tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/yitzhak-rabin-12852/articlesYitzhak Rabin – The Conversation2024-03-25T12:38:41Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2259362024-03-25T12:38:41Z2024-03-25T12:38:41ZIsrael’s ‘Iron Wall’: A brief history of the ideology guiding Benjamin Netanyahu<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/583238/original/file-20240320-16-lzg9fz.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C9%2C3052%2C1932&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A view of Khan Yunis in Gaza on Feb. 2, 2024, after weeks of continuous Israeli bombardment and bulldozing.
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/view-of-destruction-with-destroyed-buildings-and-roads-news-photo/1973198679?adppopup=true">Abdulqader Sabbah/Anadolu via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has signaled that Israel’s military will soon <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/19/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-rafah-offensive.html">launch an invasion of Rafah</a>, the city in the southern Gaza Strip. More than 1 million Palestinians, now on the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/gaza-malnutrition-famine-children-dying-israel-palestinians-2f938b1a82d7822c7da67cc162da1a37">verge of famine</a>, have sought refuge there from their bombed-out cities farther north. Despite U.S. President Joe <a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/biden-warns-netanyahu-an-assault-on-rafah-would-cross-red-line-c78677ba">Biden’s warning against the move</a>, Netanyahu appears, for now, undeterred from his aim to attack Rafah. </p>
<p>The attack is the latest chapter in Israel’s current battle to eliminate Hamas from Gaza. </p>
<p>But it’s also a reflection of an ideology, known as the “<a href="https://en.jabotinsky.org/media/9747/the-iron-wall.pdf">Iron Wall</a>,” that has been part of Israeli political history since before the state’s founding in 1948. The Iron Wall has driven Netanyahu in his career leading Israel for two decades, culminating in the current deadly war that <a href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Israel-Hamas-War">began with a massacre of Israelis</a> and then turned into a <a href="https://hhi.harvard.edu/news/humanitarian-situation-gaza">humanitarian catastrophe for Gaza’s Palestinians</a>.</p>
<p>Here is the history of that ideology:</p>
<h2>A wall that can’t be breached</h2>
<p>In 1923, <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Vladimir-Jabotinsky">Vladimir, later known as “Ze’ev,” Jabotinsky</a>, a prominent Zionist activist, published “<a href="https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/quot-the-iron-wall-quot">On the Iron Wall</a>,” an article in which he laid out his vision for the course that the Zionist movement should follow in order to realize its ultimate goal: the creation of an independent Jewish state in Palestine, <a href="https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/timeline-for-the-history-of-judaism#brits2">at the time governed by the British</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/583249/original/file-20240320-20-uluqu0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man in a double breasted suit, wearing round glasses." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/583249/original/file-20240320-20-uluqu0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/583249/original/file-20240320-20-uluqu0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=832&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583249/original/file-20240320-20-uluqu0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=832&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583249/original/file-20240320-20-uluqu0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=832&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583249/original/file-20240320-20-uluqu0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1045&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583249/original/file-20240320-20-uluqu0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1045&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583249/original/file-20240320-20-uluqu0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1045&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Vladimir ‘Ze'ev’ Jabotinsky, in Prague in 1933.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa1176800">United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, courtesy of L. Elly Gotz</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Jabotinsky admonished the Zionist establishment for ignoring the Arab majority in Palestine and their political desires. He asserted the Zionist establishment held a fanciful belief that the technological progress and improved economic conditions that the Jews would supposedly bring to Palestine would endear them to the local Arab population. </p>
<p>Jabotinsky thought that belief was fundamentally wrong. </p>
<p>To Jabotinsky, the Arabs of Palestine, like any native population throughout history, would never accept another people’s national aspirations in their own homeland. Jabotinsky believed that Zionism, as a Jewish national movement, would have to combat the Arab national movement for control of the land. </p>
<p>“Every native population in the world resists colonists as
long as it has the slightest hope of being able to rid itself of the danger of being colonised,” <a href="https://en.jabotinsky.org/media/9747/the-iron-wall.pdf">he wrote</a>. </p>
<p>Jabotinsky believed the Zionist movement should not waste its resources on Utopian economic and social dreams. Zionism’s sole focus should be on developing Jewish military force, a metaphorical Iron Wall, that would compel the Arabs to accept a Jewish state on their native land. </p>
<p>“Zionist colonisation … can proceed and develop only under the protection of a power that is independent of the native population – behind an iron wall, which the native population cannot breach,” <a href="https://en.jabotinsky.org/media/9747/the-iron-wall.pdf">he wrote</a>.</p>
<h2>Jabotinsky’s heirs: Likud</h2>
<p>In 1925, Jabotinsky founded the <a href="https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/revisionist-zionism">Revisionist movement</a>, which would become the chief right-wing opposition party to the dominant Labor Party in the Zionist movement. It opposed Labor’s socialist economic vision and emphasized the focus on <a href="https://www.knesset.gov.il/vip/jabotinsky/eng/Revisionist_frame_eng.html">cultivating Jewish militarism</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://embassies.gov.il/MFA/AboutIsrael/Maps/Pages/1947%20UN%20Partition%20Plan.aspx">In 1947, David Ben Gurion and the Zionist establishment</a> <a href="https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-202101/">accepted partition plans</a> devised by the United Nations for Palestine, dividing it into independent Jewish and Palestinian Arab states. The Zionists’ goal in accepting the plan: to have the Jewish state founded on the basis of such international consensus and support. </p>
<p>Jabotinsky’s Revisionists opposed any territorial compromise, which meant they opposed any partition plan. They objected to the recognition of a non-Jewish political entity – an Arab state – within Palestine’s borders. </p>
<p>The Palestinian Arab state proposed by the U.N. partition plan <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-Nations-Resolution-181">was rejected by Arab leaders</a>, and it <a href="https://www.un.org/unispal/history/">never came into being</a>.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://www.gov.il/en/departments/general/declaration-of-establishment-state-of-israel">1948, Israel declared its independence</a>, which sparked <a href="https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war">a regional war between Israel and its Arab neighbors</a>. During the war, which began immediately after the U.N. voted for partition and lasted until 1949, more than half the Palestinian residents of the land Israel claimed were expelled or fled. </p>
<p>At the war’s end, <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Partition-of-Palestine">the historic territory of Palestine was divided</a>, with about 80% claimed and governed by the new country of Israel. Jordan controlled East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip.</p>
<p>In the new Israeli parliament, Jabotinsky’s heirs – <a href="https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/herut-movement">in a party first called Herut</a> <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Likud">and later Likud</a> – were relegated to the opposition benches.</p>
<h2>Old threat, new threat</h2>
<p>In 1967, another war broke out between Israel and Arab neighbors Egypt, Syria and Jordan. It resulted <a href="https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/arab-israeli-war-1967">in Israel’s occupation of</a> East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip and Golan Heights. <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39960461">Yitzhak Rabin led Israel’s military</a> during that war, called the Six-Day War.</p>
<p>From 1948 until 1977, the more leftist-leaning <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Israel-Labour-Party">Labor Party governed Israel</a>. <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Menachem-Begin">In 1977, Menachem Begin led the Likud to victory</a> and established it as the dominant force in Israeli politics. </p>
<p>However in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/24/world/israel-s-labor-party-wins-clear-victory-in-election-ready-to-form-a-coalition.html">1992, Rabin, as the leader of Labor, was elected as prime minister</a>. With Israel emerging as both a military and economic force in those years, fueled by the new high-tech sector, he believed the country was <a href="https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/what-would-rabin-do">no longer facing the threat of destruction</a> from its neighbors. To Rabin, the younger generation of Israelis wanted to integrate into the global economy. <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1994/rabin/facts/">Resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict</a>, he believed, would help Israel integrate into the global order. </p>
<p>In 1993, Rabin negotiated <a href="https://history.state.gov/milestones/1993-2000/oslo">the Oslo Accords</a>, a peace deal with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. The two men <a href="https://www.npr.org/2016/08/06/488737544/oslo-tells-the-surprising-story-behind-a-historic-handshake">shook hands</a> in a symbol of the reconciliation of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The agreement created a Palestinian authority in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, as part of the pathway to the long-term goal of creating two countries, Israel and a Palestinian state, that would peacefully coexist.</p>
<p>That same year, <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Benjamin-Netanyahu">Benjamin Netanyahu had become the leader of the Likud</a> Party. The son of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/01/world/middleeast/benzion-netanyahu-dies-at-102.html">a prominent historian of Spanish Jewry</a>, he viewed Jewish history as facing <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/2012-04-30/ty-article/benzion-netanyahu-father-of-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-dies-at-102/0000017f-e958-d639-af7f-e9df59c90000">a repeating cycle of attempted destruction</a> – from the Romans to the Spanish Inquisition, the Nazis and <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2018-07-05/ty-article/when-netanyahus-father-adopted-the-view-of-arabs-as-savages/0000017f-e00a-d3ff-a7ff-f1aa22770000">the Arab world</a>. </p>
<p>Netanyahu saw the Oslo peace process as <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oslo/interviews/netanyahu.html">the sort of territorial compromise</a> Jabotinsky had warned about. To him, compromise would only invite conflict, and any show of weakness would spell doom. </p>
<p>The only answer to such a significant threat, Netanyahu has repeatedly argued, is <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-no-full-palestinian-state-no-surrender-in-exchange-for-gaza-hostages/">a strong Jewish state that refuses any compromises</a>, always identifying the mortal threat to the Jewish people and countering it with an <a href="https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/world-news/no-compromise-on-rafah-operation-israeli-pm-vows-to-continue-fight-despite-global-appeals/articleshow/107792076.cms">overwhelming show of force</a>. </p>
<h2>No territorial compromise</h2>
<p>Since the 1990s, Netanyahu’s primary focus has not been on the threat of the Palestinians, but rather that of <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/netanyahu-at-war/transcript/">Iran and its nuclear ambitions</a>. But he has continued to <a href="https://www.npr.org/2024/01/21/1225883757/israels-netanyahu-rejects-any-palestinian-sovereignty-post-war-rebuffing-biden">say there can be no territorial compromise</a> with the Palestinians. Just as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/01/22/netanyahu-biden-two-state-solution-palestine-river-to-sea/">Palestinians refuse to accept Israel as a Jewish state</a>, Netanyahu <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68025945">refuses to accept the idea of a Palestinian state</a>.</p>
<p>Netanyahu believed that only through strength would the Palestinians accept Israel, a process that would be <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/22/middleeast/israel-benjamin-netanyahu-cnn-interview-intl/index.html">aided if more and more Arab states normalized relations with Israel</a>, establishing diplomatic and other ties. That normalization reached new heights with the 2020 <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Abraham-Accords">Abraham Accords</a>, the bilateral agreements signed between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and between Israel and Bahrain. These agreements were the ultimate vindication of Netanyahu’s regional vision.</p>
<p>It should not be surprising, then, that Hamas’ horrific attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, took place just as Saudi Arabia was <a href="https://apnews.com/article/un-israel-netanyahu-politics-4d07d9fd0413c6893d1ddfb944919ae0">nearing normalization of relations</a> with Israel. In a twisted manner, when the Saudis subsequently backed off the normalization plans, the attack reaffirmed Netanyahu’s broader vision: The Palestinian group that vowed to never recognize Israel <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-07/saudi-says-no-ties-with-israel-unless-gaza-aggression-halted">made sure that Arab recognition of Israel would fail</a>. </p>
