestinian National Identities: The role of the other in existential conflicts. Journal of social issues. 55 (3). 581-600. Klein, A. (2008). Palestinians: Jews come from pigs, monkeys. [Online] Available: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=4789 1/ [6/3/08]. Maoz, I., & McCauley, C. (2008). Threat, Dehumanization, and Support for Retaliatory Aggressive Policies in Asymmetric Conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution. 52 (1). 93-116. Marcus, I., & Crook, B., Palestinians: "Gaza withdrawal is victory for Islam". Major and Dangerous Campaigns Of hate Against the Jews. [Online] Available: http://www.newyorkmonthlyherald.com/islamic_fundamentalism.ht m/ [6/3/08]. Marcus, G., E., Sullivan, J., L., Theiss-Morse, E., & Wood., S. (1995). With malice toward some: How people make civil liberties judgments. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Opotow, S. (1990). Moral exclusion and injustice: An introduction. Journal of Social Issues. 46.1-20. Pilger, J. (2007). Imprisoning a whole nation. [Online] Available: http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=438/ [6/3/08]. Roberts, A. (2002). The changing faces of terrorism. [Online] Available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/recent/sept_11/changing_faces_05.s html/ [6/3/08]. Shamir, M., and T. Sagiv-Schifter.(2006). Conflict, identity, and tolerance: Israel in the Al-Aqsa intifada. Political Psychology. 27 (4). 569-95.