Israel

Answer 1

The Arabs and the Israelis have been at war since the Crusades. Most Holy Wars last centuries, such as this one.

Answer 2

The Arab-Israeli Conflict has nothing to do with the Crusades (see the Related Question). The Arab-Israeli Conflict has its origins in the confrontation between immigrant Zionist Jews in the Mandate of Palestine and their interaction with the indigenous Arabs in the 1920s and 1930s. Before that point, the immigration into the land had been a small trickle and Arabs were not terribly concerned. However, the Jewish immigration in the 1920s was quite large and disruptive. By the mid 1930s, both sides had developed militias which they used both to attack British colonial institutions and each other. In 1947, as UN Resolution 181 was being debated, a full-scale war erupted between the Jewish militias and the Arab militias. When Israel declared its independence in 1948, the Arab States joined in the War which caused it to be internationally recognized and called the Arab-Israeli War of 1948-9.

Therefore, the Arab-Israeli Conflict is around one century old.

Answer 1

It is unclear. We know that the first self-identifications of various Levantine groups under one banner of being "Levantine Arabs" occurred roughly 800 years ago, but many of these groups were already living in the Levant before that point, they just had a different ethnic association.

Levantine Arabs did not begin to self-identify according to the names of the modern nations (Syrian, Lebanese, Jordanian, and Palestinian) until those nations came into existence in the 20th century.

Answer 2

Levan people were the frist in Isreal ...The problem is none of the Israelies now are the same as ancient Israelies ..since arabs,egyptian,romans took over ...Levans would be the frist Isrealies...that got mixed by many different people..judeaians where not at frist considered Israelies intill israel took over judea rule..frist the Arabs took over israel then romans took over..the Isrealies now and palenstinian now only differ in religion but not in actull race..most of this is only bought on by government and not the people...some families are mixed of jews and muslims ...jews got to stay and muslims were kicked out...which families still have been trying to get there families back in...this all bought by power of government ..so infact none have cliam to be real Israelies since most are not ture Levans...

[See the Discuss link to the left, for discussion of this answer.]

As this is a thematic question you may have different answers.

Answer 1

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict has its origins in the confrontation between immigrant Zionist Jews in the Mandate of Palestine and their interaction with the indigenous Arabs in the 1920s and 1930s. Before that point, the immigration into the land had been a small trickle and Arabs were not terribly concerned. However, the Jewish immigration in the 1920s was quite large and disruptive. By the mid 1930s, both sides had developed militias which they used both to attack British colonial institutions and each other. In 1947, as UN Resolution 181 was being debated, a full-scale war erupted between the Jewish militias and the Arab militias. When Israel declared its independence in 1948, the Arab States joined in the War which caused it to be internationally recognized and called the Arab-Israeli War of 1948-9.

Therefore, if we use the terms Israeli and Palestinian retroactively to those people who would eventually identify or would be identified as Israelis or Palestinians, the conflict started during the 1920s. If we require that these terms be strictly applied, then the conflict started in 1948 when Israel declared its independence.

A number of things would have to take place before a long-standing peace (as opposed to a mere cessation of hostilities) could take place. There are other requisites, but there are the most important.

1) Mutual Recognition: Israel would need to recognize a completely independent and sovereign Palestinian Government that would fully control a certain amount of the former British Mandate of Palestine (most likely Gaza and the West Bank). Israel would also have to confer on this state the unambiguous nature of being correct and necessary for Israel. Conversely, Palestine would have to recognize the Right for Israel to Exist as a Jewish State occupying the remaining amount of the British Mandate of Palestine (most likely 1949-Israel). Both sides would have to recognize the historical and emotional value that the land also has to the other.

2) Regional/International Recognition: States that have adopted attitudes strongly favoring one side at the expense of the other, such as the Arab States would need to recognize the legitimacy of both Israel and Palestine.

3) Israeli Reparation Payments: Israel dispossessed many Palestinians of their property, either by malicious activities that took place during the Arab-Israeli Wars or by Ben-Gurion refusing to let Palestinians who left return after the 1948-9 War. Israel needs to pay the Palestinian government reparations for the land that was taken in this way.

4) Israeli Withdrawal from the Settlements: Israel must withdraw from the Settlements to provide Palestine with a viable infrastructure and complete sovereignty. The Settlers must return to Israeli territory. The buildings, however, should be left as partial payment of the above-mentioned reparations.