<p>The Hamas attack gave Netanyahu an opportunity to reassert Israel’s – and Jabotinsky’s – Iron Wall. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/12/12/israel-gaza-hamas-biden-netanyahu/">The massive and wantonly destructive war that Netanyahu has led</a> against Hamas and Gaza since that date is the Iron Wall in its most elemental manifestation: unleashing overwhelming force as a signal that no territorial compromise with the Arabs over historical Palestine is possible. Or, as Netanyahu has repeatedly said in recent weeks, there will be no ceasefire until there’s a complete Israeli victory.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225936/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Eran Kaplan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The destructive force that Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu has unleashed in Gaza is rooted in a century-old ideology that says overwhelming power is how Israel should deal with Palestinians.Eran Kaplan, Rhoda and Richard Goldman Chair in Jewish Studies, San Francisco State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2218722024-02-06T19:09:47Z2024-02-06T19:09:47ZExplainer: what is the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?<p>In recent weeks, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/21/middleeast/netanyahu-palestinian-sovereignty-two-state-solution-intl/index.html">repeated his rejections</a> of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I will not compromise on full Israeli security control over all the territory west of Jordan – and this is contrary to a Palestinian state.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>While Netanyahu has never been in favour of a two-state solution, it has had significant support from governments around the world for decades, including the <a href="https://www.npr.org/2024/01/18/1225309529/the-biden-administration-insists-a-2-state-solution-remains-a-real-possibility">United States</a>, the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/20/sunak-reiterates-support-for-two-state-solution-in-meeting-with-abbas">United Kingdom</a>, <a href="https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/01/23/israel-palestine-europeans-unite-to-defend-the-idea-of-a-two-state-solution_6457718_4.html#:%7E:text=On%20Monday%2C%20January%2022%2C%20European,Israel%20of%20a%20Palestinian%20state.">European nations</a>, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-19/albanese-dont-abandon-hope-for-two-state-solution/103247366">Australia</a>, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/canada-is-still-committed-israel-palestine-two-state-solution-pm-trudeau-2023-10-20/">Canada</a>, <a href="https://carnegieendowment.org/2023/10/13/arab-perspectives-on-middle-east-crisis-pub-90774">Egypt</a> and others.</p>
<p>However, the two-state solution is now further away than it has ever been, with some even proclaiming it “<a href="https://theconversation.com/israel-palestinian-conflict-is-the-two-state-solution-now-dead-221967">dead</a>”.</p>
<p>But what actually is the two-state solution and why do so many see this as the only resolution to the conflict?</p>
<h2>What is the two-state solution?</h2>
<p>The two-state solution refers to a plan to create a Palestinian state separate from the state of Israel. The goal is to address Palestinian claims to national self-determination without undermining Israel’s sovereignty.</p>
<p>The first attempt at creating side-by-side states occurred before the independence of Israel in 1948. The year before, the United Nations passed <a href="https://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?FinalSymbol=A%2FRES%2F181(II)&Language=E&DeviceType=Desktop&LangRequested=False">Resolution 181</a> outlining a partition plan that would split the Mandate of Palestine (under British control) into separate Jewish and Arab states.</p>
<p>The UN’s proposed borders never materialised. Shortly after Israel declared independence, Syria, Jordan and Egypt invaded, sparking the first Arab-Israeli war. More than 700,000 Palestinians were <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-nakba-how-the-palestinians-were-expelled-from-israel-205151">displaced</a> from the new state of Israel, fleeing to the West Bank, Gaza and surrounding Arab states.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-nakba-how-the-palestinians-were-expelled-from-israel-205151">The Nakba: how the Palestinians were expelled from Israel</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In recent decades, there have been many different views on what shape a Palestinian state should take. The 1949 “green line” was seen by many as the most realistic borders for the respective states. This line was drawn during the armistice agreements between Israel and its neighbours following the 1948 war and is the current boundary between Israel and the West Bank and Gaza.</p>
<p>However, following the <a href="https://www.history.com/topics/middle-east/six-day-war">1967 Six-Day War</a>, Israel captured and occupied the West Bank and Gaza, along with East Jerusalem and Golan Heights. Most current discussions of the two-state solution now refer to creating two states along “the pre-1967 borders”. </p>
<p>This would mean the new Palestinian state would consist of the West Bank prior to Israeli settlement, and Gaza. How Jerusalem would be split, if at all, has been a significant point of contention in this plan.</p>
<h2>Why is statehood so important?</h2>
<p>The kind of statehood referred to in the two-state solution, known as <a href="https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1472">state sovereignty</a> in international politics, is the authority given to the government of a nation within and over its borders. </p>
<p>State sovereignty was formalised through the League of Nations (the precursor to the UN) and it gives governments complete control to administer laws within their borders, allows them to conduct relations with other states in formal bodies, and protects them from invasion by other states under international law. This status is derived from mutual recognition from other states. </p>
<p>This is something many of us take for granted. The vast majority of people on Earth live in or legally fall under the jurisdiction of a sovereign state. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/israel-palestinian-conflict-is-the-two-state-solution-now-dead-221967">Israel-Palestinian conflict: is the two-state solution now dead?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The state of Israel was formally established in 1948 through the political project of <a href="https://theconversation.com/israel-hamas-war-what-is-zionism-a-history-of-the-political-movement-that-created-israel-as-we-know-it-217788">Zionism</a> – the movement to establish a Jewish homeland. The aim was to create a sovereign state – with borders, a government and an army – that would give the Jewish people a political voice and a place free from antisemitic violence. </p>
<p>But it was not until other countries established diplomatic ties with Israel – along with its accession to the UN in 1949 – that it achieved <a href="https://legal.un.org/repertory/art2.shtml">state sovereignty</a> similar to other countries. <a href="https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/international-recognition-of-israel#google_vignette">More than 160 members</a> of the UN now recognise Israel; those who do not include Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Indonesia. </p>
<p>Since the end of the Six-Day War in 1967, more than 5 million Palestinians who are not citizens of another nation have been <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/International/palestinians-stateless-united-longing-liberation-historians/story?id=103899678#:%7E:text=They%20are%20stateless%2C%20their%20identity,fate%20hanging%20in%20the%20balance.">stateless</a>. The West Bank and Gaza Strip remain in an institutional limbo – best described as semi-autonomous enclaves under the ultimate control of Israel. </p>
<p>While <a href="http://palestineun.org/about-palestine/diplomatic-relations/">139 members of the UN</a> recognise a state of Palestine, the governing bodies in the West Bank and Gaza (the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, respectively) do not have control over their own security or borders. </p>
<p>As such, the self-determination of Palestinians through the creation of a sovereign state has been a cornerstone of Palestinian political action for decades. </p>
<h2>The closest the two sides got – the Oslo Accords</h2>
<p>For a time in the early 1990s, significant progress was being made toward a two-state solution. Negotiations began largely as a result of Palestinian uprisings across the West Bank and Gaza. Beginning in 1987, they were known as the <a href="https://www.btselem.org/statistics/first_intifada_tables">First Intifada</a>. </p>
<p>In 1993, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and the head of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) Yasser Arafat met in Oslo and signed <a href="https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/IL%20PS_930913_DeclarationPrinciplesnterimSelf-Government%28Oslo%20Accords%29.pdf">the first of two agreements</a> called the Oslo Accords. At the time, this was not seen as a meeting between equals. Rabin was head of a sovereign state and Arafat was leader of an organisation that had been designated a terror group by the US.</p>
<p>But the leaders were able to formalise an agreement, following major concessions from both sides, that laid the groundwork for the creation of a separate Palestinian state. While the accord did not expressly mention the 1967 borders, it did refer to “a settlement based on <a href="https://peacemaker.un.org/middle-east-resolution242">UN Security Council Resolution 242</a>” in 1967, which called for the withdrawal of Israel’s armed forces “from territories occupied in the recent conflict”. Arafat, Rabin and Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres all received <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1994/summary/">Nobel Peace Prizes</a> afterwards.</p>
<p>The Oslo II Accord was signed in 1995, detailing the <a href="https://theconversation.com/understanding-the-history-of-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict-in-5-charts-216165">subdivision of administrative areas in the occupied territories</a>. The West Bank, in particular, was divided into parcels that were controlled by Israel, the Palestinian Authority or a joint operation – the first step toward handing over land in the occupied territories to the Palestinian Authority.</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-954" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/954/a5d24879b7e2bd363807769879e7fac1913f35d8/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>But just six weeks later, Rabin was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/assassination-yitzhak-rabin-never-knew-his-people-shot-him-in-back">shot dead by a Jewish nationalist</a> aggrieved by the concessions made by Israel. </p>
<p>Negotiations between the two sides slowed and political will began to sour. And over the next few decades, the two-state solution has only become harder to achieve for various reasons, including:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>the rise of conservative governments in Israel and lack of effective political pressure from the US </p></li>
<li><p>the shrinking political influence of the Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas and the rise of Hamas in Gaza, which caused a political split between the two Palestinian territories</p></li>
<li><p>Hamas’ vows to <a href="https://apnews.com/article/hamas-gaza-palestinian-authority-israel-war-ed7018dbaae09b81513daf3bda38109a">annihilate Israel</a> and refusal to recognise the Israeli state as legitimate</p></li>
<li><p>the continued growth of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which has turned the territory into an ever-shrinking series of small enclaves connected by military checkpoints</p></li>
<li><p>dwindling support among both <a href="https://theconversation.com/israel-palestinian-conflict-is-the-two-state-solution-now-dead-221967">Israelis</a> and <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/512828/palestinians-lack-faith-biden-two-state-solution.aspx#:%7E:text=Younger%20Palestinians%20report%20less%20support,those%20aged%2046%20and%20older.">Palestinians</a> for the model</p></li>
<li><p>continued political violence on both sides.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>And of course there is Netanyahu – no individual has done more to undermine the two-state solution than the current Israeli leader and his party. In 2010, a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/jul/26/binyamin-netanyahu-tape-israeli-palestinian-politics">leaked recording from 2001</a> came to light where Netanyahu claimed to have “de facto put an end to the Oslo accords”.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1751531837095023043"}"></div></p>
<h2>What alternatives are there?</h2>
<p>There aren’t many alternatives and all of them have significant problems. </p>
<p>Some are now advocating for a “one-state solution,” in which Israeli citizenship would be granted to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza to create a democratic, ethnically pluralist state. </p>
<p>Although Arabs already make up around 20% of Israel’s current population, the one-state solution would not be politically feasible. According to Zionist ideology, Israel must always remain a <a href="https://www.american.edu/sis/news/20231121-what-is-the-one-state-solution-and-why-is-it-unlikely-to-work.cfm">majority Jewish state</a> and granting Palestinians citizenship in the occupied territories would undermine this.</p>
<p>Another kind of one-state solution is not feasible for a different reason. The most far-right ministers in Israel’s parliament <a href="https://hashiloach.org.il/israels-decisive-plan/">have championed</a> an idea to expand complete sovereign control over the West Bank and Gaza and encourage mass Jewish settlement in these areas. Such action would draw the ire of the international community and human rights organisations and would be seen as tantamount to ethnic cleansing. </p>
<p>The other option is the status quo. The Hamas attack on October 7 and subsequent Israeli assault on Gaza have shown us that this is not a solution either.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/221872/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Thomas does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The two sides got very close to a deal in the 1990s but have drifted apart since then.Andrew Thomas, Lecturer in Middle East Studies, Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2133402023-10-04T12:33:07Z2023-10-04T12:33:07ZThe Nobel Peace Prize offers no guarantee its winners actually create peace, or make it last<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551816/original/file-20231003-21-46u90x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1091%2C0%2C71%2C233&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Norwegian Nobel Committee is set to announce its annual winner for the peace prize on Friday, Oct. 6, 2023. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/plaque-depicting-alfred-nobel-at-the-nobel-peace-prize-news-photo/83979203?adppopup=true">Chris Jackson/Getty Images </a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Norwegian Nobel Committee is <a href="https://www.nobelpeaceprize.org/presse/arrangementer/accreditation-announcement-nobel-peace-prize-2023?instance=0">set to announce</a> the recipient of the annual Nobel Peace Prize on Oct. 6, 2023, drawing from a pool of 351 nominees. </p>
<p>Environmental activist Greta Thunberg and Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Zelenskyy <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/how-is-nobel-peace-prize-decided-2023-09-29/">are reportedly two of the nominees</a>, among political dissidents, leaders and human rights activists who are up for the prize. The winner will receive a medal, US$994,000 and global recognition.</p>
