Search icone
Search and publish your papers

"When you look back at the role that Washington has played between the Arabs and the Israelis, it is clear that the United States could end the Arab-Israeli conflict tomorrow, if it so desired"

Or download with : a doc exchange

About the author


About the document

Published date
documents in English
term papers
3 pages
22 times
Validated by
0 Comment
Rate this document
  1. Introduction
  2. The United States: The third variable in the Arab-Israeli conflict
  3. American inconsistencies in the Arab-Israeli conflict
  4. Conflicts originating from the internal factors
  5. Conclusion
  6. References

The picture taken at the Washington summit right after the Madrid conference just says it all: Rabin and Arafat, the representatives of the two most antagonistic peoples in the modern world, shake hands under Clinton's blessing. Thus it may seem that the American presence and participation is the condition to successful peace negotiations between Arabs and Israelis. But the truth is that the interests at stake in this long-lasting conflict ?land and religion, to name but a few? are too linked to both Palestinian and Israeli communities to be solved by an external power. The very notion of ?promised land? shows that this is first a matter of attachment to land, something quite irrational or at least not rational enough to be tamed by outside powers. The United States has proved to be able to elaborate solutions that seem workable, but actual implementation is very difficult because old interests and rivalries cast away signs of sensibility.

[...] Moreover, the fact that the United States had difficulties coping with the complexity of the issues and all the elements involved in the conflicts made American choices less consistent. For instance, the long-lasting belief that the Arab world was a unified one flawed America's understanding of the geopolitical issues and of the possible alliances in the Middle East. Also, the complicated international context that prevailed since the creation of Israel in 1947 (essentially conditions of the Cold War( had an important role. [...]

[...] But this is a success of as much as a limit to America's intervention between the two enemies: while the United States have a role in getting the Arabs and the Israelis together to negotiate, they can't implement the decisions taken at those times. Thus, many agreements (or at least many in comparison with traditional failures in peace talks( have been reached recently and yet not applied, such as the Hebron Accords between Arafat and Netanyahu. Therefore, the United States can't achieve peace just through their intervention: an external convincing power is not enough when it comes to stopping fight that have gone on for decades, the more so as the implications of this conflict carry a ?national-political dimension and a religious dimension?[3]. [...]

Similar documents you may be interested in reading.

A closer examination of the phenomenon of globalization and its affect on India

 Economics & finance   |  Economics   |  Research papers   |  05/10/2009   |   .doc   |   117 pages

The character of James Bond

 Arts & media   |  Arts and art history   |  Presentation   |  09/29/2010   |   .doc   |   28 pages

Top sold for international relations

An evaluation of constructivism as an approach to international relations theory

 Politics & international   |  International affairs   |  Presentation   |  09/29/2010   |   .doc   |   11 pages

Constructivism and intervention: The case of Kosovo

 Politics & international   |  International affairs   |  Term papers   |  11/29/2009   |   .doc   |   5 pages