Rayanlyse * research * consultancy * business support *
[Company profile] [Political - Economical services] [Defence - Security services] [Financial - Business services] [News, reports] [Reply Form]

November 2000, The Israeli - Palestinian dilemma


A short history

The recent explosion of violence in Gaza, on the West Bank and in some parts of Israel proper after the somewhat disputable visit of Ariel Sjaron the leader of the oppositional Likud party with an armada of police officers to the Temple mount, Al Aqsa, surprised many people in the world. The people, the world, had become used to some kind of agression and violent demonstrations in this rather volatile region but not of the intensity and scale as is and was happening this time around. On the contrary, the world still believed the peace process was more or less on track and the violence would be ended.
The eruption of violence after the visit of Sjaron, which was considered as an insult to the whole muslim community in the world, was in the first place an expression of the frustrations of the Palestinian community in the region.
The Palestinians have been promised a lot in the slowly developing peace process. A process which promised so much after decades of violence between Israel and the many Palestinian organisations. The peace process was however caught by the inertia of time and the political process of the Middle East. After a good head start the majority of the positive developments were slowed down if not nullified by the events around them. The Palestinians were granted some land and the right to establish the Palestinian Authority, PA, to administer the land under their control, Gaza and some parts of the West Bank. Events like the changes of the Israeli government after the elections, twice, and some terrorist attacks put everything to a temporary halt. These delays became more frequent and all social and economical progress was made impossible by the existing regulations like that everything had to be transported through Israel. This led to several new negotiations and a new interpretation and even re-writing of existing treaties.
In every new agreement the PA have been promised with more of the same transfer of land. This transfer of land and the sovereignity belonging to it has been in short delayed by two consecutive Israeli governments after radical elements of one of both sides tried to frustrate the peace process by an useless and senseless act of terrorist agression.
The peace process had been delayed by the above mentioned security problems and by four more contentional questions; the final status of Jerusalem, the return of the Palestinians living in the diaspora, the position of the Jewish settlements and the division of water in this water starved region.
The policy of delay, the seemingly immobile position of the Israeli government to adress the contentional questions to the satisfaction of the Palestinians and the problems with the economy of the areas under control of the PA created a lot of dissatisfaction in the population. There has been none to little progress in the last years and this made the people willing to use violence to warn and attent Israel and the world about their dissatisfaction.
The visit of Sjaron to the Temple mount was just an excuse to launch the violence against everything what was considered Israeli. The demonstrations quickly turned violent to express the dissatisfaction and this is the only way to receive the attention of the Israeli government and the world community.
As usual Israel closed, isolated, the territories under PA control and other Palestinian inhabited regions.
The conflict became even more serious as some soldiers lost the road and accidentally entered Ramallah they got victims of the dissatisfied mob. The mob simply lynched the sodiers without to much, interference, from the Palestinian police force.
The Israelis decided to react with determination against this kind of violence and called in the armed forces, the IDF. With the encirclement of the Palestinian villages with IDF armoured and infantry forces and the missile strikes of helicopters against Palestinian targets, police stations, infra-structure and other suspected buildings, the Israeli government tried to make a point that Israel would not accept the continuation of the violence.
Nevertheless, the violence, the demonstrations and the stone throwing continued without much care about the demands out of Israel to stop the violence. Which could be expected, as such a demand would be absolutely unacceptable for the Palestinians. The would not obey Israeli orders, who are in the view of many Palestinians the occupier of Palestinian land, land which 50-55 years ago belonged to them.
The renewed violence reached very quickly a status quo, as no party would be able to win. The Palestinians can not defeat the much superior Israeli army and the Israeli security forces can not pacify the region without the use of excessive force which would be politically suicidal. The former status quo, was beneficial for Israel, a slow moving peace process in which they did not need to sacrafice to much and without to much violence against Israeli interests.
In the new situation Israel was under fire, a public uprise of the Palestinians in the occupied territories Gaza and the West Bank but also problems with the Palestinians living in Israel proper. This was the first time that the socalled Arab-Israelians moved against the government and took part in the violence.
An international conference of the two belligrents with the U.S.A., Russia, Jordan and Egypt in the Egyptian city of Sharm el-Sheikh should end the unrest between the two sides. What seemed to be impossible became possible, Israel and the PA came to the agreement to end the violence and they would try to restart the peace process. They agreed that Israel would end the isolation and Jassir Arafat would call upon his people to end the violence.
The agreement to end the hostilities, the violence, will be difficult to fulfil as it will become difficult to persuade the Palestinians to end the resistance. The majority of the Palestinians are frustrated and dissatisfied about the current situations. They feel that their situation has not improved that much and if they resist, operate, against the hated Israeli occupiers, At least they will try to make the live of Israel a little more difficult. The stone throwing and even small scale attacks against Jewish people and property will therefore continue.
There will be some differences in the intensity of the violence but it will be very difficult to put the anger back in the box. In some respects it will increase as Palestinian groups, probably of the Tanzi organisation, the Fatah military wing, started to attack Jewish settlements with gunfire. The attacks took and take not only place in the occupied territories but also in Israel, especially the suburban of Jerusalem. Especially villages which were build after the 1967 war and are thus build on confiscated Palestinian property were targeted. This fact will also complicate the negotiations in all future peace negotiations, a lot of Palestinian land has been confiscated on a rather dubious legal base, according to international standards, and Jerusalem as been enlarged through the annexation of Palestinian counties. On the other hand the violence will remain the same, stone throwing and making the movement for the Israelis difficult.
The situation have got its own dynamic as the Israeli government is compelled to react on the Palestinian violence which will encourage the Palestinians even more and as the Palestinians suffer the most casualties and because there is an increasing understanding for the Palestinian situation, they are prepared to accept casaualties. The international community will condemn the Jewish use of violence and this will put Israel in the corner of the bad boy. Every action like the closure of the Palestinian areas to starve them into submission or the cancellation of the peace talks will back fire as this will only make Israel even look worser.
The use of violence in therfore advantageous for the Palestinian case of an independent Palestinian homeland and it simply feels good. They finally can do something against the Israeli occupation. Even if they have no change to win a military conflict with Israel, the violence permits them to win politically.
To put it bluntly every stone thrown by the Palestinians is an act of legitimate resistance, if they use firearms and somebody would get hurt it is seen as a cosmetic mistake. As long as they do not use bombs, missiles, explosives, limit the number of casualties in each attack and do not attack civilian targets in Israel proper they are on the save side. Any Jewish victims on the West Bank and in Gaza are ever more considered internationally as that it should not have happened but that it is their own fault. The Palestinians are ever more portrayed as the victims in an unequal and unfair fight. The Palestinians are fighting for a right cause against the mighty Israeli army with insuffucient and less capable equipment. And this is clearly an advantage to receive international political support. But if Israel uses force, teargas and riot police, or even worser rubber-bullets, it will be considered as the brutal suppression of the poor Palestinians. If they hurt or even kill a Palestinian it is considered as the use of excessive, unlegitimate, force, not to speak about the use of missiles and the isolation of the PA territories which is ever more seen as absolutely out of bound.
As long as the Palestinians do not use heavy weapons and large scale operations with large number of casualties against light defended Israeli targets, like Kibbutzm the Israeli security forces are very limited in their actions. All Israeli actions will be thoroughly scrutinized by the international community on their merits, and excessive violence will be immediately become public knowledge so deteriorating the Israeli international position.

