Tension Between Israel and Palestine

Palestinian and Israeli Flag

After reading this week’s readings, I now further understand how complex the Israel-Palestine relationship is. Both groups are fighting for land that they see as theirs. So ultimately, this leads to disagreements and tension between both because both sides believe that they have THE rightful claim to the land. I want to further unpack what that means, especially as it relates to Jerusalem.

I believe that it is necessary for both Israelis and Palestinians to recognize each other’s claim to Jerusalem. Friedland and Hecht go into depth on the history of the Israel-Arab disputes in Jerusalem in Sacred Places and Profane Spaces. In the second chapter of the book, they state the importance of the Temple Mount (or Al-Haram-Al-Sharif) to both Israelis and Palestinians. In doing so, they identify how politics comes to shape who has access to sacred space. This is wrong because it polarizes both Israelis and Palestinians, as well as it creates a violent environment. For Jerusalem to become more of a peaceful place, political involvement should be limited because it does not seem to help cool the situation down.

A prime example of this is when the US moved their embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2018. This move created even more tension in Jerusalem because it seemed as if the US was affirming that Jerusalem rightfully belonged to the Israelis and not the Palestinians. And having America supporting them, Israelis became more incentivized to move into Palestinian territory. Not only does this create tension, but it is clear that Palestinians will retaliate in response to this. Therefore, this move exemplifies that political involvement by other countries is harmful to the precarious situation in Jerusalem, and further increases levels of tension between both Israelis and Palestinians. 

Most of which are violent. Intifadas (uprisings) happen as a result of excessive political control over sacred areas. These uprisings by the Palestinian people are likely to have been caused by “a basic mistrust between [Israel and Palestine] that made war talks inevitable after peace talks broke down.” And unfortunately as a result of this, “skepticism of the process grew” (Beauchamp). Even though the intifadas, in this case the second one, happened before the US embassy move, it still highlights the tension in the region. And because of this, this history suggests that moving an embassy to Jerusalem is not the best idea. This is because both states consider Jerusalem their capital, and siding with one side subsequently will lead the other side to protest. The US embassy move was therefore ineffective, even though its goal was to demonstrate the American support of Israel, because it increased the polarization between Israelis and Palestinians. 

Reference(s):

Beauchamp, Zack. “What Were the Intifadas?” Vox, Vox, 20 Nov. 2018, www.vox.com/2018/11/20/18080066/israel-palestine-intifadas-first-second. Accessed 5 Apr. 2024.