<p>I have <a href="https://www.sandiego.edu/peace/about/biography.php?profile_id=2091">worked in the peace-building field</a> for over 20 years to support societies as they work to prevent violence and end wars. Each year, I think I should look forward to this moment, when a champion of peace is celebrated on the world stage. But given the track record of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, I always feel some dread before the peace prize announcement. Will the award celebrate a true peace builder, or a politician that just happened to sign a peace agreement? Will it celebrate a true and historic achievement, or what happens to be in the newspaper right now? </p>
<h2>A mixed history</h2>
<p>Admittedly, the <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/about/the-norwegian-nobel-committee/">Norwegian Nobel Committee</a> – made up of five Norwegians, mostly former politicians, whom the Norwegian parliament appoints for a six-year term – has made some great peace prize selections over the years. </p>
<p>South African politician Nelson Mandela, for example, <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1993/summary/#">won the prize</a> in 1993 for his work to help end apartheid.</p>
<p>And Leymah Gbowee, an activist who helped bring peace to Liberia, <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2011/gbowee/facts/">won the award</a> in 2011, alongside former Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Yemeni women’s rights activist Tawakkul Karman.</p>
<p>Gbowee brought Christian and Muslim women together to end Liberia’s devastating 14-year civil war by using creative tactics – <a href="https://qz.com/958346/history-shows-that-sex-strikes-are-a-surprisingly-effective-strategy-for-political-change">including a sex strike</a>, in which Liberian women promised to withhold sex from their husbands until a peace agreement was signed. </p>
<p>Despite the prize’s mixed track record – and <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/end-nobel-peace-prize/616300/">despite calls by some to stop giving the award</a> – I think the Nobel Peace Prize should continue. War remains one of humankind’s greatest problems, and peace is still a human achievement worth celebrating.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551809/original/file-20231003-25-gozy93.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Leymah Gbowee wears a white shirt and marches with a long line of women, also wearing white." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551809/original/file-20231003-25-gozy93.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551809/original/file-20231003-25-gozy93.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551809/original/file-20231003-25-gozy93.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551809/original/file-20231003-25-gozy93.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551809/original/file-20231003-25-gozy93.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551809/original/file-20231003-25-gozy93.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551809/original/file-20231003-25-gozy93.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Leymah Gbowee, who was a joint Nobel Peace Prize winner in 2011, marches with women’s rights activists to pray for peace in Monrovia, Liberia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/liberias-joint-nobel-peace-prize-2011-leymah-gbowee-and-news-photo/1250772202?adppopup=true">Issouf Sanogo/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The prize can be off-mark</h2>
<p>The Nobel Committee, in my view, does not always give the peace prize to people who actually deserve the recognition. And the prize is not a precursor to peace actually happening, or lasting. </p>
<p>Some previous awardees are head-scratchers, for peace experts and casual observers and recipients alike. For example, former President Barack Obama said that <a href="https://www.npr.org/2009/10/09/113677764/obama-surprised-at-winning-nobel-peace-prize">he was even surprised by the award</a> when he won it in 2009.</p>
<p>The committee gave him the award “based on his extraordinary efforts to <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2009/press-release/">strengthen international diplomacy</a> and cooperation between peoples.” However, Obama had been in office for less than a year when he got the prize, which is likely not enough time to do either of these things.</p>
<p>Geir Lundestad, a former secretary of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, wrote in his 2019 memoir that he had hoped the award “<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34277960">would strengthen Mr. Obama</a>” to pursue nuclear disarmament, but in the end he said that he regretted giving Obama the award. </p>
<p>Others selections, such as Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, have proved embarrassing in hindsight. </p>
<p>Just one year after winning the award in 2019, Abiy ordered a large-scale military offensive against the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, <a href="https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/conflict-ethiopia">a controversial political party</a> that represents the northern Tigray region of Ethiopia. </p>
<p>The war between the Ethiopian military and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front resulted in tens of thousands of civilian deaths before it ended in November 2022. A <a href="https://apnews.com/article/health-united-nations-africa-ethiopia-eritrea-dcb992b8389069490c8b44357500cabe">United Nations investigation</a> found in 2022 that all sides in the conflict have committed <a href="https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes.shtml">war crimes</a> against civilians.</p>
<p>Berit Reiss-Andersen, the chair of the Nobel award committee, later said in 2022 that Ahmed “has a special responsibility to end the conflict and contribute to peace.” </p>
<p>Unsurprisingly, such statements encouraging peace – alongside the Nobel Prize itself – have had little effect on how prize winners act. The factors that drive war or peace are complex and are unlikely to be significantly influenced by an annual award given in Norway.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551815/original/file-20231003-19-ful84d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A picture of the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed Ali is on display at the Nobel Peace Center in Oslo, alongside other framed photos of people in a dark room with blue lighting." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551815/original/file-20231003-19-ful84d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551815/original/file-20231003-19-ful84d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=477&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551815/original/file-20231003-19-ful84d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=477&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551815/original/file-20231003-19-ful84d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=477&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551815/original/file-20231003-19-ful84d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=599&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551815/original/file-20231003-19-ful84d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=599&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551815/original/file-20231003-19-ful84d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=599&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A photo of Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed is on display at the Nobel Peace Center in Oslo, Norway, recognizing winners of the Nobel Peace Prize.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/picture-of-the-2019-nobel-peace-prize-laureate-ethiopian-news-photo/1175337675?adppopup=true">Stan Lysberg Solum/NTB Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Peace is long term</h2>
<p>Other Nobel awarding committees seem to understand that it takes a significant amount of time to judge whether an achievement truly merits the prize.</p>
<p>Both physicists and economists wait an average of 23 years to <a href="https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news/chemistry-fastest-path-nobel-prize">receive an award</a> after they achieve their award-winning work. </p>
<p>In contrast, American diplomat Henry Kissinger won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1973 for negotiating a <a href="https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/cease-fire-goes-into-effect">cease-fire in Vietnam that same year</a>. The cease-fire began to falter almost immediately, and Saigon, the capital of South Vietnam, fell to the North Vietnamese army in May 1975. Kissinger then unsuccessfully tried to return the prize, noting that <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/world/kissinger-nobel-peace-prize-vietnam-war-b2261492.html">“peace we sought through negotiations has been overturned by force</a>.”</p>
<p>Similarly, the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and Israeli political leaders Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin won the peace prize in 1994, one year after they signed the <a href="https://peacemaker.un.org/israelopt-osloaccord93">Oslo Accords,</a> a series of agreements that set up Palestinian self-governance for the West Bank and Gaza. But by 2000, Palestinians had launched the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/place/Israel/The-second-intifada">second intifada</a>, and widespread violence returned to the region.</p>
<p>The Nobel committee tends to award prizes to those involved in current events and doesn’t award prizes long after those events have happened. But some awards have stood the test of time, in part because they were given to individuals following long struggles.</p>
<p>Mandela, for instance, won the prize 53 years after his expulsion from university for joining a protest. This sparked <a href="https://southafrica-info.com/history/nelson-mandela-timeline/">a 53-yearlong career in activism and politics</a> that included 27 years of incarceration as a political prisoner by the government he had fought against – and later led as president.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551831/original/file-20231003-21-fn9thz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Yaser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzak Rabin stand in a row and show an open book with a gold Nobel peace prize in it." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551831/original/file-20231003-21-fn9thz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551831/original/file-20231003-21-fn9thz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551831/original/file-20231003-21-fn9thz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551831/original/file-20231003-21-fn9thz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551831/original/file-20231003-21-fn9thz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551831/original/file-20231003-21-fn9thz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551831/original/file-20231003-21-fn9thz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Palestinian leader Yaser Arafat, left, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, center, and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin display their joint Nobel Peace Prizes in 1994.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/in-this-handout-from-the-government-press-office-israeli-news-photo/51663003?adppopup=true">Government Press Office via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>It’s about peace</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/alfred-nobels-life-and-work/">Swedish scientist Alfred Nobel</a> – the founder of the Nobel awards – said the Nobel Peace Prize should go to the person “who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses.” </p>
<p>The language is somewhat archaic, but the message is clear – the peace prize was designed to be about stopping war and promoting peace. </p>
<p>However, in the last 20 years, the peace prize has been awarded to those working on a variety of issues, including <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2021/summary/">freedom of expression</a>, <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2014/summary/">children’s education</a> and <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2007/summary/">climate change</a>.</p>
<p>All of these are important issues that require more support and recognition – but it is not the case that freedom of expression or climate change adaptation directly leads to peace.</p>
<p>In my view, there are more than enough problems and deadly conflicts in the world whose solutions merit the award of the Nobel Peace Prize as a reflection of its original intent – to acknowledge attempts aimed at ending the scourge of war and building a sustainable peace.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/213340/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Blum does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Nobel Peace Prize has recognized some legendary leaders and peace activists, but it has a mixed track record of recognizing people who actually deserve the prize.Andrew Blum, Executive Director and Professor of Practice at Joan B. Kroc Institute for Peace, University of San DiegoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2113622023-09-12T12:26:24Z2023-09-12T12:26:24Z30 years after Arafat-Rabin handshake, clear flaws in Oslo Accords doomed peace talks to failure<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/547046/original/file-20230907-29-w0u6nx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=10%2C0%2C3542%2C2396&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A historic handshake.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/american-president-bill-clinton-watches-as-the-israeli-news-photo/2666773?adppopup=true">MPI/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>On Sept. 13, 1993, the world watched as Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat <a href="https://www.npr.org/2016/08/06/488737544/oslo-tells-the-surprising-story-behind-a-historic-handshake">shook hands on the White House lawn</a>. It was a stunning moment. The famous handshake between adversaries marked the beginning of what became known as the <a href="https://peacemaker.un.org/israelopt-osloaccord93">Oslo Accords</a>, a framework for talks between Israeli and Palestinian representatives, mediated by U.S. diplomats.</p>
<p>The idea was that through open-ended negotiations and confidence-building measures, Palestinians would eventually take control over their own affairs in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem – <a href="https://www.un.org/unispal/history/">territories that Israel</a> had <a href="https://www.globalr2p.org/countries/israel-and-the-occupied-palestinian-territory/">illegally occupied following the 1967 Six-Day War</a>. </p>
<p>After an <a href="https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/pcw/97181.htm">interim period of five years</a>, the thinking went, a Palestinian state would exist side by side with Israel. And through such a two-state solution, peace between Israel and the Palestinians could be achieved.</p>
