Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Abstract
The conflict between Israel and Palestine may be regarded as one of the most challenging and long-lasting multidimensional conflicts of the 21st century which resolution is currently unreachable. Since 1948, Israel and Palestine are involved into deadly confrontations, even if of the two-state approach is in the heart of the negotiations for peace. The international community, including the United States, undertakes all efforts to promote stability in this region. At the same time, the political decisions of the United states in relation to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may be defined as unstable as the approach to this issue was constantly changing. In the present day, regardless of the official support for peace in the region, Trumps administration contributed to the escalation of the conflict recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and the subsequent relocation of its embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem being aware of a great importance of this city for the Palestinian state as well. On the basis of previous research dedicated to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this research seeks to investigate what social impact the Trump Administrations decision will have on Palestinians and Israelis, especially in terms of the two sides access to territories and water.
Introduction to the Study
Introduction
The long-lasting conflict between Israel and Palestine continues to escalate, widening the gap of finding a stable solution to create a permanent peace. Since 1948 when the violent hostilities between Israel and Palestine broke out into deadly confrontations, the prospects of stability and peace remain a distant dream (Amal, 2020). Israel-Palestine is one of the most persistent conflicts in history that has remained unsolvable despite the involvement of the international community. The commitment of both sides to solve the conflict is confronted with hardliners from both sides of the divide, creating a stalemate on the mediation efforts. The conflict is multidimensional, involving political-economic, social, and religious dimensions that further complicate resolution efforts. At the heart of the negotiations for peace is the favor of the two-state approach, which proposes that both Israel and Palestine exist side-by-side independently (Amal, 2020). However, it is not as simple as it sounds since several elements need consideration, including security, border divisions, resources, the fate of refugees, the occupation of Palestinian territories, and the security of the Israeli people. This introductory section of the study presents background information on the conflict to understand the origins of the conflict, essential issues, timeline of events, and the road to peace. Additionally, the section outlines the problem statement, the significance of the study, and the research question.
Background
History of the Israel-Palestine Conflict
Violence erupted between Israel and Palestine in 1948 following the official establishment of the state of Israel. Before 1948 tensions had been arising between Arabs and Jews because of the proliferation of the Zionism movement, calling for the establishment of an Israeli nation in Palestine (Adenyi, 2019). On the other hand, Arabs were against the settlement of Jews into the Arab land referred to as Mandatory Palestine at the time. The Zionist movement considered the land the rightful inheritance of Jews on the notion that their ancestors first inhabited the land before they were driven away by historical events (Cordesman, 2018). As a result, the Zionists encouraged the immigration of Jews from Europe, which was further precipitated by the growing hostilities in the region. The Holocaust heightened the decision to permanently settle Jews into the land, primarily supported by most Western countries. In 1947, the United Nations (UN) Resolution 181 established a partition plan to split Mandatory Palestine into Israel and Palestine states (Cho, 2020). However, the official declaration of the State of Israel on May 14, 1948, sparked an outbreak of violence between Arabs and Jews, lasting more than 1 year. The outcome of the war was the establishment of three territories: the Gaza strip, the State of Israel, and the West Bank. Moreover, 750,000 Palestinians were displaced from their land, as the Israelis occupied territories assigned to Palestinians.
Following the war, the enmity between Jews and Arabs continued drawing Israel into violent confrontations with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. In 1956, Israel waged an invasion into the Sinai Peninsula, which further heightened regional hostilities. Consequently, in 1967, Israel initiated an attack on the Arab countries marking the Six-Day War, ending in Israel claiming the West Bank and East Jerusalem, Sinai Peninsula, and Gaza Strip held by Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, respectively. According to Zilberfarb (2018), the Six-Day War was a major turning point in the conflict because of open support for the Israeli invasion by Western countries such as France, which applauded the move. This gave Israel confidence to continue settling its citizens in the West Bank, territory originally dedicated to Palestine in UN Resolution 181. Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack, known as the Yom Kippur War, to regain lost territories. Nevertheless, both sides did not reap significant gains from the war (Reliefweb, 2021). Following this occupation, the UN released Resolution 242, directing Israel to withdraw from these territories returning to those declared to the state in 1947 (Zanotti, 2020). The back-and-forth wars between Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Israel finally ended with signing a peace treaty, Camp David Accords, in September 1978.
Even though Camp David peace negotiations ended Israels confrontations with Egypt, they failed to address the dominant question of Palestinian self-determination, which was among the root causes of these hostilities (Amal, 2020). As such, tensions between the established state of Israel and Palestine persisted as Israel continued to settle its citizens into Palestinian territory in the West Bank. Subsequently, the first intifada that started in 1987 and finished in 1993 broke out where Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip territories waged an uprising against the state of Israel. The war necessitated the formation of the Palestinian authority to allow Palestinians to govern themselves in the Gaza Strip and West Bank territories. The decision was arrived at during the negotiations that created the Oslo I Accords in 1993 (Reliefweb, 2021). Similarly, in 1995, Oslo II Accord further called for Israels withdrawal from six cities in the West Bank and several towns designated for Palestine (Reliefweb, 2021).
Palestinians continued to reel over Israels occupation of the West Bank, which led to the second intifada from 2000 to 2005. The Israeli government reacted by erecting a wall around the West Bank to control the movement of Palestinians into Israeli territory. While the decision was condemned by the international community, including the International Criminal Court (ICC), Israel completed the wall, which still stand today (Amal, 2020). Another important event that has shaped the conflict was the emergence of Hamas during this period. By 2013, Hamas had forged a coalition with the Palestinian Authoritys ruling party giving the group significant power to influence important decisions in Palestine (Davis et al., 2017). Israel and the United States consider Hamas a terrorist group with the agenda to work with Iran, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), and other terrorist factions to make the entire Middle East one Islamic State under Sharia Law. Hamas has received funding from several sources, with the main donor being Iran, while such countries as Syria, Iraq, and Sudan are also involved in funding (English, 2019). It is noteworthy that open collaboration (for example, financial) between Hamas and the countries mentioned above is not publicized.
Hamas pushed for confrontations with the Islamic government; for example, in 2014, the group launched rocket attacks into Israel, instigating retaliatory attacks by the Israeli soldiers. The skirmishes in 2014 ended after Egypt brokered a deal between the two groups. However, this decision resulted in massive loss of lives, over 2,200 Palestinians and 73 Israelis (Lewin & Berge, 2016). Following these attacks and other minor skirmishes, the Palestinian Authority withdrew its agreement to the Oslo Accord on territorial divisions. Another major violence broke out in 2018 through weekly demonstrations by Palestinians along the Gaza Strip-Israel border. These demonstrations also coincided with Nakba, marking the 17th anniversary since Palestinians were driven from their land as Israel gained independence (Reliefweb, 2021). According to a report by the UN, the protest resulted in the deaths of over 180 demonstrators and approximately 6,000 wounded (United Nations Human Rights Council, 2019). Still, in 2018, Hamas launched another attack against Israeli soldiers by firing over 100 rockets into Israels territory. Consequently, the Israeli soldiers retaliated these attacks striking targets in Gaza. Finally, the outbreak of this conflict ended in a cease-fire agreement between the two groups (United Nations Human Rights Council, 2019). Nevertheless, the sporadic attacks have continued to the current outbreak of violence, illuminating a worsening situation and dimming any prospects of peace. Moreover, analysts fear that the problem may deteriorate into a third intifada.
Jerusalem
Jerusalem is a holy city sitting on the Judean plateau located between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean Sea. Jerusalem is an old city with spiritual significance to the three major world religions: Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. The history of Jerusalem explains why one of the oldest cities in the world is important for the three religions. Jerusalem dates back to the 4th millennium BCE, evident from the nomadic shepherds encampments in Camp David (Arieli, 2020). Similarly, Egyptian tablets reveal the history of Jerusalem during the Canaanite period in the 14th century BCE, at the time named Urusalim. During its existence, Jerusalem has been attacked 52 times, besieged 23 times, recaptured times, and destroyed twice (Moment, 2008). These attacks show just how important the city is and has been throughout history.
Followers of the three religions have a history with Jerusalem because of peoples ancestries, which have all controlled the city at some point. For example, in 1,000 BCE, King David ruled over Jerusalem and established it as the capital of Israel (Amal, 2020). Solomon, King Davids son, also built his temple in Jerusalem. At some point, the city was also ruled by the Ottoman Caliphate. Other times in ancient history, Muslim and Christian factions have jointly ruled over the city, leaving a mark of its religious significance. In Jews, Jerusalem enjoys prominent mention in the Hebrew Bible, include as an Old Testament in the Christian Bible (Lewin & Berge, 2016). Additionally, Abraham, the father of Judaism and a prominent figure in other religions, including Christianity and Islam, offered his son, Isaac, for sacrifice in Jerusalem. Another important history of Jerusalem to Jews is the significance of Judahs rule over the territory. He was, however, overthrown and the Jewish Temple destroyed, exiling Jews in Babylonia from 597 to 539 BC. The place once again became the heart of Judaism, leading to the rebuilding of the temple, but this was again destroyed and the Jews driven out of place.
On the other hand, Jerusalem matters to Muslims because it was the dwelling place of important Messengers and Prophets of God. For instance, Prophets David, Solomon, and Jesus are associated with Jerusalem. Additionally, Prophet Mohammed visited heaven during one night from Jerusalem, making it a holy site for Muslims. The place also holds some of the most important and oldest buildings in Islam, such as the al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock built by the Umayyad caliph in the 17th century (El-Awaisi & Yavuz, 2020). Inscriptions of the earliest Quran adorned the walls of the Dome of Rock. During this same time period, Muslims purchased and developed land surrounding the Dome to build hospitals, religious centers, and other important institutions to serve the population. Before the question of Palestine, Jerusalem under Muslim rule, was tolerant to other faiths, as Muslims recognized and respected the rights of Jews and Christians and the religious significance of Jerusalem to these faiths (Amal, 2020). Christian and Jewish communities who lived in the place even had significant influence in the place owing to its sacredness to the groups.
The Balfour Declaration of 1917, which declared the British support for establishing a Jewish state in Ara land, marked the beginning of hostilities between the Jews and Arabs and the struggle over the occupation of Jerusalem. While declaring the state of Israel in 1948, the UN declared Jerusalem corpus separatum given its important status to both Jews and Muslims (Zilberfarb, 2018). Initially, Israel occupied East Jerusalem after driving away Jordan. However, the UN Resolution of 1967 mandated that East Jerusalem should belong to Palestine while access to the holy sites should not be restricted and freedom of worship (United Nations Human Rights Council, 2019). After the 1967 Resolution, Palestine sought to establish Jerusalem as its capital city while Israel objected. Israel had made Jerusalem its administrative city hosting important government offices and residences (Leaders, 2021). For example, the Knesset, the Supreme Court, and the residence of the Prime Minister, among others. By 1980 Israel had passed a law, making Jerusalem the united capital of Israel, thereby affirming its intentions to control the entire Jerusalem, including Old City and East Jerusalem (Lagerwall, 2018). Additionally, Israel restricts Muslims from accessing parts of the holy sites such as Josephs Tomb (Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, 2013). The holy sites are manned by Israeli security forces, which restrict access and also arrest Palestinians suspected of launching attacks on the sites. Scorned Palestinians have attacked the holy site protected by Israeli forces several times despite the tight security (Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, 2013). Palestinians are concerned over the welfare and security of Christians and Muslims who visit the holy sites.
The international community is against Israels occupation of Jerusalem, making it the undivided Israeli capital (Lagerwall, 2018). However, in December 2017, the state of Israel received support over its annexation of East Jerusalem and making the holy city its capital, when former United States President Donald Trump and the Trump Administration formally recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (Arieli, 2020). The announcement was followed by the relocation of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv. Critics argue that the move by the Trump Administration implies cements Americas unwavering support for Israel, which also compromises the peace efforts since the United States is the chief mediator and should maintain neutrality (Arieli, 2020). Trump Administrations decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel was isolated. Earlier on, other presidential administrations had hinted at doing the same. While running for the presidency in 1992, Bill Clinton stated that Jerusalem remains the undivided capital of Israel and is accessible to both Palestinians and Jews (Moten, 2018). Likewise, in 2000 George Bush Jr. had plans of relocating the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. Finally, former President Obama in 2008, stressed that Israel is the capital of Israel and should not be divided.
Gaza Strip and West Bank
Gaza Strip is located on the east coast of the Mediterranean Sea, where it borders Israel to the north and east and Egypt to the southwest. Gaza Strip is an exclusive Palestinian territory and a self-governing land. Both Gaza and West Bank are under Palestinian Authority and separated from each other by Israel territory (Lewin & Berge, 2016). This separateness is another element creating complexities in finding a resolution to the conflict because Palestine territories are fragmented, making it challenging to integrate them under one authority. Gaza Strip has also been under Hamas rule since 2007 after elections in 2006 (Hannase, 2019). This group is responsible for the rising insurgency in the region, which prompted the United States and Israel to declare economic and political sanctions on Gaza Strip. For example, the group has fired nearly 3,000 rockets into Israel and constantly wages war with Israeli soldiers (Reliefweb, 2021). Additionally, it applies unpopular laws based on Sharia law, ancient British codes, Ottoman laws, and Palestinian Authority laws. The presence of Hamas has also created a breeding ground for other militant groups, which are sometimes in coalition with Hamas, thus, threatening the security and stability of the territory and the wider Middle East and Mediterranean regions (Reliefweb, 2021). These factions are Popular Resistance Committees, the Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine, and the Army of Islam.
Despite the occupation and control of the Gaza Strip by Hamas, Israel still holds great influence over the territory. The international community believes it is violating the rights of the people through various restrictions. According to OMalley (2017), Israel controls Gazas peoples lives by controlling six of its seven land crossings, air, and maritime space. Additionally, Israel has a buffer zone in Gaza, which Palestinians are not allowed in. Finally, Gaza is dependent on Israel for water, telecommunications, electricity, and other essential utilities (Weinthal & Sowers, 2019). After the beginning of the occupation, the Israeli government invested heavily in the development of the infrastructure to support Jewish settlements. Agricultural, energy, and water supply infrastructure were integrated into the Israeli overall infrastructure. As of now, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip receive vital resources (such as water and electricity) supporting the life of settlers as well as infrastructure in the territory from Israel. Palestinians and Israeli people find themselves in an overt conflict based on access to resources. In essence, analysts emphasize that Gaza Strip is not an independent de facto state as purported but is indirectly occupied and controlled by Israel (Moten, 2018). This means that achieving a lasting peace will require the complete removal of Israeli control over Gaza and allowing Palestine full independence and sovereignty. Likewise, in West Bank, even though the territory belongs to Palestine following UN Resolutions on territorial divisions, much of it has been annexed by Israel, creating fragmented Palestine territories.
Treaties and Accords
Over the years as the conflict endures, there have been many attempts at peace resulting in treaties and peace accords with the hope of creating lasting peace. However, none of these have been close to ringing the conflict to an end. Nevertheless, it is important to understand these peace treaties and their significance for a deeper engagement with the conflicts journey and core issues. The first attempt to bring peace between Arabs and Jews was a peace deal in 1956 between Egypt and Israel, following a fight over the control of the Sue Canal (Amal, 2020). The deal was negotiated by the Soviet Union and the United States. The second peace deal occurred in 1978, the Camp David Accords, which ended the war between Israel and Egypt on and off (Cohen-Almagor, 2018). The peace deal was brokered by President Jimmy Carter and signed by Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat representing their respective countries.
The Declaration of Principles was the first peace deal signed between Palestine and Israel without the involvement of the other Ara countries in war with Israel. The deal was signed between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel and declared a five-year interim period that Palestine would practice self-rule (Davis et al., 2017). Part of the agreement was for Israel to transfer power and responsibilities to Palestinian Authority in Gaza and West Bank to allow self-governance. The Declaration of Principles, also known as the Oslo I Accords, was negotiated after a series of attacks and protests by Palestinians against the Israeli government (Nusseibeh et al., 2019). In 1995, the Oslo II Accords followed the first accord and negotiated for the withdrawal of Israel from several cities in the West Bank that it had occupied illegally (Leaders, 2021). However, Israel failed to adhere to the mandate of this accord, and with no rational solution, the conflict continued. The recent talks have focused on peace agreements based either on the two-state structure or the one-state solution. However, the discussions are at an impasse because of a lack of consensus on various issues.
Two-State and One-State Solutions
The two-state solution is one of the current proposals for a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine is the formation of a two-state system. The two-state framework notes that Palestine and Israel will exist side-by-side as two independent states: Jewish and Arab states. The two-state solution originated from the Oslo Accords following a plan to establish a permanent independent Jewish state (UN, 2020a). However, for years, the two sides have disagreed on the proposed elements of the two-state solution. While the talks are at a stalemate, the situation worsens y day, calling for urgency to find a lasting solution. As Djerejian et al. (2018) stated, the case for a two-state solution for two peoples has not radically changed in the many years it has been made, but today the urgency is higher (p. 5). According to Amal (2020), a lasting solution proposed by the two-state framework requires the leaders from both sides to make pragmatic proposals and difficult decisions. The two-state solution has several contents which are the subjects for negotiations.
The first content of the two-state solution is the international framework. The international framework postulates the territorial divisions for the proposed two states. According to the framework, the territorial divisions that would work for the two states should be based on UN resolutions 242 and 238. The following are the principles of these resolutions: Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force. (Djerejian et al., 2018, p. 6)
Further, the framework recommends that the parties maintain order agreements declared by the UN in 1947 and any modifications to be negotiated upon by the two parties. Fulfilling this requirement of the two-state solution has been challenging because Israel annexed West Bank territories belonging to Palestine (Amir, 2021). Israel has established structures and permanent residents in these territories, so abandoning these developments is not an option. The second content of the two-state framework is the question of refugees. The two-state framework postulates that the two sides should negotiate and find a mutual solution to the issue of refugees. Additionally, it acknowledges that assistance will be required to support refugees regardless of the outcome of the negotiations (Reliefweb, 2021). Once again, the fate of refugees is causing a stalemate because of Palestines insistence on the right of return of refugees. At the same time, Israel argues that such a move is not possible as it will upset the demographic make-up of Israel-Palestine.
Thirdly, the two-state solution proposes that Jerusalem becomes home to the capital of the two states, just as outlined in the 1947 territorial resolution. Additionally, the holy sites would be accessible to all religions (Amal, 2020). However, as noted in an earlier discussion, Israel has gotten old of the entire Jerusalem and insisted that it remain undivided. The lack of willingness to share Jerusalem with Palestine is a significant contributor to the impasse of the two-state negotiations. The fourth issue is the security arrangement for the proposed two independent states. The framework indicates that the two sides should agree upon the withdrawal of Israeli soldiers from the Gaza Strip and the non-militarization of Palestine (Djerejian et al., 2018). Fifth, the resolution calls for equitable distribution of resources between the two countries. Since Palestine is dependent on Israel for utilities and other resources, it would be important to ensure an equitable sharing of transboundary resources to ensure self-sufficiency.
Additionally, the two-state proposal state that the countries shall have good state-to-state relations based on respect for the sovereignty of each state. The conditions shall be supportive of a good neighborhood as forms exist side-by-side. Another issue in the two-state framework is infrastructural development. The framework indicated that Palestine would receive significant support to ensure infrastructural and institutional developments (Djerejian et al., 2018). The aim of this developmental support is to ensure that Palestine is stable, secure, prosperous, and becomes democratic to promote the welfare and wellbeing of its citizens. Finally, the two-state solution would also improve regional relations by creating peace between Israel and other Arab nations for a peaceful and stable Middle East and Mediterranean regions (Djerejian et al., 2018). While other issues are addressed by the two-state peace plan, the above are the core issues and the most contentious; thus, creating a standoff in the peace negotiations.
Israel and Palestine have been having talks for a possible resolution and formation of two states existing in the contested territory for over forty years. However, the failure to reach a consensus has created pessimism on whether the two-state dream will ever be realized. Some analysts argue that with the stalemate on the two-state solution, the only plausible solution is creating a peaceful one-state for both Arabs and Jews (Amal, 2020). With the declining hope in the possibility of a two-state solution, public support for an alternative one-state solution is steadily growing. A one-state framework is a proposal that both Arabs and Jews should form a joint government. In this case, the two would form a confederate, unitary, or federal system governing the entire territory from the Gaza Strip, West Bank, Jerusalem, and the parts currently occupied by the State of Israel. A one-state solution requires everyone to live and move freely in the Israel-Palestine territory and enjoy equal rights regardless of ethnicity or religion (Zilberfarb, 2018). In addition, the one-state framework mandates that all people have the right to vote and elect a government consisting of both Israelites and Palestinians.
The one-state solution is threatened by the national identity of each of the parties. One of the elements motivating the conflict is the desire for national identity. Israel wishes to preserve Jewish identity based on the notions of Zionism, while Palestine also wishes to experience a sense of national identity as an Arab nation (Amal, 2020). Having a combined state will not give the two parties room for fulfilling their desire and passion for preserving national identity. The second issue is Israels self-definition, where the states insist that the laws, policies, and policies do not favor the Jews over Arabs. According to Pressman (2021), the system discriminates against Palestinians in any way, including political rights, employment, security organs, housing, and immigration. Thus, if allowed to continue, it will not guarantee equality for both Palestinians and Israelites. Yet, Israel seems unwilling to modify its self-definition and change the system to accommodate the needs and rights of Palestinians.
US Foreign Policies on Israel-Palestine
The United States is an active participant in the Israel-Palestine conflict in several ways. First, Israel is a U. S. ally, and the state enjoys a close relationship with America. Consequently, America has an obligation to protect its ally, which it does by providing security support to Israel (Cordesman, 2018). Moreover, shared economic and security interests cemented the enduring relationship between the United States and Israel. Secondly, the U. S. is involved in the conflict to promote peace and stability in the Middle East region, which is the primary producer and supplier of oil. Instability and other disruptions caused by insurgency in the region would threaten the oil supply, leading to a shortage and, eventually, a global crisis (Lewin & Berge, 2016). Thirdly, the U. S. is the primary mediator between the two parties in talks to bring lasting peace and stability. Finally, because of its commitment to upholding and promoting human rights, the U. S. is involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict to restore Palestines violated rights and others in Israel. For instance, the U. S. provides humanitarian assistance and pushes for a solution that would lead to the self-determination of Palestinians and the security and dignity of the people (Amal, 2020). As such, U. S. foreign policies focus on finding a solution to the conflict. The country has taken part in the peace process and attempts to revive it whenever the negotiations are neglected for too long.
The U. S. has unwavering and unconditional support for Israel, which is a significant issue in the peace process because the relationship may influence the ability to attain a fair outcome. Thus, to understand factors that influence the outcome of peace negotiation, it is essential to conceive why the U. S. shares a strong relationship with Israel. First, Israel is strategic to America as it provides a platform for introducing pro-American democracy in the Middle East (Amal, 2020). America has tried for years to encourage the adoption of democratic forms of government by the Arab countries in vain. On the other hand, Israel benefits from the strategic relationship through support for Zionism and access to the biggest echelons in the U. S. government (Zanotti, 2020). For example, Benjamin Netanyahu has maintained a close relationship with Washington in exchange for political support for a long time. Additionally, Israel is a key U. S. ally in the counterterrorism war. Counterterrorism efforts ring together western countries in the fight against extremism and terrorist activities against western countries.
The second reason the U. S. shows overwhelming support for Israel is based on moral underpinning. For instance, having suffered Holocaust, Americans are empathetic to the suffering experienced by Jews during this period. Similarly, America being a strongly Christian country sees the need to protect the holy land, and the rationale way to do so is to support Israel (Dobers et al., 2018). Further, America supports Israel because being the only democracy in the Middle East, it resonates with western values and faces a constant threat from hostile Arab countries and terrorists against western values. This notion of the vulnerability of Israel is sometimes misleading. According to Schewe (2021), it justifies Israels hostile actions on the argument that the Arab countries threaten it and, thus, act in self-defense.
The U. S. foreign policy on the Palestine-Israel conflict has been evolving since the onset of the conflict. First, the involvement of the United States in Israel-Palestine relations started with President Truman in 1947, whose administration supported the UN resolution on the Partition Plan for the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The foreig
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.