5) Palestinians Must Concede Right of Return: Recognizing the State of Israel as a Jewish State is meaningless if Palestinians en masse are allowed to Return to Israel. Therefore, Palestinians (and their backers) must abandon the notion that they can ever return to Israeli territory. Palestinians should leave the refugee camps and become proper citizens in this new country of Palestine.

6) Jerusalem Must Be Shared or Internationalized:Palestine and Israel both want Jerusalem and the only way to solve this is either divide the city East/West respectively and divide the Old City or Internationalize the City or some combination of Internationalization and division. Neither side will rest until it can assure its followers that its holy sites will be protected.

7) Liberal Thought: Just in general, people have to be willing to compromise and live with that compromise.

Prior to the Conflict

Up until the early 1800s, most Jews in Europe had little to do with Arabs and most Jews in the Arab World lived as second class citizens in the Dhimmi System. The Dhimmi, or non-Muslim under Muslim occupation was required by the Pact of Omar to pay a number of taxes that were connected with his Dhimmi status. The most famous was the jizya, which was a tax that Dhimmi had to pay for Muslims for the right to not be killed where they stood for not acknowledging Mohammed's Prophecy; it was a form of humiliation. Additional taxes included the kharaj, which was a tax on non-Muslim land-holdings in the Muslim World. The kharaj was so untenable that most Dhimmi were forced to live in the cities where the tax would not be applicable. The above answer is also incorrect as concerns justice. On paper, a Christian or Jew could testify against a Muslim, but in reality, such testimony was not acceptable and the attempt to defame a Muslim would receive retribution. Christians and Jews were not allowed to build new houses of worship, restore old houses of worship, proselytize in any way (this included religious debate or dialogue), or allow wine or pigs to be shown in public.

Foreign Imperialism in the Arab World

As the 1800s began, European leadership began to colonize much of the Old World, especially Africa and southern Asia. Most of the Islamic World was not under direct colonial authority, but was on a short leash maintained by colonists. As a result, the segregated Dhimmi System gave way to a new, modern bureaucratic system where Europeans were the dominant class and natives, regardless of their religion were second-class, unless they became part of the bureaucracy. To do this, a person would require an education in order to become literate and be able to successfully perform functions in the Arab World.

Many Jewish groups (like Alliance Israélite Universelle) along with similar Christian groups came to the Arab World with European educations and European perspectives. They met up with their co-religionists and began to educate them so that they could become part of the new colonial bureaucracy. This created a fundamental imbalance from the way Arab society had been traditionally structured. Now it was the Muslims who were underrepresented in government, who were less educated, who were less free to practice their faith, and who were humiliated with laws passed against their interests. This would lead to many Arab Muslims painting the Jews and Christians who were native to their countries as foreign imperialists and usurpers. The hatred of Christians would eventually wane and remain marginal as Christians fled the Middle East in massive numbers in the 1920s and 1930s never to return. As the Jews had no intent of leaving, the hatred felt for them would only grow.

Arab Nationalism and Anti-Semitism

The European concept of a nation-state was beginning to become more and more popular in the Arab World since nationalism was the term used for resisting colonial and imperial authorities. It had worked for most of the countries in the Balkans of Europe, it had led to the independence on several Eastern European States, and it was internationally accepted as a legitimate form of resistance. Nationalism, however, is not terribly kind to minorities within any nation-state's area, since the concept of the "nation" was dependent on the idea that all of the people in any particular nation were of the same ethnic stock and heritage. Jews in the Arab World were branded by this system to be "the Other" and were regarded as traitors, spies, thieves, and fifth columns.

Arab Nationalism made a link between Arab Identity and Muslim Practice. This alienated Jews, Christians, and other minority religions from really participating. These issues started cropping up in the early 20th century, especially after World War I (1914-1919). The anti-Semitic nature of Arab Nationalism was only increased when Nazism became prominent in Europe (1933-1945). Arab Nationalists opposed British and French Imperialism and saw the Nazis (who also opposed British and French interests) as an ally and ideological equivalent. As a result of the increasing Anti-Semitism, many Jews in the Arab World felt uncomfortable and a small wealthy minority of them were bullied, stolen from, and executed. This, naturally provoked Jewish reciprocal hatred of the Arabs who were treating them so barbarically.

European Jewish Response to European Nationalism and Nazism

The issue of Nationalism in Europe was quite similar to that in the Arab World, although Herzl recognized the issue before it had made it to the Arab World (but while it was very persuasive in Europe). However, European Jews believed that Europeans in general were culturally superior to other peoples and that it would be unnecessary to worry. When the Dreyfus Affair turned out marches in Paris that said "Death to the Jews" on account of a kangaroo court against a particular guiltless Jew, it became clear to Herzl and several like-minded individuals that the Jew could not be integrated into Europe. Jews formed Zionist Congresses that debated how, when, and where would be the best place to create a State specifically for Jews.

