Israeli Settlements and the New U.S. Administration The focus of this essay will be the construction of new Israeli settlements in the West Bank region and whether or not Israelis think the Trump Administration supports these new settlements. This is an important topic because Israeli settlement building has been a major issue preventing Israelis and Palestinians from coming to a peace agreement. Also in Assignment 1, I referred to this issue as a possible limitation to my prospective trip to Jerusalem so I would like to further research the issue here. I will be using three main sources for this essay: Al Jazeera, a regional news organization in the Middle East, Haaretz, an Israeli breaking news site, and the Jerusalem Post, an Israeli …show more content…
In the article, they ask the same question I posed above: “Does Trump support the building of settlements or is he opposed (JPost Editorial)?” The article focuses on his first meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump told him that he would like Israel to “hold back on settlements for a little bit…I would like to see a deal made (Trump, JPost Editorial).” This statement would make people assume that he is initially against further settlement building in the West Bank. Trump also said he is in favor of a solution that involves both Palestine and Israel, which the article says was common for previous presidents to say. The article also claims that Trump’s pick to be the ambassador to Israel is in favor of building settlements, which I will talk about with another article below. The writers of this article are confused due to this fact, and say that Trump might not even have a clear opinion of settlement building yet. The writers want Netanyahu to “proceed cautiously” in dealing with Trump as they are not sure of his true intentions. The article closes by calling for more communication between the countries (JPost). As mentioned in the previous paragraph, President Trump’s pick to be the U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, is considered a supporter of new settlement building. An article written by Jonathan Cook and published on Al Jazeera on May 14, 2017 takes a closer look at Friedman. Its
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
The west had been essential to the nation’s creation, and exerted its power in Israel. Israel’s leaders developed allegiances with western countries which had been essential in the formation of their country. Tension in the area grew, both inside and outside of the state, and violence was used against both sides. However, measures were not taken to undue the problems that had arisen from the unfair nature of the agreement. “Palestinians had been branded as ignorant, hostile, and violent” and non-Jewish groups found it difficult to practice their religion as they had before. Despite the obvious inequities that were growing, the west did little to alleviate the pain that it played a large part in creating. It seemed as if “People in the west seem so taken with material things, It’s as if they have nothing in their spirit, so they need to surround themselves
Israel has said that they disagree with Kerry’s talks of peace in early 2015, saying the US will give up too much to reach a compromise. David Horovitz of the Times of Israel has said “It seemed inconceivable that [John Kerry] would have drafted an initiative that… did not require the dismantling of Hamas’s rocket arsenal and network of tunnels dug under the Israeli border.” His draft-released on July 25, 2014-was very commonly called “Pro-Hamas”by Israelis due to the fact that Kerry didn’t call for Hamas to end the rocket attacks on Israel. A poll taken in 2014 by Israel’s Channel 10 showed that 86.5% of Israelites were against the cease fire due to the fact that Hamas is far from a
Within the span of a few years, the political, social, and cultural climate in Palestine was whiplashed from being under the control of the Ottoman Empire, to colonization and state building by Jewish immigrants from the diaspora, to British rule through mandate, and finally the establishment of the Israeli state. The rhetoric that was used in both Zionist and Arab Palestinian propaganda created a situation that was very complex under the surface, and needs to be approached with delicate care. Taking this into consideration, as historians it is important to remain as objective as possible when reading documents from both the Jewish and Arab side because they both will show a view of the conflict that will benefit them most. As situations change, so will these views and the tone of newspapers and consumerism will change along with it.
Any reference to conflict turns history into a reservoir of blame. In the presence of conflict, narratives differ and multiply to delegitimize the opponent and to justify one’s own action. Narratives shape social knowledge. The Israeli Palestinian conflict, both Jews and Muslims, view the importance of holding the territories through religious, ideological, and security lenses, based on belief that Palestine was given by divine providence and that the land belongs to either the Israelis or Palestinian’s ancestral home. Understanding these perspectives is required for understanding Palestinians’ and especially Israel’s strategy and role in entering the Oslo peace process. Despite
The Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most long-term, pressing, and largely confounding social, political, and national quandaries of our age. Since we have been moving with surprising velocity into the vast horizons of globalization, the conflict has built up tremendous momentum and has called into question the adequacy of our current attempts at coming to a peaceful resolution that can simultaneously and successfully address both sides of the struggle. The purpose of this paper has been to understand the prospect of a two-state nation solution for Israel and Palestine. The discussion arises a retrospective view of the context behind the present analysis. We begin with a discourse that informs the reader of the historical narrative between the Jewish inhabitants of Israel and the Palestinians who also seek to live in the lands which comprise Israel. At the forefront of the discussion are some key issues such as trends in Israeli settlement expansion over time, the manner in which these settlements create political challenges towards the prospect of a two-state solution, and the fragmentation of power within Palestinian political parties which inhibit the opportunity for proper negotiations amongst the two parties. Finally, we delve into a discussion on nationalism, it’s importance in the discussion of a two-state solution, and the challenges posed when trying to formulate US Foreign Policy towards the matter.