<p>Thirty years later, it is clear the Oslo Accords have achieved neither peace nor a two-state solution. So far in 2023 alone, over 200 Palestinians and nearly 30 Israelis <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/8/22/more-than-200-palestinians-nearly-30-israelis-killed-so-far-this-year-un">have been killed</a>. Israel has <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israel-swears-in-netanyahu-as-prime-minister-most-right-wing-government-in-countrys-history">the most right-wing, nationalist government</a> in its history, and the <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023-06-29/ty-article-opinion/.premium/why-is-the-palestinian-authority-weak-israeli-occupation/00000189-08a0-dae1-afa9-08bd83b50000">Palestinian leadership is weak and divided</a>. There is little prospect for a return to negotiations anytime soon. </p>
<p>How did this grim reality emerge from such high hopes in 1993? Many analysts point to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhea62CPM3Q">violations of the terms of the accords</a> committed by both sides. Others blame a <a href="https://carnegieendowment.org/2013/09/12/legacy-of-oslo-process-pub-52972">lack of accountability</a>, which allowed those violations to go unchecked.</p>
<p>Certainly, there is plenty of blame to go around. But as a <a href="https://menas.arizona.edu/person/maha-nassar">scholar of Palestinian history</a>, it is clear to me that the Oslo peace process failed because the framework itself was deeply flawed in three key ways.</p>
<p>First, it ignored the power imbalance between the two sides. Second, it focused on ending violence by Palestinian militant groups while overlooking <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/4/10/israeli-violence-is-the-problem">acts of violence committed by the Israeli state</a>. And third, it sought peace as the end goal, rather than justice.</p>
<p>Let’s break each one of these down.</p>
<h2>Ignoring the power imbalance</h2>
<p>The Palestinian Liberation Organization, or PLO, had <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1988/11/15/world/plo-proclaims-palestine-to-be-an-independent-state-hints-at-recognizing-israel.html">implicitly recognized Israel</a> in 1988. But a more formal statement <a href="https://mesg.wordpress.hull.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/The-Israel-PLO-Mutual-Recognition-Agreement.pdf">was needed</a> for Israel to agree to talks. In an exchange of letters on Sept. 9, 1993, <a href="https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-205528/">Arafat wrote to Rabin</a>, “The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.” </p>
<p>In formally recognizing Israel’s right to exist, the PLO essentially gave up sole sovereign claims to <a href="https://imeu.org/article/quick-facts-the-palestinian-nakba">78% of the Palestinians’ historic homeland</a> that was now claimed by Israel.</p>
<p>In response, <a href="https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-205528/">Rabin wrote to Arafat</a> that Israel would “recognize the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people.” He did not recognize the Palestinians’ right to form their own state.</p>
<p>In a “<a href="https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-180015/">Declaration of Principles</a>,” signed by Arafat and Rabin at the White House on Sept. 13, it was stated that the aim of the talks was “the implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (from 1967) and 338 (from 1973).” Those U.N. resolutions call on Israel to withdraw from territories it occupied in 1967. But they do not explicitly call for the establishment of a Palestinian state.</p>
<p>Since then, Israel has <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-06-15/ty-article/.highlight/half-the-west-bank-land-seized-by-israel-used-only-by-settlers-report-says/00000188-b932-d1d6-a7b9-fbf73a8a0000">expropriated nearly half</a> of the West Bank for the exclusive use of Jewish settlers, <a href="https://press.un.org/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm">in violation of international law</a>. It also routinely <a href="https://apnews.com/article/water-climate-change-drought-occupation-israel-palestinians-30cb8949bdb45cf90ed14b6b992b5b42">siphons off</a> water from Palestinian underground aquifers for the use of the settlers, while <a href="https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/parched-israels-policy-water-deprivation-west-bank#:%7E:text=Immediately%20after%20occupying%20the%20West,Valley%2C%20for%20its%20own%20ends.">depriving</a> Palestinians access to their own water. </p>
<p>As a result of these <a href="https://www.unrwa.org/demolition-watch">and other measures</a>, life for Palestinians <a href="https://www.btselem.org/publications/summaries/199905_oslo_before_and_after">became worse</a> during the post-Oslo years, not better. As Palestinians lost further control over their lands, homes and resources, their ability to establish a state grew more distant.</p>
<p>Yet, by insisting that bilateral negotiations take place between a powerful state and a stateless people – rather than under the auspices of the United Nations or other international body – the Oslo framework ignored the power imbalance between Israel and the Palestinians. U.S. mediators would insist that <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/06/world/albright-in-mideast-trying-to-push-israeli-palestinian-talks.html?searchResultPosition=7">both sides</a> needed to compromise. But Israel held far more military, economic and diplomatic power than the Palestinians. </p>
<p>By ignoring this power imbalance, the Oslo Accords effectively allowed Israel to continue to confiscate land and resources with no consequences. With 60% of the West Bank <a href="https://unctad.org/publication/economic-costs-israeli-occupation-palestinian-people-cost-restrictions-area-c-viewed">under Israeli control</a>, the prospects for a viable, independent Palestinian state were undermined.</p>
<h2>No end to state violence</h2>
<p>A 1994 <a href="https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/IL%20PS_940504_Agreement%20on%20the%20Gaza%20Strip%20and%20the%20Jericho%20Area%20%28Cairo%20Agreement%29.pdf">follow-up agreement stated</a>, “Both sides shall take all measures necessary in order to prevent acts of terrorism, crime and hostilities directed against each other.” It added that “the Palestinian side shall take all measures necessary to prevent such hostile acts directed against the Settlements, the infrastructure serving them and the Military Installation Area.” </p>
<p>Successive Israeli governments have interpreted “hostile acts” broadly. As a result, even Palestinians who have defended their lands through nonviolent means <a href="https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=121998612">have been arrested</a>, <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2010/08/activista-palestino-declarado-culpable-tribunal-militar-israeli/">imprisoned</a> and <a href="https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/civilresistance/nonviolent-resistance-in-palestine-steadfastness-creativity-and-hope/">shot at</a> by Israeli soldiers.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/IL%20PS_940504_Agreement%20on%20the%20Gaza%20Strip%20and%20the%20Jericho%20Area%20%28Cairo%20Agreement%29.pdf">agreement also stated</a> that “the Israeli side shall take all measures necessary to prevent such hostile acts emanating from the Settlements and directed against Palestinians.” But it does not mention Israeli military violence against Palestinian civilians. </p>
<p>To enforce this agreement, the Palestinian Authority – an autonomous body that rules over Palestinians in the West Bank – <a href="https://www.peaceagreements.org/viewmasterdocument/983">agreed to coordinate</a> with the Israeli military over security matters. It would either arrest Palestinians whom Israel suspects of carrying out hostilities or allow Israel to enter Palestinian areas and arrest suspects themselves.</p>
<p>This coordination protects Israelis from Palestinian violence, but it does not protect Palestinians from violence by the Israeli military. Since fall 2000, the Israel military has killed <a href="https://statistics.btselem.org/en/all-fatalities/by-date-of-incident?section=overall&tab=overview">eight times</a> as many Palestinians as compared with Israelis killed by Palestinians. Half of those Palestinian victims were <a href="https://statistics.btselem.org/en/all-fatalities/by-date-of-incident?section=participation&tab=overview">not involved in hostilities</a> when they were killed, according to analysis from the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem.</p>
<p>Palestinians are also subjected to other kinds of human rights abuses from the Israeli state. These include <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israel-ramps-up-demolition-of-palestinian-homes-in-jerusalem">home demolitions</a>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/prison-israel-palestinians-administrative-detention-e4ffd1744a9692c2539a78a8d916176e">imprisonment without charge or trial</a> and <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2022-11-30/ty-article/.premium/israels-military-police-to-probe-alleged-abuse-of-palestinians-by-soldiers-at-checkpoint/00000184-c99a-dbba-a5fd-ddda80620000">abuse</a> <a href="https://www.unocha.org/publications/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/fact-sheet-movement-and-access-west-bank-august-2023">at checkpoints</a>. Most soldiers accused of harming Palestinians <a href="https://s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/files.yesh-din.org/LAW+ENFORCEMENT+AGAINST+ISRAELI+SOLDIERS+2017-2021/YeshDin+-+Data+12.22+-+English.pdf">do not face consequences</a> for their actions, according to Yesh Din, an Israeli human rights organization.</p>
<h2>Peace over justice</h2>
<p>This kind of structural violence and abuse – perpetrated by the state against marginalized groups – rarely makes headlines in Western media. Such a lack of awareness reinforces Israel’s ability to control Palestinians’ lives and further undermines the prospects for peace.</p>
<p>Yet this exclusive focus on achieving peace has, I believe, also been part of the problem. American and Israeli diplomats <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?150611-1/middle-east-peace-process">narrowly defined peace</a> as the absence of armed violence and set that as the overarching goal. They believed that if Palestinians refrained from committing acts of violence, then peace through a two-state solution could be achieved. Coverage that mirrored this perspective in the mainstream U.S. media <a href="https://www.972mag.com/new-york-times-israel-palestine/">further entrenched</a> this view. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A mural of eyes painted on a crumbling wall." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/547524/original/file-20230911-23-qc9k0g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/547524/original/file-20230911-23-qc9k0g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/547524/original/file-20230911-23-qc9k0g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/547524/original/file-20230911-23-qc9k0g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/547524/original/file-20230911-23-qc9k0g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/547524/original/file-20230911-23-qc9k0g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/547524/original/file-20230911-23-qc9k0g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Graffiti on a wall of the destroyed ‘Yasser Arafat International Airport’ in the Gaza Strip.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/this-picture-taken-on-august-27-2023-shows-a-view-of-a-news-photo/1654263885?adppopup=true">Said Khatib/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But this understanding of peace has ignored the Palestinians’ need for justice. At a minimum, justice to many Palestinians would have meant <a href="https://al-shabaka.org/memos/the-pas-revolving-door-a-key-policy-in-security-coordination/">an end to security cooperation</a> between the Palestinian Authority and Israel and the establishment of an independent, democratic Palestinian state on the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinians-1948-scepticism/palestinians-losing-faith-in-two-state-solution-idUKMAC13949320080512">remaining 22% of their homeland</a>. </p>
<p>But with the power imbalances enshrined in the Oslo framework, and with U.S. mediators focusing more on peace – measured by incidents of Palestinian violence over those perpetrated by the Israeli state – this was not to be.</p>
<h2>Oslo as ‘surrender’</h2>
<p>One month after the famous handshake, the <a href="https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v15/n20/edward-said/the-morning-after">Palestinian scholar Edward Said described</a> the Oslo Accords as “an instrument of Palestinian surrender.” Recently, a group of leading political scientists <a href="https://www.foreignaffairs.com/middle-east/israel-palestine-one-state-solution">called on U.S. policymakers to abandon</a> the Oslo framework and the two-state solution altogether. They call on the U.S. to “advocate for equality, citizenship, and human rights for all Jews and Palestinians living within the single state dominated by Israel.”</p>
<p>It is, I believe, an urgent call. Life for Palestinians is getting worse, not better. A growing number of <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution">international human rights organizations</a> and <a href="https://sites.google.com/view/israel-elephant-in-the-room/home?pli=1">public figures</a> describe the current reality on the ground in <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/5141/2022/en/">Israel-Palestine as a form of apartheid</a>.</p>
<p>Thirty years after their famous handshake, Arafat and Rabin have long since passed. It’s time to admit that the process they kick-started is also now confined to history.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211362/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Maha Nassar served as a 2022 Non-Resident Palestinian Fellow at the Foundation for Middle East Peace.</span></em></p>A famous gesture kick-started hopes of peace in the Middle East. But today, the idea of a two-state solution seems further away than ever before.Maha Nassar, Associate Professor in the School of Middle Eastern and North African Studies, University of ArizonaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2130032023-09-12T11:29:54Z2023-09-12T11:29:54ZOslo accords: 30 years on, the dream of a two-state solution seems further away than ever<p>It has been <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/27/opinion/israel-saudi-arabia-biden.html">widely reported</a> that as a condition for a potential Saudi-US-Israel deal the Israelis will commit to making gestures towards a <a href="https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-758490">two-state solution</a>. This was the original vision, 30 years ago, when the <a href="https://history.state.gov/milestones/1993-2000/oslo">Oslo accords</a> were signed, when it seemed that a Palestinian state recognised by, and living side-by-side with Israel, might indeed be a realistic prospect by the end of the 20th century.</p>
<p>Now, in the third decade of the 21st century, the Palestinian leadership merely hopes for some more of the occupied West Bank to be <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-66734638">handed over to its control</a>. A sovereign Palestinian state does not seem to be on the agenda. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://history.state.gov/milestones/1993-2000/oslo">Oslo accords</a>, which were secretly negotiated between the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and the Israeli government between 1992 and 1993, provided for three phases of negotiations. The first involved a <a href="https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-05-14-mn-57636-story.html">withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Jericho area</a> in the West Bank and most of Gaza together with the creation of institutions for <a href="https://imeu.org/article/fact-sheet-the-palestinian-authority">Palestinian self-government</a>. </p>
