Ryan Kelsey
Israel’s
Looming Intifada
Throughout
the past several weeks, tensions have been rising in Jerusalem, with multiple
cases of lone-wolf attacks against Israeli citizens. In response, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu has upped his rhetoric in an alarming and extremely dangerous
way. He implied that the Holocaust was
not developed in the wicked mind of Hitler’s Third Reich; rather, it was
developed in the evil mind of the Muslim cleric responsible for overseeing the
holy sites in Jerusalem, Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini. The exact quote is as follows:
“Hitler didn’t
want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel [them.] Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said,
‘If you expel them, they’ll all come here.’ ‘So what should I do with them?’ he
asked. [al-Husseini] said, ‘burn them.’”
While
this could be seen as nothing more than a foolish and wildly inaccurate
assessment of history, it catalyzes an already growing trend toward violence
within Israel. This was Israel’s
response to the call from Ismael Radwan, a high-ranking Hamas official, for a
third intifada, or war between the Palestinians and Israelis. Assuming both sides are aiming to avoid
full-scale war, how does each side ramp down its actions to bring this flare in
tensions to a peaceful conclusion?
Currently,
each aggressive action being taken by either side is being met equal or
additional actions by the other side, as always happens when these tensions
arise. While no easy solution exists to
bring about a permanent solution to the differences between Israelis and
Palestinians, both sides should agree that they cannot afford a full-scale
escalation of violence right now.
For
Israel, they should recognize that their image has been damaged internationally,
especially after the violence that occurred in Gaza last year, resulting in
over 2,000 deaths and the displacement of tens of thousands more. Netanyahu, especially, should be concerned
about how his actions will impact his relations with the United States, a
relationship characterized by increasing distrust and ambivalence between the
latter. Furthermore, he risks provoking
extremism and anti-Western sentiment in a volatile region, with Syria and Iraq
as prime examples of the reciprocity that comes from violence. However, Netanyahu could also be displaying
his strength after his failure to sabotage the Iran Nuclear Deal that he
vocally opposed.
For
Palestinians, they should be searching for a peaceful solutions because,
mainly, support for an autonomous Palestinian states has been growing in recent
years, with 193 members of the United Nations formally recognizing it. Participation in catalyzing and provoking
violence may damage this support and result in a delay in its recognition by
other states. Furthermore, as mentioned
earlier, tens of thousands of Palestinians were displaced after the last war in
Gaza. Any rational leader should look at
this and consider to negative consequences of promoting violence.
In
the end, the relationship between Israel and Palestine in recent years has been
like a game of chicken on a circular track, with them narrowly avoiding a
devastating collision every time they round a lap. With the last intifada ending approximately
ten years ago, there is no telling how far this current escalation in violence
will end up. While both sides have
irreparable differences, war can still be avoided. Neither side can truly afford a conflict
right now; however, neither side can truly control the actions of their people
at this point, with unsanctioned violence sparking up on both sides. However, the leaders of Israel and Palestine
could tone down their rhetoric to avoid the full-scale conflict that both sides
appear content moving towards currently.
No comments:
Post a Comment