I see several contrasting views about the violence presently going on between the Israelis and the Palestinians. In his Washington Post column David Ignatius sees the U. S. playing a useful role:
The United States detached from the Palestinian leadership during the Trump administration. Now it’s time to reconnect and rebuild.
Economic development is the easiest piece of this puzzle. It just takes money — and Israeli recognition that a more prosperous Gaza and West Bank will be less threatening. There’s even a road map for economic development, thanks to Jared Kushner, former president Donald Trump’s son-in-law and Middle East fixer. Saudi, Emirati, Qatari, European and American money will back those projects if the Palestinians can be convinced to play.
Security is the hardest problem. Israelis and Palestinians must be confident their families won’t be ravaged by bombs and rockets. For the Palestinians to deliver, they will need a non-Hamas security force that’s tough enough to maintain order without becoming an oppressive secret police.
Here’s an unlikely but time-tested formula: The Palestinians need a training and liaison partnership with the CIA. Director William J. Burns, who speaks Arabic and has served as ambassador to Jordan, is the perfect person to lead that effort.
while in his Wall Street Journal column Walter Russell Mead sees the deteriorating situation as a sign of declining U. S. influence and engagement in the region:
Meanwhile, Washington has less leverage than ever. Everyone in the region knows that since the 2012 Benghazi debacle, the chief goal of U.S. policy has been to reduce America’s Middle East footprint—a goal that has so far spanned three presidencies.
Concerns about the declining value of their American alliance—rather than enthusiasm for the statesmanship of Jared Kushner —drove Arab and Israeli support for the Abraham Accords. Since the small share of U.S. military aid that went to Israeli companies is being increasingly directed to American firms, few Israelis fear military aid cuts from the Biden administration. Even fewer Palestinians believe that the U.S. can or will force Israel to make the concessions on Jerusalem and settlements they demand. So don’t expect words from Washington to stay their missiles. The Hundred Years’ War between Israelis and Palestinians, alas, isn’t close to an end.
I wish that Dr. Mead had considered the last century a little more closely. The reason 1920 marked the first Jewish-Arab violence in Palestine is that the Ottoman Empire had collapsed and lost its hold on Palestine. The Turks who, importantly, are not Arabs had been suppressing these sorts of actions among the Arab Palestinian population. Without a similar boot the conflict will continue and the U. S. has no interest in furnishing that boot.
There is a solution entertained by neither Dr. Mead nor Mr. Ignatius: broaden the problem to solve it. Hamas is receiving substantial financial support from Qatar; without that continuing violence will be a lot less profitable. Does the U. S. have substantial influence over Qatar or is it the other way around?
I stopped reading Meade some years ago. He is profoundly confused by everything, and is little more than a shil for the Elites. He is one of the reasons I am letting my subscription to the WSJ lapse.
The Jews and Arabs in Israel/West Bank are unable to solve their problems on their own. The dispute is over 100 years old, and the accumulated hatreds and vengeance cycles prevent any mutual understanding.
A solution requires a heavy-handed outside intervention, under UN auspices. There has to be disarmament of both sides, most especially the Israeli nukes and high-tech weapons. There has to be well-equipped, well-trained foreign troops on the ground, prepared to use lethal force to establish order. This is not a role for Great Powers like Russia or the US or China, because they would not be trusted by either side. Perhaps a joint force of Japanese and Indian troops would serve.
The peace-makers (not keepers) would not be a small, lightly armed police force. Perhaps 20,000 to 30,000 heavy-armed mechanized infantry would be needed. They would have to stay there for up to 10 years.
A one-state solution is probably best, because it eliminates the border issue, and it recognizes the current intermingling of Jews and Muslims.
I doubt anyone would sign on for that. Outsiders, even Arabs, are sick of the mess, and want no part of it. I expect the violence and killing to go on for another 100 years.
My point was that the dispute goes back far more than 100 years and only suppressed by the Turks.
And IMO the problem is much, much greater than you suggest. Both parties interpret their holy books as giving them title to the land. Neither side accepts the other’s right to exist (when interpreted as their right to a religious state). A multi-confessional society is barely tolerated by either.
The Israelis certainly represent the Jews.
But why is it set into concrete that the Palestinian’s in the West Bank and Gaza should represent Arabs?
If you want to spend money, you could do worse than to incentivize clans in those miserable hopeless enclaves to emigrate, to countries where Arabs actually live.