Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2023, The Statesmman
…
5 pages
1 file
Israel may extract its retribution for HAMAS atrocities by killing thousands of innocent civilians, women and children, but that will not bring peace. Neither can it occupy Palestinian territories and force their people to live in permanent subjugation without rights equal to those of the Jews. The two-state solution has proved to be a complete failure and for lasting peace, just as the Palestinians need to recognise the right of Israel to exist, Israel also needs to recognise that Palestinians live with the same rights and opportunities as others in a binational Israeli- Palestinian state.
The World and its representative Governments and also the United Nations needs to reflect and comprehend the reality of what has occurred in the region of Palestine and to the Palestinian People and in surrounding regions from 1948 from the creation as perceived an Illegal State known as Israel, with no relative rights to ownership of the lands that was secured to create Israel and from this illegitimate, unjust and unlawful position what has been undertook by Israel and supported by countries outside the region of Israel against Palestine, the Palestinian People and surrounding regions who support the Palestinians has been unwarranted and acts of criminally, human rights violations and war crimes supported by example the US Government and its Agencies and Military, the US Allies, the United Nations represented by the United Nations Security Council and the Australian Government its Agencies and Military since 1948 too present day. The basis of Israel and its apparent rights rights is baseless and not factual but is a representation of a myth, misrepresentation, untruths, lies and deception from 1948 to present time and beyond back in time from 1948. To date no country or military has come to the aid of the Palestinian People to secure their lands that were bequeathed, stolen, annexed from them to create Israel in 1948.
Quest for Middle East Analysis, 2014
The longer it takes to arrive at a political solution to the Palestinian dilemma, the more likely this rudderless and negative spiral of war and revenge will maintain the conditions for a ceaseless fight.
The India Forum, 2023
On 7 October 2023, Palestinian militant group Hamas launched a massive attack on Israeli territory, killing over 1300 people, many of whom were civilians; the Israeli state has responded by bombing the Gaza Strip, in which Hamas has its headquarters and over 2.3 million civilians have their homes, starving inhabitants of food, water, medicines and fuel. But why did this happen? And what can be done about it? On these questions, there is no agreement whatsoever. (The original article, with maps and pictures, is available at https://www.theindiaforum.in/history/palestine-and-israel-historical-legal-and-moral-issues )
Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME), 2014
Applying schematic and nodal analysis, this piece aims to explore potential ramifications of or perhaps opportunities arising from the recent escalation in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This piece does not intend to invoke a rights discourse. It seeks to explore a realpolitik way out of the current mayhem, assuming a cease-fire has finally materialized.
The American Political Science Review, 1976
Ihe rush of notable events set into motion by the uprising nearly two years ago of Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza is impressive. Two decades of near tranquility in Israel's occupied territories were shattered. The intifadeh provoked Jordan's King Hussein to relinquish his claims to the West Bank, which his grandfather had annexed in 1951. It led the Palestine Liberation Organization to declare Palestinian independence, to renounce terrorism and to accept Israel's right to exist, which in turn paved the way for the diplomatic dialogue between the United States and the PLO. Finally, in Israel, it led the Likud-Labor coalition to adopt an initiative for elections in the occupied territories for transitional selfrule to be followed by negotiations on their final status. Opponents on all sides rallied in an effort to cripple Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir's initiative. These events, and more, were crammed into a short period of time, creating a sense of unparalleled passion and fluidity, of fears among some and euphoria among others. But has all this brought a settlement of the long festering conflict any closer? In the absence of any indication that Israel is prepared to withdraw from at least some of the disputed territories, or that the Palestinians are willing to settle for something less than an independent state, what is there to talk about? Is there any realistic diplomacy that can sidestep the questions aptly put by Henry Kissinger: What territories, if any, will be given up by Israel? Who shall govern there? And what security arrangements will prevail after Israel's withdrawal? Can Israel be asked simultaneously to give up territories and permit the foundation of a PLO state? There are no clear answers yet to any of these questions and the present outlook is grim on the three main concerns: the peace process itself, the issue of Palestinian representation and
Xavier Pons Rafols, 2024
