Palestinian Rejectionism

Good Essays
“The Problem is Palestinian Rejectionism,” by Yosef Kuperwasser and Shalom Lipner and “Israel’s Bunker Mentality,” by Ronald Krebs attempt to dissect and solve one of the most complex geopolitical conflicts in recent human history, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yosef Kuperwasser and Shalom Lipner discuss that the one thing that’s stopping this conflict from being resolved is Palestinian reluctance to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. On the other hand, Ronald Krebs argues that it’s in Israel’s best interest to resolve the conflict, because Israel’s occupation is damaging domestic affairs and stagnating Israel’s progress. I argue that not only is it in the best interest of both states to resolve the conflict, but that one can’t solely …show more content…
Hamas, an extremist organization in Gaza, has severely harmed the Palestinian cause for statehood. Hamas isn’t shy of its hate towards Israelis and has committed terrorist acts over the years. I contend that if the Palestinian National Authority is truly committed to ending the conflict, it must first denounce the actions and beliefs of Hamas. Both Israel and Palestine would benefit from such a move. For one, Israel wouldn’t need to worry so much about its security during negotiations, but it will also be confident that Palestine’s intentions are well and truly peaceful. Denouncing the Hamas would not only facilitate negotiations, but the Palestinian National Authority would serve as the sole and central authority of the Palestinian state. I also maintain that the reduced risk of violence would allow both sides to exercise a bit more flexibility at the negotiating table. Israel, just like Palestine, has got some work to do. Israel is nonchalantly ignoring any and all orders to stop its settlement program, but it’s contributing to its hypocrisy in the process. Israel continually insists that Palestine recognize its existence and its borders, but Israel continues to build beyond 1967 lines. Even during the Oslo Accords, Israel made it clear that it would go on with its settlement program. At the 2000 Camp David Summit, …show more content…
Both Israel and Palestine have to become more cooperative, because not only are some of their demands unrealistic, but also because it’s in their best interest to do so. Since 1948, this conflict has inhibited Palestine’s ability to progress. Conflict resolution would allow Palestine to focus its energies to other pressing matters as it will finally be able to function as an independent state. The conflict, as Ronald Krebs discusses, has also been detrimental to Israel. This conflict of occupation has ignited an ethnoreligious movement in the nation. As a result, Arab-Israeli citizens continually face discrimination in health care, education, housing and employment. Furthermore, the conflict has empowered the ultra-Orthodox haredim. As the occupation continues, ethnoreligious sentiment continues to grow in support of these haredim. Consequently, in order to form a coalition government, majority parties like the Likud comply with the Haredi’s request for subsidies and special privileges like exemption from the military. This rent-seeking behavior causes the state to raise taxes in order to compensate for such requests. High taxes, as Krebs suggests, causes educated, secular Israelis to flee the country and a brain drain ensues. I agree with Krebs that conflict resolution is best for Israel, because the resolution will spell the end of extreme ethnoreligious movement

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    For peace, we desperately need to improve Palestine’s infrastructure, or at the very least, stop hindering its development. The Palestinian people do not have options, so they turn to violence. The dismal conditions and the lack of improvements for the lives of Palestinians spawned the intifadas. We can all agree that violence against each other is bad. So, to gradually eliminate violence against Israeli citizens, and violence against Palestinians from Israeli retaliation, we must strengthen the Palestinian infrastructure, and in doing so, we can give the Palestinian people opportunities to live good lives.…

    • 700 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This could potentially cause the United States to lose some of its global power. In a realist perspective this is one of the worst thing that can happen to a state because a loss of power mean a loss of national security. Therefore the United States needs to take a firm stance with Israel by telling them to reengage in peace negotiations with Palestine to restore the hope for a two state…

    • 802 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    I do support the Israelis on retrieving their land if in fact it was theirs to begin with, but since there is no proof whose land is who’s, I feel that their forceful way of handling this situation has gotten out of hand. Some readers may challenge my view by insisting that Israelis have every right to do what is needed to take back what is rightfully theirs, but no one has…

