Tracing the Origins of Conflict

Analyzing the British Impact and Legacy of Historical Palestine

The year 1948 was a year of exuberance and a year of tragedy: a tumultuous time for those living in the land known today as Israel. For Israeli Jews, it marked a huge success for the Zionist movement: the achievement of an independent, Jewish state in the Middle East. For Palestinians, it signified "al-Nakba," the Arabic word for "the struggle." It was a time of calamity and expulsion leading to a Palestinian diaspora that continues today. These two polarizing and diverging cultural memories of Israeli Jews and Palestinians offer insight into the trauma that each has endured with respect to the other. Israeli independence more prudently marked the end of the British Mandate for Palestine in 1948, an important moment in the conflict that is often ignored. It should not be. Great Britain's role in the formation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was seminal, and while this moment is largely forgotten within British cultural memory, the legacy of the British influence in the Middle East is certainly remembered in many Middle Eastern countries. As a growing number of states in the Middle East became independent after the Second World War, Britain failed to efficiently address the impacts of colonialism and leave the region in a stable manner. As a result, Britain and the West's relationship with the Middle East and specifically Israel has been one of continued distress, often leading to discrimination, injustice, and a disregard for human rights. The result today is an Israeli government that feels the need to suppress the Palestinian narrative, thus fostering more tension. Through false promises and inept diplomatic decisions from years of colonial and imperial rule, the British played a direct role in the current situation in regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, its associated ethical discord, and the use of violence to deter from peace.

One of the largest misunderstandings of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that it has lasted for centuries–a conflict of two rival sides each with competing religious interests. While religion does play a role, the conflict is more accurately a dispute between two groups of people who claim the same land, and the conflict really only began a century ago. At a time where the British Empire faced growing backlash against imperialism in the Middle East and movements for independence grew, Palestine was no exception to growing Arab nationalism. Before the 20th century, modern-day Israel was part of the religiously diverse Ottoman Empire. At that time, more and more people on that land came to view themselves as Palestinians rather than just ethnic Arabs part of the region. Simultaneously, a large number of Jews were bolstering support for the Zionist movement, affirming that Judaism was not just a religion, but also a nationality: one that deserved a nation of its own. In the first decade of the 20th century, tens of thousands of European Jews moved to this patch of land in the Ottoman Empire. The number grew from roughly 12,000 to over 35,000 European Jews over the course of a few decades^[1]. At the end of World War I in 1918, the Ottoman Empire collapsed and British and French forces carved up areas of the former empire, ultimately solving the so-called “Eastern Question.” Under the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement, Great Britain and France had previously designated mutually agreed spheres of influence from the failing empire. The British took control of an area known as the British Mandate for Palestine (which included modern-day Israel), while the French took a similar position by assuming control over a French Mandate for Syria^[2]. At first, the British allowed a large number of Jews to immigrate and settle into farming communities in Israel. However, as more and more Jews arrived in what the Palestinians viewed as their home, tension between the two groups grew. By 1930, Britain had begun to limit Jewish immigration to Palestine, and as a result, Jewish militias formed to fight both local Arabs as well as the British occupying the region in order to resist imperial rule. At the heart of this conflict was the original promises of the British to create sovereign Jewish and Arab states. The first of these promises was to the Arabs in 1915 and 1916. In the middle of the Great War, Sir Henry McMahon on behalf of the British government offered British support for an independent Arab state including Palestine if the Sherif of Mecca would rebel against the Turks, which he carried out accordingly. A year later, British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour the British issued the Balfour Declaration, a written document of support stating, “His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object…”.^[3] Through the Declaration, Britain clearly advocates for the Zionist movement and even offers to facilitate its goal; however, Britain’s domestic objectives took priority when making dual promises each with conflicting facets. As such, Britain was forced to uphold one while dismissing the other, establishing the grounds for conflict.