The dilemma

Israel and the Palestinians are, if they like it or not, sentenced to live with eachother. Some kind of co-habitation agreement has to be created that both groups can live together in this relatively small region. Both have a legitimate claim on living over there but to find a mutual acceptable agreement about where and how to live with eachother will remain difficult. The religious claim on Jerusalem will further complicate a solution.
Israel and the Palestinians have to divide the territory to allow both people to live in the area, allow the Palestinian fugitives in the neighboring countries to return and divide Jerusalem according the border of before 1967. If the muslims are not able to control their holy places, it will always remain a potential bone of contention. These are necessities for every Palestinian leader to achieve if he or she wants to remain in power.
The Israeli government has the same kind of set of demands and worries in regard of the Palestinian question. The loss of the occupied territories and eastern Jerusalem will be considered by Israel as, first, a security problem and second a religious-politically unwanted development.
The Israeli society has a problem with security. They are constantly looking to maintain the highest standard of security for their people and a former foe living so close to the population centres of Israel seems to be unacceptable. The divison of Jerusalem will be difficult if not impossible to sell to the population as a large part of the Israeli population regards Jerusalem as their political and religious capital, which is indivisable in their understanding. Another complicating factor is the annexation of several communities around Jerusalem by which Jerusalem have become much larger than ever before. Originally Jerusalem was much more smaller, the enlargement is therefore considered as a way to confiscate more land to the advantage of the Jewish population.
The land question is very important and without some kind of fair division of the territory and the division of Jerusalem any peace is simply impossible. Maybe one could exclude Jerusalem form the negotiations if Jerusalem would become some kind of separate entity, with no relations with what ever country. A religious city governed by the communities who live in the city.
However as long as the Palestinians are considered as a threat to Israel and need to be controlled and if possible kept on distance good neighborship will be impossible and a peaceful co-habitation will remain an illusion.