<p>Second there would be an interim agreement which would create an elected Palestinian Council and expand the area under its direct control. Third there would be permanent status talks to resolve the difficult issues of the status of Jerusalem, settlements, refugees, borders and relations with neighbouring states. </p>
<p>But when these issues were eventually discussed at the <a href="https://www.chathamhouse.org/2018/07/israeli-palestinian-peacemaking/camp-david-approach-2000">Camp David talks in 2000</a>, neither Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat or Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak could rise to the occasion and strike a deal. </p>
<p>This was no doubt due to the ambiguity of the accords on questions of self-determination and statehood. The text referred to “<a href="https://www.peaceagreements.org/view/34">mutual legitimate and political rights</a>”. But while Israel and the PLO recognised each other, it was as negotiating parties rather than as partners with legitimacy and the right to self-determination exercised through two sovereign states. </p>
<p>In 1993 there was much talk about the creation of a new Middle East which would be part of the post-cold war world order. The ambiguities of the Oslo accords would be resolved by good faith negotiations in an atmosphere where many talked about the “peace dividend”.</p>
<h2>Things fall apart</h2>
<p>But there was a darker side to the early 1990s. The Balkan wars (1991-1995) were markedly violent conflicts which were the product of xenophobia, racism and religious extremism. As the 1990s progressed it was these features, rather than a peaceful democratic dispensation, which characterised the post-communist world. </p>
<p>For Israel and Palestine, the optimism present in 1993 was to dissipate with rising violence. Within three years we saw the <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3cszmsk">assassination of Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin</a> by a Jewish terrorist, the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/25/newsid_4167000/4167929.stm">massacre of Muslims</a> while praying in Hebron by an Israeli settler and Hamas <a href="https://1997-2001.state.gov/global/terrorism/1996Report/middle.html">suicide terrorist attacks</a> against Israeli civilians in February and March 1996. By May 1996 the Israeli government that had negotiated the Oslo accords had been defeated at the polls by Benjamin Netanyahu who announced he would “lower Palestinian expectations”. </p>
<p>In the years since, there has been the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/v3_ip_timeline/html/2000.stm">second intifada</a> (2000-2004), the reoccupation by Israel of the West Bank (beginning in autumn 2000) and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/hamas-israel-history-confrontation-2021-05-14/">three wars between Hamas and Israel</a>. The Palestinian leadership has fractured, with Fatah (the main component of the PLO) running the West Bank while Hamas is in control of Gaza.</p>
<p>Israeli politics, meanwhile, has moved sharply to the right. This has included 12 years of populist Netanyahu governments and, since the 2022 elections, the formation of an <a href="https://theconversation.com/israeli-elections-benjamin-netanhayu-set-to-return-with-some-extreme-new-partners-193814">extreme rightwing government</a> containing ministers who are openly racist – some of them even convicted of anti-Palestinian terrorism.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/israeli-elections-benjamin-netanhayu-set-to-return-with-some-extreme-new-partners-193814">Israeli elections: Benjamin Netanhayu set to return – with some extreme new partners</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Elusive dream</h2>
<p>A paradox of the past 30 years has been that while the negotiations promised by Oslo have failed, the Palestinian institutions created by the Oslo process have persisted. </p>
<p>The Palestinian Authority created by the <a href="https://peacemaker.un.org/israelopt-cairoagreement94">Cairo Agreement in 1994</a> remains in place with Mahmoud Abbas as president. The <a href="https://ecfr.eu/special/mapping_palestinian_politics/palestine_legislative_council/">Legislative Council</a> created in 1995 remains in session in Ramallah – even if there have been no elections since 2006. </p>
<p>Since 2012, the United Nations has <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-palestinians-statehood-idUSBRE8AR0EG20121201">recognised Palestine as a state</a>. It is now recognised by about 140 countries and has joined international organisations only open to states, such as the <a href="https://www.icc-cpi.int/palestine">International Criminal Court</a>. </p>
<p>It has also been the case that there have been some initiatives to improve the situation. In 2005, then prime minister Ariel Sharon <a href="https://reliefweb.int/report/israel/israel-begins-forced-evacuation-gaza-settlers">removed Israeli settlers and troops from Gaza</a>. Whether he had a plan for a deal with the Palestinians we shall never know, as he collapsed and died shortly after. </p>
<p>His successor Ehud Olmert offered Abbas a <a href="https://www.jpost.com/diplomacy-and-politics/details-of-olmerts-peace-offer-to-palestinians-exposed-314261">comprehensive plan for a Palestinian state</a> in 2008, but the Palestinian president <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-admits-he-rejected-2008-peace-offer-from-olmert/">walked away from it</a>.</p>
<p>A resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has proved elusive due to a combination of the specific issues and the xenophobic age in which we live. Oslo offered an opportunity which could have worked if only both sides could break with traditions of mutual denial of the national aspirations of the other. </p>
<p>In December 1995, I stood in the streets of Ramallah and watched as a Palestinian procession reclaimed the city from the Israeli occupiers. It was a glimpse of a possible future. The enthusiasm of the crowds for emancipation underlines what is possible when two peoples recognise that each has the right to self-determination. </p>
<p>The recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/israels-democracy-protests-what-happens-next-211723">mass pro-democracy movement in Israel</a> offers a possible turning point against populism and xenophobia. However it needs to grow into a movement that can not only save Israeli democracy from the attacks of the right but also from the corrupting influence of 56 years of occupation. It will only be successful if it liberates both Israel and Palestine.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/213003/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Strawson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When Yasser Arafat and Yitshak Rabin shook hands on the White House lawn in September 1993 it looked as if Israel and Palestine might achieve a lasting peace. Three decades on this remains a dream.John Strawson, Honorary Professor of Law and director of LLM programs, University of East LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2082722023-07-10T12:29:10Z2023-07-10T12:29:10Z‘Idiots,’ ‘criminals’ and ‘scum’ – nasty politics highest in US since the Civil War<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536078/original/file-20230706-15-1575vv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C26%2C5991%2C3961&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Former U.S. President Donald Trump at the Moms for Liberty Joyful Warriors summit in June 2023 in Philadelphia. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/republican-presidential-candidate-former-u-s-president-news-photo/1506161556?adppopup=true">Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Joe Biden, “together with a band of his closest thugs, misfits and Marxists, tried to destroy American democracy.” </p>
<p><a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/trump-republicans-conjure-familiar-enemy-attacking-democrats-marxists-100187077">This is what Donald Trump said</a> to his supporters hours after pleading not guilty in federal court in June 2023 to his mishandling of classified documents. </p>
<p>The indictment of a former president was shocking, but Trump’s words were not. Twenty years ago, his rhetoric would have been unusual coming from any member of Congress, let alone a party leader. Yet language like this from the <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/24/politics/cnn-poll-republican-primary-field/index.html">leading Republican presidential candidate</a> is becoming remarkably common in American politics. </p>
<p>It’s not just Republicans. In 2019, New Jersey Democratic Sen. Cory Booker appeared on a talk show bemoaning Trump’s rhetoric and the lack of civility in politics. But he then went on to <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/454311-cory-booker-my-testosterone-sometimes-makes-me-want-to-punch-trump/">call Trump</a> a “physically weak specimen” and said that his own “testosterone makes me want to” punch Trump.</p>
<p>How bad have things gotten? In <a href="https://www.zeitzoff.com/book-project.html">my new book</a>, I show that the level of nastiness in U.S. politics has increased dramatically. As an indication of that, I collected historical data from The New York Times on the relative frequency of stories involving Congress that contained keywords associated with nasty politics such as “smear,” “brawl” and “slander.” I found that nasty politics is more prevalent than at any time since the U.S. Civil War. </p>
<p>Particularly following the Jan. 6. insurrection by Trump’s supporters, journalists and scholars have focused on the rise of the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/12/us/politics/republican-violent-rhetoric.html">politics of menace</a>. In May 2023, U.S. Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger testified before Congress and <a href="https://wtop.com/congress/2023/05/u-s-capitol-police-facing-more-threats-while-understaffed/">said that</a> one of the biggest challenges the U.S. Capitol Police face today “is dealing with the sheer increase in the number of threats against the members of Congress. It’s gone up over 400% over the last six years.” </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536074/original/file-20230706-29-jtwzj7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A balding man in a dark blazer and blue shirt standing against a yellow wall." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536074/original/file-20230706-29-jtwzj7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536074/original/file-20230706-29-jtwzj7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536074/original/file-20230706-29-jtwzj7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536074/original/file-20230706-29-jtwzj7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536074/original/file-20230706-29-jtwzj7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=609&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536074/original/file-20230706-29-jtwzj7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=609&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536074/original/file-20230706-29-jtwzj7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=609&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Aug. 25, 2017, booking photo of U.S. Rep. Greg Gianforte, a Montana Republican who was later convicted of assaulting Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs. Gianforte is now Montana’s governor.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/AssaultChargeGianforte/c65894c8f1414bd0ae3cd66a45399418/photo?Query=(renditions.phototype:horizontal)%20AND%20%20(Gianforte%20reporter)%20&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=32&currentItemNo=6">Gallatin County Detention Center via AP, File</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>From insults to actual violence</h2>
<p>“Nasty politics” is an umbrella term for the <a href="https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/30/yes-political-rhetoric-can-incite-violence-222019/">aggressive rhetoric</a> and occasional actual violence that politicians use against domestic political opponents and other domestic groups. </p>
<p>Insults are the least threatening and most common form of nasty politics. These include politicians’ references to opponents as “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/27/liz-cheney-electing-idiots/">idiots</a>,” “<a href="https://www.axios.com/2019/09/25/adam-schiff-ukraine-trump-transcript-impeachment">criminals</a>” or “<a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/467131-trump-blasts-never-trump-republicans-as-human-scum/">scum</a>.” Leveling accusations or using conspiracy theories to claim an opponent is engaging in <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/28/democrats-trump-russia-investigation-congress-1025919">something nefarious</a> is also common in nasty politics. </p>
<p>Less common – and more ominous – are threats to <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sheerafrenkel/12-people-who-actually-jailed-their-political-opponents">jail political opponents</a> or encouraging one’s supporters to commit violence against those opponents. </p>
<p>In 2021, Republican U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/11/18/1056761894/rep-paul-gosar-is-censured-over-an-anime-video-depicting-him-of-killing-aoc">tweeted</a> out an anime cartoon video of his likeness killing Democratic U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. </p>
<p>The rarest and most extreme examples of nasty politics entail politicians actively engaging in violence themselves. For instance, in 2017, Republican U.S. Rep. Greg Gianforte of Montana <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/happened-republican-greg-gianforte-body-slammed-reporter/story?id=58610691">body-slammed</a> a reporter from The Guardian. Gianforte would later win his 2018 election and is the current governor of Montana.</p>
<p>But nasty politics is not just a U.S. phenomenon. </p>
<h2>Deadly words</h2>
<p>In 2016, then-candidate Rodrigo Duterte famously promised Philippine voters that when he was president he would kill 100,000 drug dealers and that “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/18/world/asia/rodrigo-duterte-philippines.html">fish will grow fat</a>” from all the bodies in Manila Bay. </p>
<p>In 2017, in a speech on the one-year anniversary of the failed coup attempt against him, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/20170715-erdogan-turkey-threatens-chop-off-traitors-heads-coup-anniversary-speech">threatened</a> to “chop off the heads of those traitors.” </p>
