Israel-Palestine Conflict
October 2023
Terrorist Attack
On Saturday, October 7, 2023, the Palestinian militant group Hamas carried out an unprecedented large-scale surprise attack on Israel by air, land and sea which left at least 900 dead in Israel, prompting a lethal volley of retaliatory Israeli airstrikes on Gaza that killed at least 687 people. The next day, Israel declared war on the Palestinian militant group. Journalists are comparing this recent attack by Hamas on Israel to the equivalent of September 11, 2001. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans know little or nothing about the nature of conflict between Israel and Palestine. Having lived through September 11th and being so moved by it that it catapulted me headfirst to study political science, history, and law, I want to simply share a historical basis for the conflict we see today and offer one way to process it all.
Israel-Palestine Conflict (Brief History)
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as we know it today, has been ongoing for my 40 years on Earth and for decades before I was born. We can (and should!) look at history with a curious mind and empathetic heart for clues into the violence. We should remove our prejudices during this initial undertaking.
The middle east region of modern day Israel and Palestine has historically been home to religious and colonial conquests spanning the Mongolian, Egyptian, Roman and Ottoman Empire, with added complexities of the rise in Christianity and push for a Jewish State. However, in the last century, the foreign policy decisions major colonial superpowers — Britain in particular — set in motion the violent unrest within the region.
Balfour Declaration
To better understand the violence of the past century in this region, we must go back to the end of The Great War. Britain had just defeated the Ottoman Empire and the spoils of war often go to those who emerge victorious. Unknown to the world at the time, we now know about the secretive 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement. Therein, Britain, along with France and Italy, agreed to carve out each part of the former Ottoman empire and take those territories. Generally, France would take Algeria and Tunisia, Italy would take Libya, and Britain would control Aden protectorate, Oman, Kuwait, and other areas. Also noteworthy in this agreement is Russia's involvement.
For Britain, those spoils included decisions regarding a huge geographic land mass in the middle east as outlined by Britain’s Lord Arthur Balfour in the Balfour Declaration of 1917. During this period, the Zionist movement emerged, whose primary goal was to establish a 'national home' for the Jewish people. Both Lord Balfoud and Walter Rothschild, a famous banker during that period, were advocates of Zionism. Britain naturally looked to the middle east for the land on which to settle. However, the land on which this new national home would be created was currently inhabited by a non-Jewish population in Palestine. Therefore, there was a need for a clear understanding that, "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine".
Two years later, Britain’s Mandate for Palestine put the Balfour Declaration into effect; thereby seeking to create “a national home for the Jewish people”.
The citizens and people within the region of Palestine, who either survived the war outright or knew families affected by the horrors of war, would understandably feel displaced, frustrated, angry after the war and by the decision of their new rulers. Tensions would eventually rise over the years, with acts of violence committed by both Jewish people and Palestinians. The Arab Revolt in 1936 is one such example. Britain, desperate to find a solution to the violence, initially explored (privately) a potential two-state solution in 1937 via the Peel Commission but failed to make it a reality.
In this horrific time period, while graphic news and imagery regarding the holocaust against Jewish people spread throughout the globe, Britain decided not to increase, but rather limit and restrict immigration of Jewish people looking for safety and refuge in Palestine. Jewish people living in Palestine were upset, understandably so, and began to fight against both Britain and Palestinians.
The fighting within Palestine, now between Jews and Palestinians, and Jews against the British would continue until May 14, 1947, when the United Nations proposed a two-state solution. On that day, David Ben-Gurion, then head of the Jewish Agency and de facto leader of the Jewish community in Palestine, proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel. U.S. President Harry S. Truman recognized the new nation on the same day. The very next day, Britain gave up her mandate and the British Army departed from Palestine, leaving the Jews and the Arabs to fight in the war that followed until present day...and make no mistake — fighting is precisely what has happened ever since. War, conflict, terrorist attacks, and geographic annexation in some form or another has continued every single year afterward. For those who feel so inclined to learn more about the conflict from then until present day, you can pick up reading with the 1948 Arab-Israel War leading into Nakba.
Today, in 2023, Israel faces a range of threats to its Statehood. Its citizens routinely face constant threat to life. Some nearby Countries and terrorist militias hope to see chaos and failure inside Israel. Yet, the Israeli Government, particularly members of the nationalist party, elect to use rhetoric which further antagonizes its critics; including those seeking a caliphate in the region. Palestine’s last election 17 years ago put Hamas in charge, which is neither helping end the conflict nor keeping Palestinian citizens safe from harm.
Nuanced Stance
Is it possible to support both sides AND also criticize both sides? Is it possible to distinguish between citizens and their government?
Yes, it is possible. It is possible to support the citizens of Palestine without supporting, and in fact condemning, Hamas. At the same time, it is possible to likewise support Israelis and the Jewish people without fully supporting the antagonistic rhetoric and actions of the Israeli Government. Further, it is in fact possible to scold both sides for continuing generational violence and terrorist acts toward one another. It is also possible to hold these beliefs and remain disappointed at both sides, to various degrees, for failing to unite in pointing the finger at external actors, including Britain, which has been allowed to slink off into the background without bearing the full responsibility of extending an invitation to settle on Palestine’s land. Lastly, it is possible to be critical of other nations, including the United States for its continued annual budget appropriation of approximately $3 Billion toward Israel’s military operations AND Iran (among other nations) for their ongoing support of Hamas and other militia groups such as Hezbollah. Hamas alone has received an estimated $1 Billion dollars in the past decade alone from Iran.
In more concrete terms, it is firmly possible to believe Jewish people have a right to their own National Home; in the form of a geopolitical State as they currently do. It is also firmly possible to believe Palestinians deserve sovereign land and their own free State; a State which shall neither be stolen nor repurposed ever again. Further, it is firmly possible to believe violent acts, including the recent acts of Hamas, as well as other historical terrorist acts committed in pursuit of advancing a political agenda by force, whether for the benefit of Israel and/or Palestine, are by definition acts of terrorism and should be referred to accordingly. It is firmly possible to criticize the government of Israel for willingly bombing hospitals while knowing full well that doing so will guarantee death of hundreds of babies, women, and seniors and the use of chemical agents in their response to Hamas’ brutal terrorist attack. It is also firmly possible to criticize the International Criminal Court for failing to more actively prosecute those engaged in war crimes and seek justice for the citizens of the world whose sons, daughters, mothers and fathers are too often harmed when politicians, armies, and militias decide to seek retribution for bad decisions of yesteryear.
I will even go so far as to criticize myself for feeling so strongly about this, possibly naive, stance that an 'eye-for-an-eye approach makes the whole world go blind'. In fact, statistically speaking, had any Western person such as myself been born in Palestine, Gaza, or Israel, it would be near impossible NOT to know someone directly impacted by this conflict during the span of their lifetime. Yet, in times like these, a fresh and forgiving perspective might just be necessary for peace in the region. Absent this approach, the likelihood for war crimes, genocide, and/or influx of hate crimes around the world is all but guaranteed.
I hope this can serve as a primer to aid you and help navigate the stories which you will continue to hear on the subject for the remainder of our lifetime.