Problem Identification
The Middle East never ending conflict between Israel and Palestine is partly because of their historical past and their cultural characteristics that have largely contributed to the crisis. This protagonist’s characteristics can rightly be termed as weaknesses that are unique for each party and at times similar for both of them. The major problem that is equally facing both parties is the lack of political will or good will from their respective citizens which is a crucial catalyst for sustaining the search for peace process. Without political or national support neither party has the mandate or authority to discuss or implement peaceful resolutions that can be reached during any such talks. This is because Israel for instance will require any agreement to be vetted and approved by relevant parliamentary committees before they can be implemented; the same case applies to Palestine authority as well (Yun, Yu, Qiujuan and Xiaowei, 2007).
Another major hurdle that is facing both parties is lack of mutual trust which is understandable, but unfortunately a major obstacle for the peace process, more so in agreements of resolutions that require good faith and trust. Another challenge that is unique to Palestine authority is its inability to guarantee a total ceasefire before they can engage in peaceful negotiations for various reasons that we shall outline in the next part of this paper. Other challenges that face the peace negotiations include lack of a platform for a peaceful dialogue between the two communities, water resource, violent mentality, economic breakdown.
Underlying this entire peace process are the contentious issues between the two protagonists which are settlements, demarcation and right of return and borders (Reitman, 2002).
Problem Analysis
The challenges facing Israel and Palestine are essentially the same; nevertheless there are few of these problems that are unique to each party. The main obstacles to peace process in the region is grounded in trust and political good will, other challenges include lack of capacity to honor agreed issues, polarization of communities’ water resource among others (Reitman, 2002). Trust is a central issue since neither Israel nor Palestine is able to trust the other side regarding their true motives on the whole peace process, indeed Israel has consistently refused to agree to Palestinians return to their former homelands that they occupied prior 1948.
On the other hand Palestine faction movements such as Hezbollah have always refused to implement a peace resolution that would make Israel a sovereign state with a right to co-exist side by side with Palestine. Lack of trust has also meant that both parties have been actively pursuing other channels to resolve their difference since they no longer have faith in the process of a peaceful resolution. The upshot of this is that Palestine has continued with their traditional approach of resolving the problem which includes violence in form of suicide bombs that targets Israel citizens. On the other hand Israel has continued to exercise tight control over the Palestine land through limiting movements, food aid and eliminating Palestinians Leaders that they consider obstacles to the peace process (Yun et al, 2007).
Another huge challenge that requires to be addressed but which is a complex issue refers to political good will and national support that is essential since it will provide the negotiators with free will to agree to terms without having to consult widely. As it is the case now Palestine authority is undermined by various faction movements such as Hezbollah that have always refused to acknowledge any agreements that have been made with Israel, thereby greatly compromising peace efforts between the two countries (Yun et al, 2007). This is because Palestine on their side are powerless to guarantee that this factions will not wage violent attacks against Israel during the peace process since they are usually funded by other stakeholders. Indeed the role of external parties with vested interests in the peace processes is regarded as key to it process.
The ten principles as discussed by Reitman seeks to address these core obstacles by applying solutions that are applicable to both parties that involve identification of practices that hampers the peace process, such as the culture of violent and mistrust that both parties are instilling on their children’s. The fact that Palestine state is an amalgamation of various political parties and faction movements with varied interests and perspective regarding the peace process complicates its ability to engage in the peace process objectively. However since both states recognizes that search for peaceful resolution is the only option is a good starting point for renewed energy of addressing the contentious issues.
Action Plan
Lasting peaceful resolutions must address the two most important components of trust and good faith as well as recognize both parties’ national values such as the holy sites in Jerusalem (Yun, 2007). The objective will be in two parts: to ensure existence of both states, side by side without any form of interference from each other, or co-existence as one state country. To achieve this, the following current situation must change, Israel must abandon and completely withdraw from controlling all parts of Palestine state that will be agreed, and Palestine on their side must cease all violent attacks towards Israel. That way no retaliatory attacks will be waged by Israel and no further violence will occur.
After this step the peace process should be undertaken based on two concepts: co-existent in one state by merging the present Israel and Palestine State or co-existence as two states. The first option is a big feat that will require lengthy process, commitments, change of mentality and mutual trust whose success cannot be determined with certainty. The other option is equally hard to achieve but feasible since both parties do not seem to be in a position to ever agree on border points. I would adopt the second alternative since the issues to be covered under this are not broad and comprehensive as would be the case in the first alternative, besides the consequences of failure with the first option are disastrous since it might lead to a civil war that is very likely to lead to genocide.
In order for option two to work, I will incorporate all the stakeholders in the peace process, this way resolutions that are agreed upon will not be undermined during implementation by other external stakeholders. Other measures that can be put in place to align stakeholders differences is funding a process especially in Palestine for the purpose of informing leaders what the majority of the people would wish for their state. This is necessary to ensure that leaders are aware of what citizens expect from the peace process and therefore isolate faction groups that have interests that are not in line with the vision of the people. Once this is accomplished the next step would be determination of border points between the two countries, since this is unlikely to happen I will propose a joint venture ownership by the two countries that will be overseen by an international neutral party such as United Nations until such a time it when issue of borders can be resolved.
This will be possible assuming no party will insist on retaining such parts exclusively, and is based on the fact that both Israel and Palestine will concur that each side is equally entitled to such lands. Once this has been determined the other issues such as returnees will be addressed as well as water resources by allowing Palestine to invest in technologies that would ensure availability of water in their borders unrestricted. Assuming that both parties will abide by agreed resolutions then this alternative will provide a lasting peace solution to the region. The weakness in this alternative is in the way that failure to abide by any single resolution might trigger flouting of all the other articles of agreements that holds the whole process together and therefore lead to complete breakdown of peace agreement as has happened severally before.
References
- Reitman, J., 2002. Ten Principles to Aid the Quest. Dispute Resolution Journal.
- Yun, G., Yu, F., Qiujuan, R. and Xiaowei, Z. (2007). General Issues in International Law. The Australian Law Journal, 65(5), pp. 149-165.