Debate
5
|
Borders for Israel – where?
|
The fifth debate in week 14 of the
class considers the current conflict in Israel/Palestine. There seemed little
doubt now (since the Oslo agreement of 1993 to recent months) that Israel has accepted the presence of a
Palestinian state; the debate and the conflict is about where it should be
placed and exactly where its borders should be. At the present time, before the
recent upsurge in fighting after October 2000, it seemed that most of the West Bank would be allocated to the
Palestinians, as well as Gaza, with some indetermination about
the fate of the Jordan River valley, east Jerusalem, and the Israeli settlements
scattered around the West Bank (Judea and Samaria to Israelis).
The background reading in the Economist
article does not treat the Israeli-Arab conflict specifically but deals
with a continual theme of the class - the extent to which globalization and
economic integration has managed to break down barriers between states and nations
and erode borders. It makes the point that, though trade is flowing freer
in most parts of the world, barriers to human movement (e.g. from Mexico to the U.S.) are as strong or
stronger than ever. In conflict zones (e.g. Balkans, former Soviet Union and the Balkans), borders are
heavily guarded and state control up to the last meter of the border are
zealously protected. The control is magnified when the borders coincide with
the location of important landscape icons, such as the Temple Mount (Al-Haram-al-Sharif)
in Jerusalem. Such is the case with the current
impasse about the borders of Israel.
The stumbling point of talks on the
scope of the Palestinian state at Camp David in summer 2000 was the eventual disposition of the
Old City of Jerusalem, containing the holy sites for Christians, Moslems and
Jews. Since 1967, the area has been under Israeli control. East Jerusalem beyond the Old City is the Arab area and West Jerusalem is Jewish. While it is conceivable
that an Israeli government could negotiate away areas of the West Bank that
have been settled by religious Jews (about quarter of a million people), it is
far-fetched to imagine that they would be able to survive politically if they
allowed the holy sites to become part of a Palestinian state. A similar dilemma faces Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian authority. So,
border-lines still matter and the consequences for the wider state of relations
between Israelis and Arabs are immense. One option under discussion (but not
yet seriously considered by either side) is some sort of international
authority for the holy sites, allowing access for all worshippers. Here is a
live webcam link that shows the Dome of the Rock
mosque on Al-Haram-al-Sharif and the Western Wall (of
the Second Temple) below.
Team A
|
Government of Israel
|
Here is a link to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Team B
|
Palestinian Authority under the leadership of Yasir Arafat
|
Here is the official website for the Palestinian National
Authority. The Electronic
Intifada reports on the conflict from a
Palestinian perspective.
Team C
|
Hamas (Palestinian Islamist Movement)
|
Here is a link to Hamas Online.
An account of Hamas (origin and strategy) is
given by the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies.
The BBC Profile on the Hamas
might also be helpful.
Team D
|
U.S. State Department
|
The U.S. Embassy in Israel
has speeches and transcripts.
Here are the links to Peace
Now and Americans
for Peace Now.
Questions to answer:
- Can the peace process continue?
- What borders do you want as a
minimum condition for a settlement?
- What should be the eventual
disposition of Jerusalem and the holy sites? Would you
accept international control of the Old City of Jerusalem?
- Will the location of the
border between Israel and its neighbors matter in
a globalized world?