World War II and the Holocaust brought about even more Jewish immigration to British Palestine, and it galvanized much of the world in support of a Jewish Palestine. In 1947, as tension between Arabs and Jews grew, the United Nations approved a plan to divide British Palestine into two separate states: one for Jews and one for Arabs while the city of Jerusalem, where Jews, Muslims, and Christians all have holy sites, would be an international zone. All this was under the condition that each state signed a treaty establishing the economic union of Palestine.^[4] However, Britain was leaving a situation of sectarian violence that they could no longer control. While Jewish settlers agreed to the terms laid out by the United Nations and the Special Committee on Palestine, the Arabs rejected the 1947 proposal, citing that the whole of Palestine was an integral part of the Arab world and that the United Nations, a body created by Europeans and Americans with historical colonial tendencies, had no right to grant Zionists any portion of their territory.^[5] Furthermore, the Arabs who vehemently opposed the 1949 proposal claimed that the Western world was trying to atone for the past and the atrocities of war by paying off a debt to the Jewish people with someone else’s land. The Arab reason for declining the United Nations’ proposal was valid: the British were handing the issue of dissident violence within their Mandate to the United Nations. Arabs who experienced British and European colonialism saw the move as further imperial meddling in the Middle East and frankly believed that the British had no right to deal with the issue via the European-founded and heavily European-influenced United Nations. The Special Committee included not a single Arab state, contributing to the isolation of Arab countries from Europe and reducing the likelihood of just compromise. As a result, the Arab-Israeli War broke out in 1948. Five Arab nations (many of whom had recently won independence themselves) declared war on Israel and invaded territory in the previous Palestinian mandate following the announcement of the independence of Israel. They sought to create a unified Arab Palestine where all of British Palestine had been. Israel won the war a year after it began, but in doing so, it pushed well past its borders established by the United Nations plan of 1947, taking the western half of Jerusalem and much of the land that was designated for Palestine. During this time, Israel also expelled over 300,000 Palestinians from their homes creating a massive refugee population whose descendants today number around seven million.^[6] In the end, Israel controlled all of the area except for the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. This was the start of the decades-long Arab-Israeli conflict, and throughout this time, minority Jewish populations in Arab countries fled or were expelled, leading them to Israel.

In June of 1967, Israel and the neighboring Arab states fought another war: the Six-Day War. Within three hours, Israeli planes destroyed Egypt’s air force while it was still on the ground. While Israeli troops took Gaza and eventually the entirety of Sinai, they managed to destroy the air forces of Jordan and Syria. Eventually, Israeli forces had acquired Gaza and then the entirety of the Sinai peninsula.^[7] Homes and villages of fleeing Palestinians were frequently demolished, and the war contributed to an ever-growing refugee crisis in the Middle East. In the acquisition of Gaza and the West Bank, Israel came into control of 1.1 million Palestinians.^[8] The end of the Six-Day War, however, left Israel confident and robust in military strength, and the new country grew three times its size as determined in 1947. To solve this international crisis, Israel and Egypt signed the U.S. brokered Camp David Accords, in which Israel gave the Sinai Peninsula back to Egypt. This was seen as an extremely controversial move by the rest of the Arab states, so much so that Egyptian president Anwar Sadat was assassinated for his part in these diplomatic talks. Despite the outrage from the treaty, it marked the beginning of the end of the wider Arab-Israeli conflict. Israel’s Arab neighbors slowly began to make peace, even if they never signed formal treaties. The Camp David Accords also marked the beginning of a more specific Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as Israel was still left in control of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and the Gaza strip. The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), established in 1964, fought against Israel through violence and non-violence. Initially, the PLO claimed the whole of the original British Mandate, essentially meaning the removal of the state of Israel. Fighting between the two sides continued for years, including a 1982 invasion of Lebanon to oust the group from Beirut.