By the 1910s, the Zionists were well-organized and were able to effectively petition the British to declare His Majesty's intent to create a Jewish State in the southern Levant (where Israel is now). Jewish Settlers began to arrive in Mandatory Palestine and built an economy. The Zionists consistently reached out to Arabs during the Mandatory Period to create collective society. The Bedouins responded well, especially in the Galilee, as did the Druze. The Settled Arabs (who would become the Palestinians) did not wish to mix with the Zionists and formed militias which would attack the Yishuv (Zionist settlements in Mandatory Palestine). The Yishuv retaliated and the fights between the Palestinians and the Yishuv continued throughout the 1930s and 1940s relatively sporadically.

Mandatory Palestine was still seen as a backwater and dangerous place by most European Jews who preferred to live in the European cities they knew and loved. They thought a Jewish State to protect the Jewish people was unnecessary, but the mass extermination of the Holocaust fundamentally changed this perspective. After that, most Jews supported any partition plan that would guarantee them any country, even the hugely prejudicial Peel Commission plan, so that they and the Palestinians could live in peace, but it was the Palestinians who rejected the right of the Yishuv to be in any position of power in any area of Mandatory Palestine.

Jews were able to capture enough sympathy to get UN Resolution 181 passed, which would permit the declaration of independence of a Jewish State (and an Arab State) in Mandatory Palestine. The Arabs said that they would resist and in late 1947, they began fighting against the Yishuv in the Jewish-Arab Engagement of 1947-1949 (which included the Arab-Israeli War of 1948). From that point on, Israelis and Palestinians have been in conflict.

After the Jews in Palestine declared independence as the State of Israel, war immediately broke out between the newborn state and its Arab neighbors, including Egypt and Jordan.

for: k12 students the answer is:

( Arab countries invaded Israel, and the first Arab-Israeli War began. )

Depending on who you ask, Israel or Gaza can be responsible.

Gazan Perspective: It's Israel's Fault

Israel broke the peace treaty and subsequently launched operation 'Cast Lead' a massive military offensive against a civilian population. It banned foreign press from entering Gaza. It used white phosphorus (a chemical weapon) on UN sanctioned hospitals and schools (a war crime). Within 23 days the death toll had reached 1,284 Palestinians dead, 6 IDF by enemy fire and 3 IDF by friendly fire. When the operation had finished Israel had claimed more land from the Gaza strip in the name of security zones for their protection.

Israeli Perspective: It's Hamas' Fault

Hamas failed to control both its own militants and those of the group Islamic Jihad to abide by the terms of the hudna (ceasefire) that they had negotiated with Israel and did not seem interested in renegotiating. They fired large volleys of rockets repeatedly into Israeli territory. After growing Israeli resentment over the attacks, the Israeli government saw fit to use a military incursion to stop the rocket bombardments.

Answer 1 - Listing

There are numerous causes to this conflict and the list below is not exhaustive.

1) "Wipe Israel off the Map" Statements: Arab Nationalists, especially Charismatic Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, were pushing strongly for Israel's elimination and made daily speeches about how the Arab States were going to invade and remove Israel from the map to form a unified Arab State. He began to coordinate military strategy with Syria and Jordan (to a lesser degree) as to how to invade Israel effectively. These threats were made daily and consistently in 1967. Additional troops were added to the Egyptian Army and that army began to be arrayed closer and closer to the Israeli border.

2) Removal of UNEF Forces: As a condition of the Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula in 1956, the UN deployed security forces to the Sinai Peninsula to prevent Egypt from massing troops in the Sinai. Nasser evicted the UNEF (the UN security force) from the Sinai Peninsula in contravention of the Armistice for the 1956 Suez Crisis and placed large numbers of Egyptian soldiers and armored divisions on the Israeli-Egyptian border.

3) Arab Military Coordination: Nasser coordinated military strategy quite closely with Syria and Jordan. It was clear to many at the time that these forces would not sit idle for long. A number of Syrian battalions were positioning themselves in the Golan Heights above the Sea of Galilee and Jordanian positions in the West Bank were becoming more entrenched.

4) Closure of Waterways: Egypt, counter to the armistice ending the 1956 War, closed the Suez Canal to Israeli shipping and then proceeded to close the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, cutting Israel off from trade with Iran which was Israel's greatest ally in the Middle East at the time and primary supplier of petroleum. This had the effect of strangling Israel and is considered by Israel to be the primary causus belli.