<p>Before Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was <a href="https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-721498">murdered by a far-right Jewish extremist</a> in 1995, then-opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu railed against Rabin’s support for territorial compromise with Palestinians. In an op-ed in The New York Times, Netanyahu compared Rabin’s potential peace deal with Palestinians to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1993/09/05/opinion/peace-in-our-time.html">Neville Chamberlain’s</a> appeasement of the Nazis before World War II. In the lead-up to the assassination, Netanyahu spoke at several right-wing rallies at which his supporters held up posters of Rabin in a Nazi uniform, and Netanyahu himself even marched next to a coffin that said “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/04/opinion/incitement-movie.html">Rabin kills Zionism</a>.” </p>
<p>In Ukraine before the 2022 Russian invasion, the Ukrainian parliament, known as the Rada, many times resembled a meeting of <a href="https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-parliament-fight/24934282.html">rival soccer hooligans</a> rather than a functioning legislature. Fights among rivals regularly broke out, including the occasional egging and smoke bomb. In 2012, a full-blown legislative riot occurred in the Rada over the status of the Russian language in Ukraine, with <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/26/world/europe/ukraine-parliament-debate-over-language-escalates-into-a-brawl.html">rival lawmakers punching and choking one another</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536076/original/file-20230706-17-zoq2h1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man in a blue striped shirt, standing among a number of people, raises his clenched fist." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536076/original/file-20230706-17-zoq2h1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536076/original/file-20230706-17-zoq2h1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536076/original/file-20230706-17-zoq2h1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536076/original/file-20230706-17-zoq2h1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536076/original/file-20230706-17-zoq2h1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=574&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536076/original/file-20230706-17-zoq2h1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=574&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536076/original/file-20230706-17-zoq2h1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=574&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Philippines presidential candidate Rodrigo Duterte clenches his fist during a campaign visit to Silang township, Philippines, on April 22, 2016.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/PhilippinesElectionsDuterte/756a5ca3edf046aa91b239aacdb16e0f/photo?Query=(renditions.phototype:horizontal)%20AND%20(persons.person_featured:%22Rodrigo%20Duterte%22)%20AND%20Duterte&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:asc&dateRange=&totalCount=502&currentItemNo=14">AP Photo/Bullit Marquez</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Voters don’t like it</h2>
<p>The conventional wisdom for the reason politicians go nasty is that while voters find mudslinging or political brawling distasteful, it’s actually <a href="https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/304141-the-dirty-secret-about-negative-campaign-ads-they/">effective</a>. Or that although they won’t admit it, voters secretly like nasty politics. </p>
<p>Yet <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/11/01/662730647/poll-nearly-4-in-5-voters-concerned-incivility-will-lead-to-violence">polling</a> consistently shows the opposite. </p>
<p>Voters don’t like it when politicians go nasty, are worried it could lead to violence, and reduce their support for those who do use it. That’s what I found in countless surveys in the U.S., Ukraine and Israel, where I did research for my book. Other <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000140">research in the U.S.</a> finds that even ardent Trump supporters reduced their approval for him when he used uncivil language.</p>
<p>So why do politicians use nasty politics? </p>
<p>First, nasty politics grabs attention. </p>
<p>Nasty rhetoric is more likely to get covered in the media, or to get likes, clicks or shares on social media than its civil counterpart. For Trump, some of his most-shared tweets were one <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/31/us/politics/trump-antifa-terrorist-group.html">labeling antifa</a> a “terrorist” organization and a clip of him <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/02/trump-body-slam-cnn-tweet-violence-reporters-wrestlemania">body-slamming</a> a pro wrestler with CNN’s logo superimposed. </p>
<p>Second, given their attention-grabbing nature, nasty politics can be a particularly important tool for opposition or outsider politicians. These politicians who don’t have the name recognition, or access to the same resources as party leaders, can use nasty politics to get noticed and build a following. </p>
<p>Third, and perhaps most important, nasty politics can be used to signal toughness. This toughness is something that voters seek out when they <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/authoritarian-dynamic/7620B99124ED2DBFC6394444838F455A">feel threatened</a>. This sentiment was best captured in a <a href="https://twitter.com/JerryFalwellJr/status/1045853333007798272?s=20">September 2018 tweet</a> from the Rev. Jerry Falwell Jr., a Trump ally: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Conservatives & Christians need to stop electing “nice guys”. They might make great Christian leaders but the US needs street fighters like @realDonaldTrump at every level of government b/c the liberal fascists Dems are playing for keeps & many Repub leaders are a bunch of wimps!</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>From nasty words to worse</h2>
<p>Nasty politics has important implications for democracy. </p>
<p>It can be a legitimate tool for opposition and outsider politicians to call attention to bad behavior. But it can also be used as a cynical, dangerous tool by incumbents to cling to power that can lead to violence. </p>
<p>For example, in the lead-up to the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Trump and his supporters concocted a baseless conspiracy that the 2020 election would be stolen. He <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/07/trump-incitement-inflammatory-rhetoric-capitol-riot">implored his supporters</a> to come to Washington on Jan. 6 as part of a rally to support the baseless conspiracy and “Stop the Steal,” and urged followers to “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/capitol-mob-trump-supporters.html">Be There. Will Be Wild!</a>” foreshadowing the violence that was to come. </p>
<p>Perhaps most ominously for the near future of U.S. democracy, the growing Trump legal troubles have escalated to violent rhetoric. </p>
<p>After Trump’s indictment in June, Republican U.S. <a href="https://twitter.com/RepAndyBiggsAZ/status/1667241900938502146">Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona tweeted: “We have now reached a war phase. Eye for an eye</a>.”</p>
<p>The uptick in nasty politics in the U.S. is both a symptom of the country’s deeply divided politics and a harbinger of future threats to democracy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208272/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Thomas Zeitzoff has received funding from the National Science Foundation and the Charles Koch Foundation</span></em></p>Studies show, though, that voters don’t like all that nastiness.Thomas Zeitzoff, Associate Professor, School of Public Affairs, American UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1624612021-06-11T12:39:43Z2021-06-11T12:39:43ZHistoric change: Arab political parties are now legitimate partners in Israel’s politics and government<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405676/original/file-20210610-19-1ibfn4g.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=40%2C10%2C6669%2C4456&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mansour Abbas, Israeli Arab politician and leader of the Ra'am Party, in a meeting at the Israeli president's residence in Jerusalem on April 5, 2021. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/israeli-arab-politician-leader-of-the-united-arab-list-news-photo/1232132109?adppopup=true">Abir Sultan/Pool/ AFP/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The next government is not going to be a typical one for the citizens of the state of Israel, and especially for members of the Palestinian Arab minority, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/05/13/arab-israeli-faq/">who are 20% of Israel’s population</a>. This is the <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/arab-israeli-raam-party-makes-history-by-joining-bennett-lapid-coalition/">first time the Zionist political parties forming the government are including an Arab party</a>. </p>
<p>It is ironic that the prime minister of this government would be Naftali Bennett. Bennett is the leader of the radical right-wing political party Yamina, whose ideologies and interests contradict the Arab party’s interests, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/02/world/middleeast/naftali-bennett-israel.html">and which has opposed Arab participation in the coalition or government</a>. His national-religious political movement, which represents many Jewish settlers, signed the coalition agreement with Ra’am, the Islamic Arab party.</p>
<p>In the 73-year history of Israel, it was an unwritten rule that any government <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/06/07/an-islamist-party-is-part-israels-new-coalition-government-how-did-that-happen/">coalition would be formed only by the Jewish Zionist parties</a>. There was only one exception, when the late Prime Minister <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/02/world/middleeast/arab-party-raam-coalition.html">Yitzhak Rabin relied on the support of an Arab party</a> in the wake of the Oslo Peace Accords in the 1990s. The agreement, however, did not formalize that party’s entry into the ruling coalition. </p>
<p>The chain of events Rabin triggered was considered <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/assassination-yitzhak-rabin-never-knew-his-people-shot-him-in-back">an unforgivable sin by the Israeli right, which depicted Rabin as a traitor</a> – as they do now with Bennett – and which ultimately led to Rabin’s assassination.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405684/original/file-20210610-13-ledl0.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A campaign billboard for Arab parties in Arabic with pictures of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli far-right leader Itamar Ben Gvir." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405684/original/file-20210610-13-ledl0.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405684/original/file-20210610-13-ledl0.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405684/original/file-20210610-13-ledl0.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405684/original/file-20210610-13-ledl0.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405684/original/file-20210610-13-ledl0.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405684/original/file-20210610-13-ledl0.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405684/original/file-20210610-13-ledl0.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A campaign billboard for the Joint List of Arab parties mocked Netanyahu’s promise of a ‘new approach.’</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/an-election-campaign-billboard-in-arabic-showing-israeli-news-photo/1231734325?adppopup=true">Amir Levy/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Changing Israeli politics</h2>
<p>What drove the first Arab party into a ruling coalition now was not the desire for a peace agreement. It was <a href="https://www.barrons.com/news/israel-voters-take-fourth-shot-at-deciding-netanyahu-s-fate-01616465706">the poor state of Israeli politics after four election rounds in two years</a> without a clear winner, combined with the strong desire of the opposition, called the “<a href="https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210530-israeli-change-bloc-steps-up-effort-to-oust-netanyahu">Change Bloc</a>,” to oust longtime Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. </p>
<p>The Arabs did not forget Netanyahu’s hostile remarks during the previous elections. That’s when he urged the settlers to cast their votes against the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/03/17/on-israeli-election-day-netanyahu-warns-of-arabs-voting-in-droves/">Arabs who “are voting in droves</a>.” </p>
<p>After failing in the latest election to both discourage the Arab vote and ensure a majority of his own, it was Netanyahu who first understood the potential need to cooperate with the Arab parties. After all other efforts to form a ruling coalition failed, he <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-holding-talks-with-netanyahu-first-legitimized-raam-among-all-parties/">tried to lure Ra’am leader Mansour Abbas to his side</a> even before Bennett did, but to no avail.</p>
<p>For his part, Abbas proposed to change the way Arab parties deal with the Jewish parties and politics in Israel. </p>
<p>“I say here clearly and frankly: When the very establishment of this government is based on our support … we will be able to influence it and accomplish great things for our Arab society,” <a href="https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2021/0603/In-a-first-for-Israeli-politics-Arab-party-to-join-government">Abbas said</a>. </p>
<p>For decades, Palestinian Arab political parties <a href="https://www.idi.org.il/articles/4340">would not join Israeli governments</a> that continued to support the occupation of their Palestinian brothers, oppressed them and denied their basic rights. And they were <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/05/07/how-netanyahu-learned-to-love-israeli-arab-parties/">kept out of leadership coalitions</a> by the Jewish parties’ fear of cooperating with them. </p>
<p>Abbas’ call for <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/here-we-go-again-tois-guide-to-the-38-parties-still-seeking-your-vote/">pragmatism means</a> that he will support political coalitions committed to meeting the immediate and urgent demands of the Arab minority in Israel. Chief among those demands is addressing the issues of violence, house demolitions, planning in new Arab villages and towns, education and equality.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405688/original/file-20210610-21-f3m5un.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A group of people sit at a large table with white tablecloth and Israeli flags in the background." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405688/original/file-20210610-21-f3m5un.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405688/original/file-20210610-21-f3m5un.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405688/original/file-20210610-21-f3m5un.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405688/original/file-20210610-21-f3m5un.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405688/original/file-20210610-21-f3m5un.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405688/original/file-20210610-21-f3m5un.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405688/original/file-20210610-21-f3m5un.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Mansour Abbas, leader of the Ra'am Party, second from right, and fellow Arab politician Mazen Ghanayem, right, discuss with Israeli President Reuven Rivlin who might form the next coalition government, at the president’s residence in Jerusalem on April 5, 2021.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/IsraelPolitics/9c897944ede749da82c28b96a519cd3f/photo?Query=Mansour%20AND%20abbas&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=40&currentItemNo=5">Abir Sultan/Pool Photo via AP</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Significant promises made</h2>
