Controversial British playwright Edward Bond was once quoted saying, “Violence shapes and obsesses…society, and if we do not stop being violent we have no future.” It seems today peaceful resolution may be beyond the grasp of those embroiled in the increasingly violent standoff between Israel and Palestine, and that violence may be the only recourse to resolve numerous differences. However, the tit-for-tat violence is only serving to shape Palestinian and Israeli society as bellicose and intolerant. It is growing increasingly clear that drastic measures must be taken to curb the cycle of death before it becomes an unstoppable progression towards wanton destruction.

In an effort to prevent Israelis and Palestinians from being consumed in the fire of hatred that is now the reality of their society due to reproachable violence, the UN has passed a new resolution envisioning the formation of a Palestinian state with internationally recognized borders. This Palestinian state would coexist with Israel. These measures taken by the UN are naïve and detrimental to stability not only within the disputed region but also in other global hot spots, and therefore should be recanted at once. There exist several compelling reasons all delineating that the UN resolution is fundamentally flawed, a few of which are the following. Nobody currently involved in the dispute had an input during the motion. Also, the resolution dodges the key issue of the political deadlock between Israel and the Palestinians. In addition, the UN resolution sets a dangerous precedent for other similar situations elsewhere in the world. Finally, it would be morally incorrect to reward or recognize any unscrupulous and pernicious force.

During the motion, the UN failed to consult any of the leading members directly involved in the raging conflict, thus depriving the resolution of any modifications that more experienced and involved perspectives might have deemed necessary. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, an ardent war hawk, shows no sign of willing to negotiate. Despite the best efforts of the United States through its envoy Anthony Zinni, Sharon has flatly refused to a total recall of Israeli forces occupying Palestine territory. Each day as the death toll climbs and news of Israeli military strikes becomes commonplace, Palestinian leader Arafat is losing his leadership of and influence over the Palestinian people. Numerous polls and reports indicate that extremist and fundamentalist right-wing groups such as Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah are the dominant factions for the Palestinian, providing him with a sense of security and a method through which his blind rage can be directed towards Israeli civilians (something Arafat hasn’t been able to provide).

The largest and most influential group, Hamas, has a much larger support base than any other faction, including Yasser Arafat and the Fatah Movement. Groups such as Hamas have been using to their advantage the abject poverty and insecurity in which Palestinians live, attracting the masses by pointing fingers an already established institution for the wretched state of living, and providing a means to channel that burning rage at “the source of misery”. Thus the Palestinian has come to believe that Israel is the right hand of the devil, a demon dealing out death and misfortune to all those she encompasses. In fact, this has gone so far such that groups such as Hamas refuse to recognize the fundamental right of Israel to exist. The UN resolution fails to take these facts into account because it did not have the counsel of the people it needed advice from the most: those directly involved in the issue. Thus the resolution is ultimately nothing more than uneducated third party intervention, hardly the recipe for peace in a war-torn land.

The UN resolution evades a core issue in the conflict between Israel and Palestine: the political impasse that has stemmed from the decades of deep-rooted hatred. It fails to address the issue of the right of existence and the extent to which self-defense encompasses military retaliation. At present, Palestinians cite a complete withdrawal of all Israeli troops occupying Palestinian territory as stipulation for US brokered peace talks. However, Sharon is adamant in refusing to recall his forces unless Arafat can guarantee that he will curb violence in the region. The problem with the Israeli demand is that since Arafat is losing power and prestige to groups such as Hamas, he no longer has the power or the authority to stop the Palestinians and the radical groups from engaging in the senseless bloodshed.

Arafat supported and funded groups such as the Hamas, but now his dogs are loose and he has found himself unable to call them back. The Hamas show no intention of obeying a cease-fire despite Arafat’s desperate pleas for an end to the bloodshed. The Hamas repeatedly attack Israeli civilians and Israel retaliates by occupying Palestinian territory and attacking Palestinian buildings and terrorists. This only provokes more attacks by the militant groups, which in turn causes Israel to intensify its level of military retaliation under the name of self-defense. The vicious spiral seems to be an inescapable death trap for all involved. An exacerbating factor in the already fragile situation is Arafat’s true intentions, which remain unknown to the world at large. At times refusing to even attend peace talks and at others, falling on his knees, hands clasped, begging for peace. Whether or not Arafat is truly interested in peace, whether or not he truly has connections to extremist terror networks, is anyone’s guess.

In fact one is justified in going as far as to call Arafat’s inane calls for peace a façade. Arafat is ambivalent in his decisions, indecisive in his actions, and unclear in his intentions. Not knowing the underlying motives of the leaders and the desired results, a third party intervention cannot be successful. Coalescing all these loose strings, it is clear that the violence will not end. Militants will attack because Israel has no right to exist, and they will not recognize such a right granted to Israel by the UN, therefore rendering the UN resolution void. Sharon will continue to occupy Palestinian territory under the guise of self-defense. Arafat is on the fence and inconclusive on his position as leader. The grim dance of death regardless of a UN resolution because the resolution fails to address these facts of the matter, and in fact evades them.

The UN resolution sets forth a dangerous precedent to the rest of the world that violence rather than diplomacy is the means to a desirable end. By passing this resolution at a time when violence in the region is reaching all time highs, the UN is tacitly implying that an increase in violence to unbearable levels will ultimately result in the achievement of ones’ goals, thus setting a dangerous standard in some of the world’s most volatile hotspots. The situation in Spain isn’t entirely different from the Israel/Palestine issue, and the UN resolution may fuel Basque separatists to a far more violent and bloody protest by leading them to believe that they will be shown the same clemency as the Palestinians.

The inevitable result of such a situation is a heavy death toll in the ensuing struggle and a strain on Spanish paramilitary forces. Other situations very similar to that of the Israel/Palestine standoff are the struggles between FARC and Colombia, and Sri Lanka and the Tamil Tigers. By leading each of these groups to believing that they too will attain their objective through indiscriminate bloodshed, the UN is thoughtlessly placing in danger the lives of the many people who share the misfortune of living in close proximity with these violence prone groups, and also placing in a disadvantageous position the countries that must daily face the burden of controlling these groups operating in their own backyard. The resolution is pushing governments and law enforcement agencies and militant separatist groups already in a precarious position towards the brink of raw and unleashed combat, rendering global hotspots even more volatile than they already are. In the passing of this resolution, the UN did not consider the broader ramifications that the world would face.

|