Whitney Murphy, CTS, Conflict Post 

What is the Arab-Israeli/Palestinian-Israel conflict? This question has been on my heart and mind before I was sure I was embarking on a journey to Israel. From the international media circus that has surrounded this conflict, I have come to understand that when trying to describe this conflict, it depends on who you are and where you live. Perspective is key when trying describe, digest, or even rationalize this conflict which has been an issue for generations and arguable for generations to come. I have known that through this discussion of Palestinian-Israel conflict that one must be careful about your environment because of how sensitive and emotionally charged this discussion is for many, those included and those witnessing.

If you have not noticed already, I have used “Arab-Israeli/Palestinian-Israel” interchangeably to describe the conflict because even the name raises intense debate. It seems that the Israelis prefer the term Arab-Israeli as it projects the understanding of the Old Testament story of David and Goliath. In this case, David would be the small Israeli state going up against the giant Arab world who is Goliath. Yet, Palestinians are not in agreement with that name for many prefer to name the conflict the Palestinian-Israel conflict as they see themselves as the small shepherd boy going against a hostile giant of Israel which is being supported by Jews globally as well as the superpower of the United States of America. Yet, the debate does not stop there with the name because the above ignore the fighting that preceded 1948 when the Zionist Jews and local Palestinian population were at odds before the formation of the Jewish state of Israel. As one can see and what I have learned, is that there every aspect of this conflict, like most, if not all, are surrounded by perspective.

Author Ian Bickerton in his book, “The Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Guide for the Perplexed,” summarized many of our thoughts around this issue that is taking place in the Middle East when he said:

 “The Palestinian-Israel conflict is a difficult subject to talk about. It not surprising that people are perplexed by it. Its origins and causes lay in the distant past as well as in present grievances, and it goes into the heart of peoples’ identities. The conflict involves issues relating to ethnic and religious difference, disputes over territorial claims and national integrity, claims, and counter –claims of injustice suffered at the hands of enemies, and the combatants seek to draw in the nations of the world as they utilize worldwide resources, including the international media, to carry out their dispute (18).

In this book, he discussed the core issues of the conflict, the role of the international media and the many perspectives that are spun, the hand in which the United States of America plays, as well as diving into the issue of Palestinian refugee’s right of return. He covered a breadth of knowledge surrounding this issue, but what I truly grappled with, was getting to the basics of Who are the Arabs? Who are the Jews? Who are the Israelis? Who are the Palestinians? What are the key issues and What are we really talking about here? So often we use many of these terms out of its context out of ignorance and I was happy when Bickerton provided context to the words that I, admittedly, used out of misinformation.

Both the Arabs and Israelis believe that they have common origin and rights to the inheritance of Abraham’s Promised Land given to him by God’s covenant. Arabs see themselves as the descendants of Abraham’s son Ishmael while Jews see themselves as the descendants of Isaac. Arabs are considered an ethno-national group rather than a formal nationality like Jews or even a race. Arabs share a common culture, language (Arabic), but not religion as the commonly believed for millions consider themselves to be Christian. However, I have learned that the term Jew is more complex for it was originally not a race but deemed more than a religion. Conservative Jews believe the identity to based of biology while more liberal Jews “regard it more than a question of genetic inheritance and regard Jewish identification as a matter of shared beliefs, values, and actions” (29). Linguistically identifying Jews is not helpful because not all identified Jews speak this native language. The question is still arising as to “Who is Jewish?” those who live in the confines of Israel or the diaspora? Palestinians are Arabs who live in Palestine and Israelis are those who reside in Israel, but that does not necessarily mean Jewish because there are non-Jewish residents. Of course I am giving the “elevator speech” portion of how these groups identify, but it is good to note, that these identities and groups are as complex as the conflict in which they engage.

For me, I am very much a believer that if you understand the “who” and the “what” of a situation, the “why” becomes quite clear. So I have discussed the” who” and the “what”, but again, this conflict has thrown off my hypothesis of clearly understanding the “why.” However, from what I have understood, it depends on perspective: is it colonialism at its finest or is it Divine Right? The slogan, “A land without a people for a people without a land” is used by many Israelis as a justification of their commandeering of land belonging to the Palestinians. It was stated that the Prime Minister of Israel said that “There is no such thing as Palestinians. When was there an independent Palestinian state...They did not exist.” Birkerton noted that “Israelis believe they have returned, and are turning, to a land that is rightly theirs by continuous occupation and Divine Right as the land of their heritage promised them by God” (31). However, the Palestinians argue that “the above-mentioned slogan has been used as an argument by man colonial powers as justification for their denial of the rights of the native or indigenous people, particularly in regard to their land claims” (32).

When understanding this surface mindset of how Palestinians and Israelis view one another, we are able to see how and why this can truly be a complex conflict of promise, land, covenant, and divine right. It seems to me that this is not a matter of conflict between persons, but ideas of persons, propaganda, religious origin, theology, and the question of divine right. When growing up, you were told not to discuss religion and politics at the table, well, there is some truth behind that because “right” and “truth” are relative, especially when discussing religion and politics in this conflict.

This book was quite helpful in how it tried to curb its biases and provide all perspectives around this conflict (that could arguable be termed in international one as well). My So, what some may deem as a conflict over land is what I would say is simply surface. It is a conflict over the Promise, now who wins in that battle? The Promise is deeply spiritual as it is political, it is deeply ingrained in identity as it is in one’s environment. This is a battle over the Promise.