    • 1400 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    By encouraging settlements in the areas, Israel was violating the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949). Second, the piece of land was controversial as it challenged the United Nations’ warnings as well as the changes it is going to bring to the peace talks as returning to the former armistice lines and negotiations for two-state solution with Palestine has proven now to be very difficult if not impossible. It became a bitter reminder to the Palestinians of Israeli power and territorial claims, while the settlements also cut through Palestinian countryside, hindering the possibility for a unified Palestinian state one day. Finally, the settlements were off the table as bargaining chips as settlers refused to move out--even threatening civil war if the Israeli government forces them to. Contrary to what Dershowitz claims, Israel was more ambitious for land than he makes them out to be, it would not have been able to pay for this area in exchange for peace even if it wanted to, and neither was it inclined to…

    • 1674 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Prime Minister Netanyahu took advantage of the legally non-mandatory clause of the Oslo Accords. He had no legal obligation to stop increasing settlements on the West Bank and as expected he did not halt the settlements (Lesch, 2008). Obviously this made the Palestinians extremely upset to the point of extremist violence, “Palestinian Islamist groups reacted by carrying out more attacks, with the Israelis not only responding in force but also pressuring Arafat to do more to police his own in order to prevent such attacks” (Lesch…

    • 1352 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    “Flag Burning or Desecration.” American Civil Liberties Union. N.p.,n.d web. 16 march.2017. This article states,” “Our democracy is strong because we tolerate all peaceful forms of expression, no matter how uncomfortable they make us feel or how much we disagree.” This is true as regarding that an organization has been trying to stop legislation efforts and attempts to ban desecration of the flag as led by ACLU. This is a peaceful protest that may not agree with everyone point of view but we need to respect it.…

    • 1176 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The four neighboring states of Israel; Syria, Transjordan, Egypt and Iraq all declared war on the new Jewish state of Israel. The goal of the Arab states was to either halt Zionist expansion in that region or reverse the Zionist expansion. Both the Israel state and the Arab states did not truly know the strength of the opposite army, and thus did not understand the cost of war. In International Relations, the reason why many states fail at bargaining or fail at cooperating is because they lack information about the consequences or rewards. The Arab-Israel war should have been a war without any costs, and thus many people believed that Arab states would have won.…

    • 1329 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Entebbe Raid Analysis

    • 1245 Words
    • 5 Pages

    This suggests that the raid was unjustified as a more peaceful solution could have been reached. The main criticism of the raid from the United Nations was that it involved an action which affected the sovereignty of a state (Source K). The United Nations Secretary General, Kurt Waldheim, felt that “it was his obligation to uphold the principle of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of every state” (Source K). The United Nations believed that Israel should have consulted with them first and not invaded Entebbe as they felt that the hostage situation could have been solved through a process of negotiation and the raid was therefore…

    • 1245 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Peace In The Middle East

    • 817 Words
    • 4 Pages

    However, under current circumstances, Israeli peace can only materialized when Arab-Israeli peace is attained, as Arab-Israeli tensions directly threaten stability in the Middle East. This instability is highly problematic because an unstable Middle East is a dangerous Middle East, especially from the American perspective. President Obama articulated it best when he said, “the lack of a resolution to this problem provides an excuse for anti-American militant jihadists to engage in inexcusable action and so we have a national security interest in solving…

    • 817 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Furthermore, these ethical terms — such as good and right — also serve to “arouse feelings and stimulate actions.” Not only do Palestinians articulate their emotion against violations of human rights, an ethical judgment like breaching human rights is wrong aims to arouse international community’s sympathy. Meanwhile, it gives the sentence “an effect of commands” (Ayer, 511) in a sense that “[you] don’t violate human rights.” In moral disagreement like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, two sides have different feelings on the action which Trump recognized Jerusalem as the Israel’s capital. They both express their disparate emotions and intend to demand their counterpart to stop disruption and to persuade others (international community) to support the same…

    • 932 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays