"Jerusalem Then And Now" by Mick Dumper really gave me some insight on Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It was nice to get a history of Jerusalem and the reasoning behind why both Israel and Palestine have conflicting opinions when it comes to the city. I also found it interesting that Dumper says that nothing will be resolved without international pressure to come to an agreement. I agree with this because without this pressure, I don't believe that either side will negotiate with the other. The second reading, "The History of Jerusalem", was also interesting. It gives an Arab perspective, and I found it interesting to see how these two sides differ in their opinions of Jerusalem. I also found it interesting that there was an agreement to divide Jerusalem after the 1948 war, but was not put into effect. This makes me wonder how different Jerusalem would be if this agreement had been acted on. "Jerusalem: The Holy City" also had a very good history of Jerusalem and the conflicts that have risen. It is astounding to really put into perspective how much change Jerusalem has gone through over the years.
What you bring up about how Jerusalem could be today is one that has infinite answers. From these readings, it is clear that there have been many opportunities to move forward, but rarely are they fully effective.
ReplyDeleteI would like to point out that the failure of the 1948 UN Res. 181 (the partition plan) was not so simple. Jews around the world and zionists alike rejoiced at this progress. While they would still have to work incredibly hard to create a legitimate state, this was a great first step. Yet the Arab response to the plan was not so easy. There was much objection, and ultimately, its implementation was not complete.
While this plan, UN Res. 181, has been cited in more recent years as justification of a Palestinian state, many also see the Arab response as the sole reason that it didn't work the first time around.
So I will end to the idea of "what if?" We can ask "what if" in response to many failed attempts at solving this problem in the past, but the only thing that does is keep matters in the past. I don't see a way we can return to 1948 negotiations, just as I don't see a way to return to the pre-1967 borders. Years of conflict have brought much new development in Jerusalem and surrounding areas on both sides of the conflict. So I will offer the idea that if we are ever going to solve this problem, maybe we need to only look forward. Take the situation for what it is now, and face the facts on the ground before they get any worse.
(If you are interested in taking a look at UN Res 181, take a look here: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/res181.htm )
I have to say I disagree with the fact that International pressure will make any progress with the Israeli-Palestinian issue. The fact that funding for the UN is largely supported by the United States Agenda and has been for over 50 years, makes it very difficult for International pressure to be placed on equal rights issues for the two groups. Israel will continue to gain and increase room for Jewish settlements unless the United States creates a radical change in our agenda for the country. This would not be wise on our part due to the fact that they are strong allies of ours in the Middle East. I'm not saying that I have a solution to the problem, but it is highly unlikely to happen.
ReplyDelete