Following the end of the Six-Day War, as Israel engaged in several armed battles with the PLO, several Israelis were moving into the Israeli occupied territories of the West Bank and Gaza. Known as “settlers,” these people migrated and made their homes in the Palestinian territories, without any consent from the Palestinians. Settlers moved to these territories due to religious or political reasons, but also because housing was cheap and subsidized by the Israeli government. These settlers were accompanied by soldiers to guard them, and the growing settlements pushed even more Palestinians off of their land. In the short term, these settlements only contributed to the Palestinian diaspora and made life very difficult for Palestinians already living there. However, these settlements drastically reduce the likelihood of an independent state for Palestinians. Today, there are several hundred thousand settlers in the Occupied Territories, despite the international community viewing them as illegal.^[9] In 1987, Palestinian frustration and anger manifested into the violent First “Intifada,” the Arabic word for “uprising.” Although it began with mostly protests and boycotts, it soon became violent as both sides responded to violence with more violence. In the Gaza Strip, a group of Palestinians who thought the PLO was too secular and too open-minded towards Israeli occupation, created Hamas, a violent, extremist group dedicated to the destruction of Israel.

By the early 1990s, it was clear that Israelis and Palestinians had to make peace in order to bring some form of stability to the region. In yet another attempt for peace, the leaders of both sides signed the Oslo Accords in 1993. The event marked a turning point in the search to find a two-state compromise, that is, an Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied Territories. The Oslo Accords established the Palestinian Authority, allowing Palestinians some freedom to govern themselves in certain areas. In addition, the new deal limited control over the region and allowed Israel to annex portions of the West Bank, as well as establishing parameters for political and economic cooperation.^[10] Hardliners on both sides opposed the deal, and members of Hamas launched suicide bombings in an attempt to sabotage the process. The violence from extremists on both sides showed how one can use violence as a tool to derail peace and compromise and keep a permanent conflict intact as they seek the other side’s total destruction. Again, the influence of the British is paramount even in these peace negotiations brokered by the United States. Historical memory and narrative play such an important role in the way a collective views a situation. In the case of Israel-Palestine, Jewish people–and not just Israeli Jews–hold the memory of Israel as a national homeland, one that is as old as Judaism itself. Palestinians, however, remember the far more recent catastrophe of the diaspora and the occupation of their land by foreigners. These two contrasting cultural memories conflict one other much in part due to the problems Imperial Britain caused during the Mandate. Conflicting promises made in the middle of the 20th century, were still remembered 30 years later. Ignoring contrasting narratives from both sides would not only be unjust to both Israeli and Palestinian cultural memories, but also present issue in understanding this conflict at its core.

Negotiations meant to determine the final outcomes of peace dragged on for many years after the Oslo Accords, and a second Camp David summit bears no fruit. As Palestinians come to believe that peace is nowhere in sight, a Second Intifada, much more violent than the first. By its end in 2005, around 1000 Israelis and 3200 Palestinians had lost their lives.^[11] The increased violence of this second uprising changed the dynamic of the conflict. Israelis became much more skeptical of the Palestinians and their willingness to accept peace, and some begin to question if it is even worth trying to find a compromise. The country’s political axis shifts right as Israel erects walls and establishes blokades to separate Palestinian territories and control Palestinian movements. After failed negotiations and failed violence, Palestinians were left feeling stuck under an ever-growing occupation with no end in sight. The same year the Second Intifada ended, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon with support from the Knesset left the Gaza Strip. Almost immediately, the militant group Hamas gained power, and after a short civil war with the Palestinian Authority, Gaza split from the West Bank. As a result, Israel put Gaza under a suffocating blockade, and the territory’s economy was destroyed with unemployment reaching 40 percent.