5) Best Defense is a Good Offense: Israel realized that its borders were too close to for them to risk an Arab Invasion of Israel before retaliating. Israel would have to fight a pre-emptive war in order to secure the best probability of success in a military engagement. The first act of open warfare was when Israel destroyed 2/3 of the Egyptian Air Force on the tar mac on June 5, 1967.

6) Imperialist Israel: (Written by someone else) It's when Israel wanted to occupy "their" land, and decided to attack their neighboring Arab countries for it.

Answer 2 - Discussion

The Six-Day War had a number of proximate and chronic causes.

Chronic Causes: Israel and the Arab States were only in Armistice for 18 years and during that time Arab Nationalism really developed. One of its cornerstones was Pan-Arab Unity and a non-Arab State (like Israel) that divided Arabs from each other (not to mention the Palestinian Exodus) was a wedge in that dream. Therefore, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser repeatedly threatened to push Israel "into the sea." Israel was also very jumpy in the sense that they had little in the way of international protection (as the United States did not become a strong backer of Israel until after the Six-Day War) and very indefensible borders.

Proximate Causes: Egypt made a number of overt threats to the peace and security of Israel. They closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli Shipping which cut off Israel from Iran (who at that time was ruled by the Shah and in Alliance with Israel) and other South Asian Nations. This severely diminished Israel's ability to procure petroleum. Also the armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan mobilized their troops to surround Israel and kicked out the UN observers who had been maintaining the Armistice.

Between the fear of a slow death (because of the lack of petroleum) and the fear of a quick death (because of the mobilized armies on its borders) Israel decided that a surprise attack was the best way to deal with these threats. Israel never expected the attack to be the overwhelming success that it was.

The discussion was moved to the discussion area.

Answer 1

One of the answers to the Arab-Israeli conflict involves is that Abraham's descendants are still fighting over the Promised Land given to them by God.

1948 by U.N decision.

War broke as some Arab countries didn't like the idea of Jewish settlement in the middle east.

Palestine was a Colony under British rule. The British made a "deal" granting Arab independence in Palestine and granting them control from the Euphrates to the Nile.

Answer 2

The Jewish tribes (who originated from the Arab tribes) decided to find their own homeland in ancient times and sometimes use force to find it. The other Arab tribes have not really ever agreed with their reasoning or their methods. The Western powers tried resolving the dispute by creating the new state of Israel but the Arab states still didn't agree - partially because some of Israel is on holy Arab land. As the West is seen as the reason for the brutal Crusades (against ancient Muslim occupation of Jerusalem and the Holy Land), the Arabs have never taken kindly to Israel having Western allies. Also, Israel's tough methods of altering their boundaries ever since the West's intervention a few decades ago -mostly against the wishes of the West- have angered the other Arab tribes all over again. The ancient conflict over who owns the holy lands still wages. So these other Arab tribes to this day still demonstrate their anger strongly (with threats to remove Israel from the map and with terrorism, etc.) and this in turn leads to Israel responding to their threats more strongly. It is difficult to ever see an end.

Answer 1

Israel does not take anyone´s land.

Answer 2

It depends on how the term "Palestinian Land" is understood. There are two competing definitions for this term and based on each definition there is a different answer.

1) All lands of the Mandate for Palestine: Israel is occupying the majority of these lands because it has the legal, historical, and political to do so. According to UN Resolution 181, a Jewish State could be formed out of part of the British Mandate for Palestine. Since the territory was controlled by the British at that time who had willfully ceded jurisdiction to the United Nations and the vote passed at 2/3, this UN Resolution has legal effect. As much as the Arab Nations may not like it or approve of it, International Law remains law.

2) Parts of the West Bank: The creation of the British Mandate for Palestine did not erase many of the older Ottoman Laws, nor did it change the actual ownership of property in the various areas of the Mandate. As a result, there were large areas of Palestinian territory that had no villages and whose owners lived in other countries. Several Israeli Settlements in the West Bank, such as Ariel, were built on lands in the West Bank that had not been occupied or used by the Palestinian Arabs at all. There are also numerous Palestinian cities with historic Jewish sites such as Hebron, Nablus (Shchem in Hebrew), etc. where Jews wish to be in order to be closer to their ancestors. The Settlers believe that they have the right to live closer to the various holy sites in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. For many of them, this is part of why God allowed Israel to conquer the West Bank in the first place. They want to raise their children and build a life near where Jewish civilization actually began, in the hills of Judea and Samaria which form the West Bank.