The purpose of this essay/editorial - closed on 8 January 2024 - is to formulate as fully as possible, although necessarily provisional, an approach from the perspective of International Law to the war in Gaza that began a little over three months ago, and more generally to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that has lasted at least seventy-five years, with the creation of the state of Israel, the first Arab-Israeli war and the Nakba to which the Palestinian people have been condemned. In other words, this is a brief international legal approach to a moment of crisis and intensification of a historic conflict that, in these months, has been a real turning point in the endless cycle of violence that has plagued the region for decades. To this end, this essay addresses various issues of international legal relevance in relation to the current war in Gaza, such as the conceptualisation of international terrorism; the justification of legitimate self-defence used by Israel and, in particular, the conditions required by International Law for its exercise; as well as the possible commission of serious crimes of international concern - war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide -, the applicability of International Humanitarian Law and the call for individual criminal responsibility in this context. This essay also analyses the response of the international community organized in the United Nations to the current war in Gaza, highlighting the insufficient action of the Security Council during these months of acute crisis, the majority reaction of the General Assembly calling for a cessation of hostilities, and the repeated and futile humanitarian appeals made by its Secretary-General. In order to place the current crisis in the perspective of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, there are also briefly discussed the historical and political context, in particular the results of the occupation of territories in the Six-Day War of 1967, the consistent position of the General Assembly on the Palestinian question, the United Nations action on human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, as well as the Security Council’s action on these Territories and the proposed peace initiatives, in particular with regard to the two-State solution. The essay concludes with concluding remarks and an epilogue where, in view of the current humanitarian catastrophe and the protracted nature of the conflict, calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities and the release of hostages, and for the current phase of the conflict to become a genuine turning point that can be grasped as an opportunity for peace in the region.
New England Journal of Public Policy, 2017
A two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with a Palestinian state along the lines of the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, the "mandated" settlement for decades, is no longer either a viable outcome or one that can be implemented. In the past fifty years, the "facts on the ground" have changed, but, perhaps more important, so too have "facts in the mind." The geopolitical landscape in the Middle East bears little resemblance to "facts" back to 1967. The context of negotiations has changed at least four times: first, after Gaza's spin-off in 2006; second, after the Gaza war in 2014; third, because of Israel's increasing religiosity; and fourth, because of the detritus of the Syrian Civil War, ISIS, and Islamic militancy roiling the post-Arab Spring Middle East. ___________________________________________________________________________ On December 23, 2016, weeks before President Barack Obama stepped into history, the United States abstained on UN Security Council Resolution 2334. The resolution called on Israel to stop all settlement activity on the grounds that it is an impediment to a two-state solution. 1 The settlements are illegal under international law, but the resolution was the first of its kind, because heretofore all resolutions along these lines were vetoed by US presidents. In practical terms the resolution means little, since the international community has failed to sanction Israel and the countries in the European Union that might have been expected to take some action are too preoccupied with their internal problems. For Obama, withholding the veto signified less the use of power than a departing gesture of impotence, the culmination of eight years of contrarian and cantankerous relations with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who consistently stymied his attempts to forge initiatives. At the end of Obama's presidency, some would say the prospects for a two-state solution were much diminished. This article argues that they were already dead in the water. Donald Trump's inauguration, his promise to relocate the US embassy to Jerusalem, and his nomination of David Friedman, a right-wing American Jew who has vociferously supported the annexation of the West Bank, galvanized the Israeli right. More than six thousand settlement units were authorized; calls to annex Ma'ale Adumim reached a new pitch, and the Knesset passed a law (sure to be overturned by Israel's High Court, even according to many of its proponents) that retroactively legalized thousands of settlement units built on privately owned Palestinian land. Such was the excess that even the White House called the move "not helpful." When he met with Netanyahu on February 15, 2017, however, Trump turned to his friend "Bibi" during their press conference and casually abandoned the decades-held position of both Republican and Democratic presidents of two states for two peoples. He was, he said, for "one
This article aims to explain the facts related to the conflict between the State of Israel and the Palestinians of Hamas and propose how immediate peace and lasting peace between the belligerents can be celebrated.
The Bulletin of Wayo Women’s University (54) 49-61 , 2014
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOIL SCIENCE, 2006
Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data, 2000
Value in Health, 2017
Jambura Journal of Food Technology
Journal of Chemical Engineering Research Updates, 2014
European Journal of Neuroscience, 2007