The Future

As stated before the current situation is rather complicated. Any violence of the Palestinians is being retributed by the Israeli security forces. The Palestinians throw stones, Israel responds with tear gas and rubber-bullets, the Palestinians have a shoot out with some radical religious Kibbutz inhabitants or the Tanzi attacks some towns in Israel, the Israeli response is to close the occupied territories and to fire some missiles at police stations and other governmental institutions.
Israel will most likely try to regain the initiative in the battle in the occupied territories by trying to go after the Tanzi and mind-like militias but they will be most likely be unsuccesful as these organisations do not really reprensent a clear target. The heavy handed approach with armour, infantry, artilley and air power will be unuseful against a mobile, small and light adversary who will disappear quickly after every strike.
The harder approach might limit the violence and clashes somewhat but they will continue and will get harder as the Palestinians have nothing to loose and can only gain something in resisting the Israeli security forces. Israel will be punished internationally by the harder treatment of the Palestinian population.
This cycle of violence can continue forever, the Israelis can not be defeated in the field but the political costs to Israel will become very high. The relations with nearly all other countries will deteriorate which in the end could be much more harmful for the Israeli society and security.
The international reactions will be limited to the freezing or elimination of the diplomatic and trade relations with Israel. The western world, with the exception of the U.S.A., will convict Israel and will reduce the relations to the absolute minimum. The Arab world, of which some countries entered for the first time diplomatic relations with Israel will end these relations, the others will increase their negative attitude against Israel.
The chance for a war will be limited as no country in the region is able, even if they would co-operate, to militarily defeat Israel. The military superiority is simply to large and a war would only damage the Arab and Palestinian political position in the current situation. The goodwill will quickly be lost. As beside the inferior military capabilities, the Arab countries, with a few radical exceptions, are also not willing to start a war because it would bring to little but will be very expensive.
A small and short military stand off is more likely between Israel and Syria about some actions in or out of Lebanon than about the Palestinian question. In this case Israel will be the most likely aggressor because they would want to punish Syria for the involvement in the Lebanese/Hizbullah activities against Israeli targets.
The Arab oil producing countries wil also not use the oil supply as a weapon to support the Palestinian case, as is demanded by some radical elements in the Palestinian and Arab world. The current high oil prices are just what the Arab countries needed after a long term of very cheap oil. They will not destroy the big revenues they now get and desparately need. And it would be a big gamble if the use of oil as a weapon would get the desired results. It would be more likely to be unproductive. The Western world does not like to be black mailed, other oil resources could be tapped, substitute products could be invented or introduced and the Arab oil producing countries need the oil income to stay in power.

Conclusion

Israel can not be defeated or to put it differently, can not be forced to accept a solution which it does not want. Militarily and internally Israel is simply to strong to be forcefully subjected to an agreement. The military superiority is organisational, technological and morally. With other words the battle order, the doctrine-strategy-tactics and the training are superior, the equipment is much more capable and finally the Iraelis are fighting in their understanding for a just cause and if they would loose Israel, they would have no other place to go. These three factors have made them much better then everything around in the region.
The Palestinians, or for that matter, the Arabs are no match for the Israelis militarily. The Palestinians are badly armed, trained and led and lack any clear organisational and combat structure. There are many different kind of organisations in the PA with different strengths, even if all are working to reach the same goal, the different masters and policies will make a coherent attack impossible. But this weakness can be used to reach more than could be expected from such a diversified force. They could slowly undermine Israeli capabilities and create a political advantage.
Israel has proved to be not very good at assymmetrical warfare as became clear during the intifadah and during their presence in the self proclaimed secuirty zone in southern Lebanon. The unrest, demonstrations and the guerilla style of warfare, in short low intensty conflict, proved to be difficult to handle for the high intensity conflict trained Israeli defence forces. Israel could retaliate against supposed headquarters of the Hizbullah and of the PA and they can destroy the infra-structure but they were and are unable to control the activities of the Hizbullah, the Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, the Tanzim and many other small and relatively weak Arab and Palestinian organisations. Not to speak about the stone throwing youths on the streets of the occupied territories who make the live of the security apparatus very difficult.
The Hizbullah, the Hamas and now the PA make use of the weakness of Israel to combat low intensity warfare. The Israeli security forces cannot suppress this elusive enemy which take the brunt of the casualties but also wound and kill Israelis, and slowly undermine the Israeli fighting power and moral in a drawn out conflict.
Israel is politically not able to accept to many casualties and the retaliation of Israel always looks and seems to be overdone, to excessive. Thus after being internally demoralized, the international community will cause the largest damage to Israel.
The Israeli weaknesses are the political perception of Israel in the world and the difficulties to accept casualties.
The position is especially undermined by the conduct of the armed forces in the field. The Israeli weakness is fully understood by the Palestinians, they play the resistance game to get as much as political support as possible and to demoralize the IDF that much that they will overreact and make mistakes.
On the short term the Palestinian and Arab activities, low intensity warfare, will not change to much but on the longer term Israel wil be forced to find a solution to the Palestinian problem, if they do not wat to become a pariah nation and loose to much of the desparately needed international support.