As of recent years, with the rise of right-wing, nationalistic politicians in Israel, the hunger for settlement of Palestine has increased. Seeing the land as theirs to take, more and more Jewish settlements have been improved and expanded on in the West Bank, culminating and high profile confrontations between the new Jewish settlers and the Palestinian
The relationship between the State of Israel and the United States of America has blossomed into a significant bilateral alliance. The ‘special relationship’ between the two countries has been the driving force behind much of the progress of the United States’ push into middle east democracy, and has helped place Israel in the company of countries who will stand by her in times of trouble. As of late, there have been increasing pushes by the Untied States for Israel to once again enter into peace talks with the Palestinians, a topic which seems to be the source of constant international commentary. These developments have brought to the forefront a rather interesting facet of the Israeli/American relationship, one which this author
The big question we ask ourselves today is, will Israel and Palestine ever agree to stop fighting? The conflict between Israel and Palestine has been traced all the way back to 1948 through 2005 in The Israel Palestine Land Settlement Problem, written by Charles Rowley and Jennis Taylor. However, this conflict did not end in 2005. This article was written in 2006, so anything within the last 10 years is not included. The conflict between the two counties still continues to this day and still remains a major problem. Israelis and Arabs have been fighting over Gaza on and off for decades now. The three issues laid out in this article are the four major wars that took place, the refugee problem, and the conflict between religions. It concludes with the road map to peace. Throughout his whole book, The Israel-Palestine Conflict, Gelvin speaks of the same historical events that occurred between Israel and Palestine, while the article reveals there are still other conflicts, the land settlement problem has been the major conflict between Israel and Palestine since 1948.
The religious rhetoric of the American President George W. Bush has raised many debates in the study of politics, it becomes clear to everybody that believing in the Bible prophecy could have profound political outcomes, and for George W. Bush, he believed heavily that God called him to office in order to spread democracy and protect America from the evil-doers. This idea started precisely since the events of 9/11 which changed the course of the American political regime from domestic to foreign interests. This section, then, introduces the words and messages of G. W. Bush towards Israel, and shows his huge support to the Jewish. Therefore, the American President admitted in his dialog with the Palestinian minister Nabil Shaath that he is conducted
"Since Biblical times there has been a conflict between the Arabs and the Jews in what today is known as Israel. It began with the birth of two boys, Ismael and Isaac; born to two different mothers and fathered by Abraham. That conflict has become more intricate, more serious and much more complicated" ("Israeli-Palestinian Conflict."). "Beginning with the Diaspora and furthered by the British Mandate post World War I and the Holocaust during the period of World War II, Jews sought to return to their Homeland only to find that they once again were unwanted; this time by their Arab brethren. Wars ensued and further complications arose.Time and again war has broken out between the two peoples, solutions sought but not found and the search for
Similar to the oppressive structure of the United States, which favors residents of a higher socioeconomic status, and favors the dominant culture while oppressing minorities (primarily poor blacks and Hispanics), Jerusalem’s structure is oppressive to Palestinians. Yes, Jerusalem’s growth politics are concerned (partially) with economics, but the driving force here is maintaining and expanding Jewish control through claim of space, and by oppressing Palestinians through displacement. When building projects take place in Jerusalem, no matter the scale, there are almost always ulterior motives, and the construction projects make local (and often national) news. The expansion of Jerusalem is driven by a desire to expand the Jewish state. Because Palestinians are the oppressed minority, the powerful controlling Jewish growth forces have been very successful in expanding the Jewish state as they desire, with claims made to territory ownership simply because it is occupied (e.g. by a building simply being built on land). Because ownership is claimed once Jewish structures and residents occupy a place, growth expansions and building projects are ultimately land grabs. According to Shlay and Rosen, there seems to be a general consensus on the worldview of settlement development in Jerusalem; the world generally regards the Jewish acquisition of land unjust and illegal.
Fear, anger, and stress were just some of the emotions swirling around the Gaza strip settlements on the 17 August 2005 . On this date, Israel began pulling its settlers out of this territory. At the center of this one Israeli commander, BG Gershon Hacohen had the mission to remove his countrymen from their homes . BG Hacohen’s greatest two challenges in his thinking to successfully carry out this mission from the elements of thought are point of view and assumptions through the scrutiny of the universal intellectual standard. These two were the greatest test because the decision was unpopular, the religious nature of the population, and the history in the region.
Trump’s relationship with Israel has been complex since the start of the campaign, but as president he has kept a very pro-Israel stance. While in Tel Aviv, President Trump met with President Reuven Rivlin and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu before travelling on to Jerusalem, where Pres. trump made history by becoming the first sitting president to visit the Western Wall. Pres. Trump also continued the tradition kept by many US presidents and leaders from around the world of visiting Yad Vashem, the massive Israeli Holocaust remembrance site outside Jerusalem. On the next day, Pres. Trump met with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to discuss potential strategies for renewing the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. One of Trump’s campaign promises was to achieve an ultimate solution to the nearly seventy-year long conflict, as well as keep the US neutral on the negotiating table. Most everyone on Earth would like to see a solution, it’s just a matter of how it gets done. Hopefully, these visits with the leaders from both Israel and Palestine have set in motion the process to find a lasting solution that both sides can rally behind.
After more than 50 years of war, terrorism, peace negotiation and human suffering, Israel and Palestine remain as far from a peaceful settlement as ever. The entire Middle Eastern region remains a cauldron waiting to reach the boiling point, a potent mixture of religious extremism, (Jewish, Christian and Islamic), mixed with oil and munitions.