<p>Abbas’ approach was rejected by the rest of the Palestinian political parties, and thus <a href="https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-palestine-arab-joint-list-split-march-election">split up the Joint List</a>, which was a political alliance of four of the Arab political parties in Israel: Balad, Hadash, Ta'al and Ra'am, that they had formed for the previous elections.</p>
<p>The February 2021 election results meant Ra’am entered Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, with four members. Those four can prove decisive in this politically fractured situation. </p>
<p>For now, it appears that Abbas achieved what he wanted. Despite the serious disagreement among the Arabs over his approach, he is convinced that his party’s governing responsibilities will change the face of Israeli politics in all matters related to the Arab minority and will show positive results for the rights and status of Arab citizens in Israel. </p>
<p>“We have reached a critical mass of agreements in various fields that serves the interest of Arab society and that provide solutions for the burning issues in Arab society – planning, the housing crisis, and of course, fighting violence and organized crime,” <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/arab-israeli-raam-party-makes-history-by-joining-bennett-lapid-coalition/">Abbas said</a>.</p>
<p>To help the Arab sector, <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/arab-israeli-raam-party-makes-history-by-joining-bennett-lapid-coalition/">among the promises he got from his new partners in the incoming government</a> are the adoption of a five-year economic development plan for the Arab community with a budget of 30 billion shekels, or $US9.3 billion, as well as plans to combat crime and violence in the Arab community, to improve infrastructure, to advance Arab local authorities, and <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/unlikely-trio-put-aside-huge-differences-one-goal-oust-netanyahu-n1269459">to reconsider the Kaminitz Law, which has led to increased demolitions of, and evictions from, Palestinian property</a>. </p>
<p>The agreement also includes recognition of several Bedouin villages in the Negev, the southern district of Israel where a majority of the country’s Bedouins live. </p>
<h2>Historic achievement</h2>
<p>Many in the Arab community, and especially among the Bedouins, see Abbas emerging from this election as a victorious leader. He has recorded for himself and the Islamic movement several historical achievements on many important levels. </p>
<p>On the material level, he has secured programs, budgets and decisions that support needs of the Arab minority. </p>
<p>But the most important achievement is the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/06/07/an-islamist-party-is-part-israels-new-coalition-government-how-did-that-happen/">fundamental change signaled by the acceptance of Arab parties</a> into Israeli politics and the recognition of Arab political parties as legitimate partners in the politics and power-sharing in Israel. </p>
<p>This is a paramount goal the Arab parties have failed to achieve since the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948. After two years with four elections, it’s not certain that this government will last either, but, regardless of what happens, this is a historic change.</p>
<p>[<em><a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/politics-weekly-74/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=politics-important">The Conversation’s most important politics headlines, in our Politics Weekly newsletter</a>.</em>]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/162461/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Morad Elsana does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>An unwritten rule in Israeli politics kept Arab political parties out of ruling government coalitions – until the latest election.Morad Elsana, Adjunct Professorial Lecturer Critical Race, Gender, and Culture Studies (CRGC)., American UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1151782019-04-10T10:47:17Z2019-04-10T10:47:17ZThe generals who challenged Netanyahu ran a campaign largely devoid of substance<p>The close results of the April 9 Israeli elections, with <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/elections/netanyahu-elections-gantz-vote-updates-results-1.7105719">Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as the apparent winner</a>, represent a missed opportunity for his centrist rivals.</p>
<p>As a <a href="https://www.american.edu/sis/faculty/ziv.cfm">foreign policy scholar who researches Israeli politics</a>, I believe that perhaps the greatest irony of the election was the failure of Netanyahu’s challengers, the <a href="https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/israeli-parties-form-election-alliance-in-bid-to-oust-netanyahu-1.3802129">newly formed “generals’ party,”</a> to contest his approach to security.</p>
<p>Security has long been the central issue in Israeli politics. It’s the one area in which this unique party would presumably have had the most to say. Former Israeli generals and retired intelligence chiefs have traditionally been the nation’s <a href="https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/netanyahu-prime-minister-obama-president-foreign-policy-us-israel-israeli-relations-middle-east-iran-defense-forces-idf-214004">most outspoken critics of Netanyahu’s security policies</a>.</p>
<p>Yet, the generals did not capitalize on their security credentials by offering a real alternative to the government’s policies, especially the government’s hard-line policies toward the Palestinians. Instead, their <a href="https://www.jns.org/new-israeli-centrist-alliance-to-be-called-blue-and-white-party-list-revealed/">“Blue and White” ticket</a> chose to turn this election into one more referendum on Netanyahu’s character.</p>
<p>In doing so, they failed in their effort to create a new centrist, nonideological bloc that would replace Netanyahu’s ruling right-wing bloc. </p>
<h2>Military at home in politics</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/22/world/middleeast/israel-generals-politics-netanyahu.html">participation of retired generals in Israeli politics</a> is nothing new. The Israel Defense Forces, or IDF, has always been the country’s most revered institution, and it has been common practice for generals to enter the political arena upon retirement. </p>
<p>Three of Israel’s 12 prime ministers – <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Yitzhak-Rabin">Yitzhak Rabin</a>, <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ehud-Barak">Ehud Barak</a> and <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ariel-Sharon">Ariel Sharon</a> – were retired generals, and numerous other military veterans have entered the political fray over the years, some more successfully than others. </p>
<p>But the unified list of three former IDF chiefs – <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/elections/israel-s-gantz-claims-election-victory-over-netanyahu-1.7087481">Benny Gantz</a>, <a href="https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Personalities/From+A-Z/Lieutenant-General+Moshe+Ya-alon.htm">Moshe Ya’alon</a> and <a href="https://mfa.gov.il/MFA/AboutIsrael/State/Personalities/Pages/Gaby%20Ashkenazi.aspx">Gabi Ashkenazi</a> – who teamed up in February to unseat the prime minister was without precedent. </p>
<p>The generals’ <a href="https://en.idi.org.il/israeli-elections-and-parties/parties/blue-and-white/">Blue and White</a> ticket was co-led by the popular centrist politician <a href="https://www.knesset.gov.il/mk/eng/mk_eng.asp?mk_individual_id_t=878">Yair Lapid</a>, whose enigmatic views on security issues mirrored the vague centrism of the three generals. The party tried to attract both right-of-center and left-of-center voters by running a campaign that was largely devoid of substance.</p>
<p>It studiously avoided engaging in key issues, such as the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Blue and White offered only banal policy pronouncements and a Trump-like “Israel First” slogan.</p>
<h2>Netanyahu’s agenda lives</h2>
<p>Netanyahu received bad news in the midst of his election campaign. In February, Israel’s attorney general announced his <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-netanyahu-corruption/final-decision-on-netanyahu-indictment-to-follow-israeli-vote-idUSKBN1QS21B">intention to indict him</a> on three separate corruption cases. </p>
<p>By focusing on Netanyahu’s flawed character and homing in on his corruption scandals, the Blue and White candidates convinced center-left voters to abandon the traditionally left-leaning Labor and Meretz parties. </p>
<p>But they did not convince right-of-center voters to abandon Netanyahu. </p>
<p>I believe that by failing to offer a coherent alternative to the right’s hard-line national security approach, the leadership of Blue and White failed to sway voters from Netanyahu’s camp over to their centrist slate.</p>
<p>Instead, they took votes from the left-bloc parties. Indeed, Tuesday’s results show that both Labor and Meretz suffered stinging defeats, with Labor falling to historic lows – <a href="https://www.jpost.com/Israel-Elections/Labor-slated-to-drop-to-single-digits-586291">their voters shifted over to Blue and White</a>. </p>
<h2>Likud in the lead</h2>
<p>To be sure, replacing Netanyahu’s dominant Likud party was no small ambition – not even for generals who once led their country into the battlefield. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.apnews.com/14f75e3c5d054a0a86b1c135245982ff">right-wing bloc has dominated the Israeli political scene</a> for years. That’s due to several factors, including Israelis’ reaction to the <a href="https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20170928-remembering-the-second-intifada/">violence that accompanied the second Palestinian intifada</a> in the early 2000s, more violence – still ongoing – that followed <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-gaza-disengagement-insight/shadow-of-israels-pullout-from-gaza-hangs-heavy-10-years-on-idUSKCN0QF1QQ20150810">Israel’s decision to unilaterally leave the Gaza Strip</a> and years of on-again, off-again failed peace talks. </p>
<p>Indeed, a preelection survey found that a <a href="https://gallery.mailchimp.com/e48e18b43a84387efa593e36a/files/23344088-c964-4009-8bf3-edf7f0048fd7/Peace_Index_February_2019_trans.docx.pdf">plurality of Jewish Israelis</a>, 40%, wanted to see the formation of a right-wing government. Just 25% preferred a right-center government; 16%, a centrist government of national unity; and a center-left or left-wing government was the least preferred option at 15%. </p>
<p>Even so, this election was a missed opportunity to do what the opposition in Israel has long failed to do: <a href="https://www.apnews.com/48a3273a98e04225ac55ea6e3887825c">to present a distinct alternative security agenda</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/even-if-netanyahu-goes-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict-will-continue-113447">Netanyahu’s hardline approach on the Palestinian issue</a> is the only approach with which young Israelis, who have grown up with Netanyahu, are familiar. His narrative of Israel’s failure to reach peace with the Palestinians – <a href="https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Netanyahu-Palestinians-the-stumbling-block-to-peace-492128">it’s the Palestinians’ fault</a> – is their only version of that story. </p>
<p>Not surprisingly, a preelection poll by the Israel Democracy Institute found that <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/young-israelis-want-netanyahu-older-ones-gantz/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter">18-24-year-old voters overwhelmingly preferred Netanyahu</a> to the more moderate Gantz – the opposite of the trend among Israelis 65 and older. </p>
<p>Letting Netanyahu off the hook on security issues allowed him to maintain his self-cultivated image as “Mr. Security.” It also enabled him to put the generals on the defensive, warning that they would establish a Palestinian state that “<a href="https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Did-Netanyahu-just-renounce-his-support-for-a-Palestinian-state-581577">will endanger our existence</a>.” </p>
<h2>Who defines Israel’s national interest?</h2>
<p>The security community, composed of veterans of the IDF and Israel’s intelligence agencies, has for years argued the opposite. </p>
<p>Several organizations of senior security establishment veterans have argued that the two-state solution is the only way to preserve Israel as both a Jewish and democratic state. They include the <a href="http://www.peace-security.org.il/?Lang=eng">Peace and Security Association</a> and the more recently formed <a href="https://en.cis.org.il/">Commanders for Israel’s Security</a>, and are supported by hundreds of former generals and intelligence chiefs. </p>
<p>The silence of Gantz’s team on the two-state solution also enabled Netanyahu to move the security discussion from a status quo policy, which critics call “creeping annexation,” to a full embrace of the hard-right’s agenda to annex the occupied territories. </p>
<p>Just three days before the election, Netanyahu vowed to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/world/middleeast/netanyahu-annex-west-bank.html">annex West Bank settlements</a>, a step he had always resisted but apparently felt he needed to take to shore up his right flank. </p>
<p>It was also a step he could take in the absence of countervailing pressure from his centrist rivals, who could have emphasized – but didn’t – the dangers of annexation to Israeli national interests.</p>
<p>Netanyahu was therefore able to get away with a dramatic policy shift that, if carried out, would bury the prospects for a two-state solution. <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/1.5064276">He endorsed that position in June 2009</a>, but has since abandoned his pledge. </p>
<p>The last two IDF chiefs who beat a Likud prime minister – Rabin in 1992 and Barak in 1999 – offered clear alternatives to the incumbent’s policies. By calling for a reordering of national priorities, they were able to form left-of-center governments, a scenario that is impossible today due to the decimation of the left.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/115178/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Guy Ziv does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>They wanted to oust Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu in Tuesday’s election, but the failure of three centrist generals to talk about key issues may have made Netanyahu the apparent winner.Guy Ziv, Assistant Professor, American University School of International ServiceLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1032222018-09-17T04:36:53Z2018-09-17T04:36:53ZTwenty-five years after the Oslo Accords, the prospect of peace in the Middle East remains bleak<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236567/original/file-20180917-96155-1jfhqz3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">US President Bill Clinton, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat sign the historic Oslo accord at the White House in September 1993.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wikicommons/Vince Musi</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Looking back on events 25 years ago, when the <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/03/world/meast/oslo-accords-fast-facts/index.html">Oslo Accords</a> were struck on the White House lawn, it is hard to avoid a painful memory. </p>