The withdrawal from Gaza and its associated consequences reflect the state of the conflict today. In the West Bank, increased Israeli migration has worsened the situation for Palestinians, who have resorted to protest and sometimes violence. In Gaza, Hamas and other violent militant groups have fought several–yet brief–wars with Israel. Like in previous wars, the fighting has overwhelmingly killed Palestinians, including civilians. In Israel, many direct an impassive view towards the conflict in an attempt to separate the conflict from their daily lives. While some of these moments are interrupted by brief flashes of violence, there is little political will for peace among the right-leaning Israeli government. For almost two decades, the United States has supported a two-state solution to the conflict, with borders similar to those before the Six-Day War including the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and parts of East Jerusalem.^[12] The Clinton parameters produced from the Oslo Accords provided the outline for the establishment of a Palestinian state. George W. Bush became the first U.S. president to publicly endorse a Palestinian state, represented by the 2003 Road Map for Peace plan put forth by the United States, European Union, Russia, and the United Nations. The Obama administration also tried to advance a two-state solution, but talks collapsed in 2014 over disagreements on settlements, the release of Palestinian prisoners, and other issues.^[13] President Trump’s plan, dubbed Peace to Prosperity, would potentially establish a Palestinian state, but give Israel sovereignty over an essentially undivided Jerusalem. Despite general support for a two-state solution, the United States has not supported Palestinian bids for statehood in the United Nations. The Palestinian Authority has yet to garner enough support for the bid, but in 2012, 138 countries at the UN General Assembly voted to recognize Palestine as a nonmember observer state.^[14] Thus, the outlook for negotiations today is bleak: it is possible that the prospects for a two-state solution will continue to fade, especially if the Israeli government annexes more settlements in the West Bank and the Jordan Valley, actions it agreed to “suspend” as part of the Abraham Accord with the United Arab Emirates.^[15]

Over the course of a century, the Israel-Palestine conflict has developed into a new kind of conflict, one plagued by indifference towards human rights and influenced by powerful international actors. While the establishment of Israel has been a point of controversy since the end of the British Mandate for Palestine, uninformed policy decisions and years of colonial influence led to the state of the conflict today. Great Britain might have been the global power that contributed to many of the issues regarding Israel’s independence; however, the end of World War II introduced the United States as a new global power, tasked with brokering conflict resolution in the region. While generally supporting a two-state solution, the United States and the United Nations have blocked Palestinian bids for statehood at every turn, and the likelihood of a one-state solution has grown ever more likely with the Middle East policy of President Trump. Israeli politics have shifted right, and Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Likud have won consistently in parliamentary elections. No one knows where the conflict will go from here: perhaps a Third Intifada or further suppression of Palestinian rights by Israel. However, while much has changed since 1948, the current state of the conflict is unstable no matter the perspective. Change needs to happen and will happen naturally, either through violence or through compromise. While the situation today lies in the hands of a few, those with the power to enact change should do so justly, peacefully, and seek a compromise acknowledging the failures of the past in order to preserve a more perfect future.

Sources (APA)

"The Abraham Accords - United States Department of State." U.S. Department of State. December 01, 2020. https://www.state.gov/the-abraham-accords/.
"Balfour Declaration: Text of the Declaration." Text of the Balfour Declaration. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/text-of-the-balfour-declaration.

"Britain's Role in the War in Palestine, 1948." Mark Curtis. June 16, 2017. http://markcurtis.info/2017/03/16/britains-role-in-the-war-in-palestine-1948/.

"The Genesis of Conflict:." The Palestine-Israel Conflict - Fourth Edition: 65-84. doi:10.2307/j.ctt1s475dd.13.

Harms, Gregory, and Todd M. Ferry. The Palestine-Israel Conflict - Fourth Edition A Basic Introduction. Pluto Press, 2017.
History.com Editors. "Oslo Accords." History.com. February 16, 2018. https://www.history.com/topics/middle-east/oslo-accords#section_1.

James Rodgers Senior Lecturer in Journalism. "Palestine and Britain: Forgotten Legacy of World War I That Devastated the Middle East." The Conversation. October 23, 2020. https://theconversation.com/palestine-and-britain-forgotten-legacy-of-world-war-i-that-devastated-the-middle-east-106408.

McCarthy, Justin. The Population of Palestine: Population History and Statistics of the Late Ottoman Period and the Mandate. Columbia University, 1990.

"Partition, Israeli Statehood, and the Six-Day War:." The Palestine-Israel Conflict - Fourth Edition: 87-116. doi:10.2307/j.ctt1s475dd.14.
"Settlement Report: October 11, 2019." Foundation for Middle East Peace. October 11, 2019. https://fmep.org/resource/settlement-report-october-11-2019/.

"What Is U.S. Policy on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?" Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-us-policy-israeli-palestinian-conflict.