The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: An Impartial Perspective

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: An Impartial Perspective

Should historians make moral judgments about the past?

The Israel-Palestine conflict has been going on for decades. It is characterized as a violent dispute over land, political control, and resources. There are two primary perspectives of the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Israeli point of view, and the Palestinian. However, due to the considerable amount of media coverage about the conflict, there are hundreds more from all over the world.

An Overview of the Conflict

 Both Jews and Muslims have strong religious and cultural ties to the region, dating back about 4000 years to Abraham, the father of the two religions. The primary reason for this conflict goes back to how it started and who is the ‘righteous’ owner of the land. According to the old testament, God told Abraham and his people to settle in a land called Canaan, which is in the approximate of modern-day Israel. In 1000 BCE King Saul established the Israel-like monarchy, which continued under King David and his son Solomon, who built the first Jewish temple in Jerusalem. This historical legacy became part of the Jewish claim to the land of Israel. The land would continue to be conquered and ruled by various groups, including Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Egyptians, Fatimids, Seljuks, Crusaders, Mamluks, and the Ottomans who called the region Palestine. It would become home to many sites considered sacred by Jews, Muslims, and Christians alike.  During these transitions, Jews were forced to flee the area creating a diaspora a dispersion of people from their homeland. In Europe, the Jewish diaspora also faced oppression and persecution so in the 1880s many Jewish people started immigrating back to an Ottoman control Palestine. By 1914 there were more than 75,000 Jews in the area. After WW1, Great Britain took control of modern-day Israel, Palestine, and Jordan from the Ottomans. 

In 1922, the League of Nations approved a British declaration that promised a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine, but it would be more than 2 decades before that promise was fulfilled. In 1939, WW2 broke out, more than 6 million Jews murdered in Holocaust, with millions more displaced. In 1947, after the war was over the UN decided to partition Palestine into two countries, the Jewish state of Israel and the Arab state of Palestine. Israel agreed to the partition and borders were drawn for two states, but many Arab residents thought the partition unfairly favored the Jewish population. On May 14, 1948, the state of Israel was established. Almost immediately the Arab league, group of surrounding Arab countries, rejected the partition and attacked. Israel fought back and after over 9 months of conflict, it's armed forces occupied much of the land to become the state of Palestine. Egypt took control of the Gaza strip. Jordan then called transjordan took control of the Westbank. The original plan of a Palestinian state was scrapped. This was a victory for many Jewish people, because over 700,000 Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes, many taking refuge in the Gaza strip and the Westbank. This war would be remembered in Hebrew as the ‘war of independence’ and in Arabic as ‘the catastrophe’.

The tension between Jews and Arab Muslims in the region continued for decades. Fighting between Israel and its Arab neighbors continued on and off for the next 60 years. In 1964, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) formed. To consolidate the power of many small Palestinian groups. In 1967, the 6-day war, Israel defeated the armies of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan and gained control of significant territory. In 1987, following an incident with the Israeli defense forces that left 4 Palestinian refugees dead, Palestinian militia led a violent uprising known as the first intifada that resulted in hundreds of death. After the first intifada, Israel and the PLO created a timetable for peace, the Oslo Accords. Further peace talks in 2000 proved unsuccessful when agreements couldn't be reached on the status of Jerusalem, the rights of refugees, and increased Jewish settlements in Palestinian lands. Later that year, Ariel Sharon, an Israeli opposition leader, visited the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. An act many Palestinians found offensive. Violent protests, riots, attacks, and suicide bombings broke out. This period of violence, the second intifada lasted nearly 5 years 2000-2005 and marked the end of any peace. The violence ended in 2005 when Israel withdrew from Gaza. 

In 2006, a Militants Suni Islamists group, Hamas, won the Palestinian legislative elections. Many countries considered Hamas a terrorist group because of their methods such as carrying suicide bombings and calling for the destruction of Israel. Hamas and Israel continue to clash violently. In 2017, Hamas called for the formation of a Palestinian state using the 1967 borders. But it did not formally recognize Israel as a state, so Israel did not accept it. Today, Palestine fights for statehood. The conflict is further complicated by Israelis who continue to settle in the Westbank. Several countries have pushed for peace agreements in recent years, and many suggested a two-state solution, though a peaceful solution has yet to be achieved. The region remains a place of significance for people of many ethnic and religious backgrounds.

This leads us to the question; “Should historians make moral judgments about the past?”

The entirety of this conflict can be looked at in several ways. Some hold the British responsible, for declaration promising Jews a national home in Palestine when it was not their decision to make. Some blame the Jews, while some the Arabs. In this case, it’s all about perspective, and being aware of biases that might lead you to believe and relate with one side of the conflict rather than the other. Moral judgments refer to judgments that have moral content; they are used to evaluate such situations. The basis of moral judgments is a topic of some philosophical dispute. Moral judgments can be based on intuition or feeling, often in connection with the emotions. 

