Israeli-Palestinian Conflict:Let the people decide!

            An intractable conflict is multifaceted and includes such issues as  being perpetuated by entrenched interests, that is, parties who benefit from the conflict, either by using it to retain power or profit from the violence. In addition, these entrenched interests are often political extremists, and spoilers--they deliberately derail the peace process in order to further their own agenda. The dispute might be long standing, perpetuating historical grievances and grudges;  negative experiences with the negotiating process may have led to pessimism about future success and created an environment where repeated patterns of strike and retaliation continue without sincere or effective effort to halt the violence ( See

Crocker, C., Hampson, F., & Aall, P. (2004). Taming Intractable Conflicts: Mediation in the Hardest Cases). Many of these traits define the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and create obstacles to peace that might appear insurmountable. Alternative approaches, however, could lead to agreements grounded in cultural and societal needs--that is, a bottom-up approach, as opposed to top-down political solutions.

The conflict between Israel and Palestine has endured for more than sixty years, eluding solutions as the conditions within the two states change over time, the officials involved die, are replaced politically, and the international community’s interest waxes and wanes. There is never a complete cessation of hostility, as the Israeli government has been imposing an ongoing state of martial law upon the Palestinian territories it occupies, trying to quell the occasional hostile flare-ups the occupation and settlement building inspire (TimeLine of Israeli-Palestinian History and the Arab-Israeli Conflict , 2011). Because of its long duration and complexity, this conflict’s intractability increases with time; positions become entrenched, grievances continue to magnify, and solutions become more elusive. Inasmuch as the political figures involved have not been able to reach a lasting solution, and compromises have only been temporary, it is evident that the best strategy for creating a lasting peace settlement must involve the citizens of both states. Understanding the concerns of the people, addressing their security and economic issues, can alter the landscape, enough to create new parameters for negotiation heretofore ignored (Crocker, Hampson, & Aall, 2004).  

A brief overview of the history of the conflict reveals that neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians have been able to maintain the conditions of the settlements they have reached, whether they be peace treaties or formal agreements such as the Oslo Accords. The Oslo accords of 1993 were an agreement by Israel to pull out of West Gaza and Jericho, and grant Palestinian control over these areas. In addition, Israel would recognize the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), while the PLO recognized Israel’s right to exist as a state. Talks would continue and a 5-year transitional period would gradually handle such concerns as Jewish resettlement, the withdrawal of Israeli troops and security issues (The Oslo Accords, 2011). Because these basic parameters were not met, trust in the process died. The Palestinians turned  first to the newly created Palestinian Authority  to represent their needs and then to Hamas, seeking a voice that would forcefully represent their demands and needs in the international arena (TimeLine of Israeli-Palestinian History and the Arab-Israeli Conflict , 2011). Neither political group has brought any enduring peace to the region; the situation has continued to deteriorate, resulting in the current apparent stalemate where Israel imposes martial law upon Gaza, and the people of Palestine turn to the United Nations in a last ditch effort to gain some form of recognition as a state, thereby acquiring a voice which has to date been suppressed (Palestinian leader asks UN for statehood, 2011).

The issues are not simply political—a sizable portion of the Palestinian people has been displaced and is not able to return to their homes due to the occupation. Israeli citizens are under constant threat of attack from terrorist groups. Negotiations therefore must take into account the expressed needs of the people and begin to work at changing attitudes. After so much time, it is to be expected that the Israeli attribute much of the blame upon the ongoing retaliatory attacks of the Palestinians, and feel as though they are in an enclave, which they have to defend. The Palestinians struggle with displacement, poverty, an apparently indifferent international community and a corrupt government that has enriched itself at their expense, leaving them with little recourse and no real voice (Forgione, 2004). As Crocker , Hampson and Aall (2004) explain, the best recourse for getting a peace settlement to stick is to obtain the support of the communities, and this means ensuring that their needs and concerns are met, and that justice is established and maintained (Crocker, Hampson, & Aall, 2004).

The first step to creating real peace in the Middle East might very well be international recognition of Palestine as a separate state, and a “conscious and deliberate effort” to engage the people of both countries in the negotiating and resolution process (Crocker, Hampson, & Aall, 2004, p. 183). This would involve the United Nations, whose role would be to help reintegrate the refugees, monitor illegal settlement evacuation and ensure that these civilians are able to find adequate housing, create educational programs that bring the two cultures together for mutual understanding and tolerance, provide forums for open discussion and exchange, and monitor the creation of adequate and effective governance systems within Palestine. These efforts, along with an international infusion of economic aid into Palestine, will help provide the infrastructure for an enduring peace and eliminate the “intractable’ aspects of the conflict.