According to the Jews and their history, a part of their claim to the land is because of what God told Abraham, to settle in Canaan. They believe that they were given this land by God, and it is symbolic, representing their holy land. They also believe that King David and his son, Solomon, built the first Jewish temple in Jerusalem. While Palestine was under Ottoman control, Jews returned to their ‘homeland’ hoping to avoid any anti-Semitism they faced in Russia. However, the Arabs increasingly felt like they were losing all of their land and that the Ottomans were not protecting their rights. Collective resentment and suspicion toward the Jews started to build among Arab inhabitants. Here, we are presented with two perspectives. To find out which side we should faction with, historians made moral judgments. They said that it was the Jewish homeland, and it had cultural significance. This brings up the questions; “Who claimed it as the Jewish holy land?; “Was this based on eye-witness testimony or other cultural significance?”; and “Is this reliable?”. Moral judgments about events in the past such as this, where God is involved, can rely entirely upon the historian and their beliefs. The historian, in this case, would have to remain impartial, regardless of his or her beliefs and assess the situation. The use of moral judgments would be necessary here.  

Another situation where both perspectives are clear is the Balfour declaration. This was the declaration made by the British promising the Jewish home. Jews were thrilled as the British government declared its support for a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine as part of the Balfour Declaration. This milestone was official recognition of their quest in front of the world. However, Arabs felt betrayed and humiliated by the Balfour Declaration, especially after the British previously pledged to support Arab independence and a unified kingdom of Arab lands if they revolted against the Ottoman Turks. A moral judgment should not be made here. The reason as to why the British promised the Jews this land after pledging support to the Arabs should be questioned in order to remain impartial and look at the conflict from an unbiased perspective. When the reason behind this is clear to both the Arabs and Jews, regardless of the rest of the world, a solution can be reached and a better understanding can promote a path to peace.

An additional example of both points of view being shown in the conflict is when Hamas wins the parlimentary election. Israel feels it no longer has a peace partner now that the radical Islamic party Hamas, which Israel, the United States, and the EU all designate as a terrorist organization, receives the majority of votes in the Palestinians’ second general election. This victory is disastrous, as Hamas, unlike the previous ruling party, Fatah, which has evolved into a secular governmental incarnation of the PLO, refuses to recognize the existence of Israel. The Israelis believe that terrorists will now have the majority of seats in the Palestine Legislative Council. The Palestinian people have spoken with Hamas’s parliamentary win over Fatah. This landslide victory for Hamas is a welcome one, as the party, who will lead the formation of the next Palestinian National Authority cabinet, will not be bullied so easily by Israel and the western world. With Hamas in power, the Palestinian’s won’t have to give too much and settle for too little, which was the case until recently.  Historians should make a moral judgment here in order to evaluate this situation. The fact that Israelis are generalizing the whole parliament as ‘terrorists’ should make their standpoint seem unreliable due to that statement not being a fact. However, Hamas’ background and political stance should be critically evaluated to determine why the Jews had this presupposition against him.

In the historical area of knowledge, making moral judgments about the past is something that is extremely arbitrary. In some cases, making these judgments considering feelings and intuition outweigh facts, however, in some cases doing the opposite is crucial. Making sure that bias is in no way present for historians is tough, but achievable. Using processes such as that of Reflexivity can help to avoid this bias. This is where the historian keeps asking themselves whether there is a bias present, even those that they might be unaware of, and how to look at the situation with an unprejudiced background. 

Works cited:
- Beauchamp, Z. (2018, May 14). What are Israel and Palestine? Why are they fighting? Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/2018/11/20/18080002/israel-palestine-conflict-basics

- (2015, February 20). Guide: Why are Israel and the Palestinians fighting over Gaza? - CBBC Newsround. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/20436092

- Israeli-Palestinian Conflict | Global Conflict Tracker. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/interactive/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/israeli-palestinian-conflict

- (2019, January 17). World Report 2019: Rights Trends in Israel and Palestine. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/israel/palestine

(2015, February 20). Guide: Why are Israel and the Palestinians fighting over Gaza? - CBBC Newsround. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/20436092

(n.d.). Israeli-Palestinian Conflict | Global Conflict Tracker. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/interactive/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/israeli-palestinian-conflict

(2019, January 17). World Report 2019: Rights Trends in Israel and Palestine. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/israel/palestine

Beauchamp, Z. (2018, May 14). What are Israel and Palestine? Why are they fighting? Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/2018/11/20/18080002/israel-palestine-conflict-basics

(2015, February 20). Guide: Why are Israel and the Palestinians fighting over Gaza? - CBBC Newsround. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/20436092

(n.d.). Israeli-Palestinian Conflict | Global Conflict Tracker. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/interactive/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/israeli-palestinian-conflict

(2019, January 17). World Report 2019: Rights Trends in Israel and Palestine. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/israel/palestine