<p>I was watching from a sickbed in Jerusalem when Bill Clinton stood between Israel’s Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat for that famous handshake on the White House lawn.</p>
<p>At that moment, I was recovering from plastic surgery carried out by a skilled Israeli surgeon and necessitated by a bullet wound inflicted by the Israeli Defence Forces. (I had been caught in crossfire while covering a demonstration in the West Bank by stone-throwing Palestinian youths.)</p>
<p>That scar – like a tattoo – is a reminder of a time when it seemed just possible Arabs and Jews, Israelis and Palestinians could bring themselves to reach an historic compromise.</p>
<p>All these years later, prospects of real progress towards peace, or as American president Donald Trump puts it, the <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/40d77344-b04a-11e8-8d14-6f049d06439c">“deal of the century”</a>, seems further away than ever.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/russia-expands-in-the-middle-east-as-americas-honest-broker-role-fades-74695">Russia expands in the Middle East as America's 'honest broker' role fades</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>As a correspondent in the Middle East for a decade (1984-1993) and as co-author of a <a href="http://www.danielpipes.org/938/arafat-in-the-eyes-of-the-beholder">biography of Arafat</a>, I had an understandable interest in the outcome of the Oslo process.</p>
<p>In hours of conversations with members of the Palestine Liberation Organisation’s historical leadership, I had tracked the PLO’s faltering progression from outright rejection of Israel’s right to exist to acceptance implicit in the Oslo Accords.</p>
<p>Throughout that process of interviewing and cross-referencing with Israeli sources, I had hoped an honourable divorce could be achieved between decades-long adversaries. Like many, I was disappointed. </p>
<p>In 1993, the so-called Oslo Accords, negotiated in secret outside the Norwegian capital, resulted in mutual recognition of Israel and the PLO. This enabled the beginning of face-to-face peace negotiations.</p>
<h2>A devastating event</h2>
<p>Two years after the historic events at the White House, and by then correspondent in Beijing, I witnessed another episode of lasting and, as it turned out, tragic consequences for the Middle East.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1995/11/05/world/assassination-israel-overview-rabin-slain-after-peace-rally-tel-aviv-israeli.html">On November 4, 1995, Rabin was assassinated</a> while attending a political rally in Tel Aviv by a Jewish fanatic opposed to compromise with the Palestinians.</p>
<p>That devastating moment brought to power for the first time the current Israeli Prime Minister <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-18008697">Benjamin Netanyahu</a>. He has distinguished himself by his unwillingness to engage meaningfully with the Palestinians through four US administrations: those of Bill Clinton, George W Bush, Barack Obama, and now Trump.</p>
<p>Some argue the Palestinians and their enfeebled leadership bear significant responsibility for peace process paralysis. That viewpoint is valid, up to a point. But it is also the case that Netanyahu’s replacement of Rabin stifled momentum.</p>
<p>Under Trump, Netanyahu finds himself under no pressure to concede ground in negotiations, or even negotiate at all. Indeed, the administration seems intent on further marginalising a Palestinian national movement, even as <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/the-oslo-accords-were-doomed-by-their-ambiguity/570226/">settlement construction in the occupied areas continues apace</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236583/original/file-20180917-177968-12fis3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236583/original/file-20180917-177968-12fis3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236583/original/file-20180917-177968-12fis3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236583/original/file-20180917-177968-12fis3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236583/original/file-20180917-177968-12fis3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236583/original/file-20180917-177968-12fis3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236583/original/file-20180917-177968-12fis3j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">US President Donald Trump, here with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has promised the ‘deal of the century’ in the Middle East, but the details have not yet been made clear.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/ Olivier Douliery/pool</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>On the eve of the accords, <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/the-oslo-accords-were-doomed-by-their-ambiguity/570226/">there were 110,000 Jewish settlers</a> in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. That number has grown to 430,000 today. In 2017, those numbers grew by 20% more than the average for previous years.</p>
<p>The Trump administration’s decision to <a href="https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2018/05/282032.htm">move the American embassy to Jerusalem</a> without making a distinction between Jewish West or Arab East Jerusalem could hardly have been more antagonistic.</p>
<p>By taking this action, and not making it clear that East Jerusalem as a future capital of a putative Palestinian state would not be compromised, the administration has thumbed its nose at legitimate Palestinian aspirations.</p>
<p>The administration’s follow-up moves to <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/28/middle-east-palestinian-israel-pompeo-trump-kushner-u-s-to-end-all-funding-to-u-n-agency-that-aids-palestinian-refugees/">strip funding for the United Nations Works and Relief Agency (UNWRA)</a> and assistance to Palestinian hospitals in East Jerusalem have further soured the atmosphere.</p>
<p>UNWRA is responsible for the livelihoods of thousands of Palestinian refugees in camps in the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. These are the ongoing casualties of Israel’s 1948 War of Independence against the Arabs.</p>
<p>In this context, it is interesting to note that Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and Middle East envoy, has <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/03/trump-palestinians-israel-refugees-unrwaand-allies-seek-end-to-refugee-status-for-millions-of-palestinians-united-nations-relief-and-works-agency-unrwa-israel-palestine-peace-plan-jared-kushner-greenb/">urged that refugee status be denied Palestinians and their offspring displaced by the war of 1948</a>.</p>
<p>In that year, two-thirds, or about <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jan/14/israel">750,000 residents of what had been Palestine</a> under a British mandate became refugees.</p>
<p>Against this background and years of conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, including two major wars – the Six-Day War of 1967 and Yom Kippur War of 1973 – the two sides had in 1993 reached what was then described as an historic compromise.</p>
<h2>Hopes dashed</h2>
<p>What needs to be understood about Oslo is that its two documents, signed by Rabin and Arafat, did not go further than mutual recognition of Israel and the PLO in the first, and, in the second, a declaration of principles laying down an agenda for the negotiation of Palestinian self-government in the occupied territories.</p>
<p>What Oslo did not do was provide a detailed road-map for final status negotiations, which were to be completed within five years. This would deal with the vexed issues of refugees, Jerusalem, demilitarisation of the Palestinian areas in the event of a two-state settlement, and anything but an implied acknowledgement of territorial compromise, including land swaps, that would be needed to bring about a lasting agreement.</p>
<p>Writing in the <a href="http://jps.ucpress.edu/content/23/3/24">Journal of Palestine Studies</a> in 1994, Oxford professor Avi Shlaim described the White House handshake as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>one of the most momentous events in the 20th-century history of the Middle East. In one stunning move, the two leaders redrew the geopolitical map of the entire region.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Now emeritus professor, Shlaim’s own hopes, along with those of many others, that genuine compromise was possible, have been dashed.</p>
<p>Referring to the recent passage through the Knesset of a “basic law” that declares Israel to be “the nation-state of the Jewish people”, Shlaim <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/13/palestinians-still-face-apartheid-israel-25-years-after-oslo-accord">recently observed</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This law stands in complete contradiction to the 1948 declaration of independence, which recognizes the full equality of all the state’s citizens ‘without distinction of religion, race or sex’… Netanyahu has radically reconfigured Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, rather than a Jewish and a democratic state. As long as the government that introduced this law stays in power, any voluntary agreement between Israel and the Palestinians will remain largely a pipe dream.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Martin Indyk, now en route to the Council on Foreign Relations from the Brookings Institution, <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/09/13/the-day-israeli-palestinian-peace-seemed-within-reach/">shared Shlaim’s hopes of an “historic turning point’’</a> in the annals of the Arab-Israeli conflict.</p>
<p>As Clinton’s National Security Council adviser on the Middle East, Indyk was responsible for the 1993 arrangements on the White House South Lawn. He writes: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The handshake was meant to signify the moment when Israeli and Palestinian leaders decided to begin the process of ending their bloody conflict and resolving their differences at the negotiating table.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Two decades later, in 2014, the funeral rites were pronounced on the Oslo Process after then Secretary of State John Kerry had done all he could to revive it against Netanyahu’s obduracy. Oslo had, in any case, been on life support since Rabin’s assassination.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/fifty-years-on-from-the-six-day-war-the-prospects-for-middle-east-peace-remain-dim-78749">Fifty years on from the Six Day War, the prospects for Middle East peace remain dim</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>"Then,” in Indyk’s words, “along came Trump with "the Deal of the Century”. Indyk writes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>His plan has yet to be revealed but its purpose appears clear – to legitimize the status quo and call it peace. Trump has already attempted to arbitrate every one of the final status issues in Israel’s favor: no capital in East Jerusalem for the Palestinians; no ‘right of return’ for Palestinian refugees; no evacuation of outlying settlements; no ’67 lines; no end of occupation; and no Palestinian state…
Over 25 years, in shifting roles from witness to midwife, to arbiter, the United States has sadly failed to help Israelis and Palestinians make peace, leaving them for the time being in what has essentially been a frozen conflict.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, as history shows, “frozen conflicts” don’t remain frozen forever. They tend to erupt when least expected.</p>
<p>Twenty-five years ago, I shared a bloody hospital casualty station – not unlike a scene from M.A.S.H. – with more than a dozen wounded Palestinians. Some of them would not recover from terrible wounds inflicted by live ammunition.</p>
<p>I asked myself then, as I do now: what’s the point of it all?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103222/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tony Walker does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In 1993 the Oslo Accords were struck in optimism, but a quarter of a century later little has changed - and there’s no real prospect it ever will.Tony Walker, Adjunct Professor, School of Communications, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/847582017-10-06T13:24:29Z2017-10-06T13:24:29ZWhy the Nobel Peace Prize brings little peace<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189277/original/file-20171007-23531-9i4k7x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Beatrice Fihn, executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN).</span> </figcaption></figure><p>The Nobel Peace Prize for 2017 was awarded to the <a href="http://www.icanw.org/">International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons</a>, an advocacy group that has worked to draw attention to their <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/06/world/nobel-peace-prize/index.html">“catastrophic humanitarian consequences.” </a></p>
<p>Every year, the winners of the Nobel Prizes are announced to great fanfare. And none receives more scrutiny than the <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/">Nobel Peace Prize</a>.</p>
<p>With good reason. The other Nobel Prizes are given to people who have already changed our world – for their remarkable accomplishments. But, in the case of the Nobel Peace Prize, the hope of the Nobel Committee is to change the world through its very conferral. It, therefore, rewards <a href="http://arcadepub.com/titles/10942-9781611457247-nobel-prize">aspiration more than achievement</a>. </p>
<p>Francis Sejersted, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee from 1991-1999, once <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/themes/peace/sejersted/">noted</a> with pride the Nobel Peace Prize’s political ambitions: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“The Committee also takes the possible positive effects of its choices into account [because] … Nobel wanted the Prize to have political effects. Awarding a Peace Prize is, to put it bluntly, a political act.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, has the Nobel Peace Prize changed the world? </p>
<p>Expecting the prize to bring world peace would be an unfair standard to apply. However, <a href="http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165X.2009.tb00660.x">my research</a> shows that the winners and their causes have rarely profited from the award. Even worse, the prize has at times made it harder for them to make the leap from aspiration to achievement.</p>
<h2>History of the peace award</h2>
<p>The Nobel Peace Prize was <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/themes/peace/lundestad-review/">first awarded in 1901</a>, five years after Alfred Nobel’s death. <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred_nobel/will/will-full.html">Nobel’s will</a> defined peace narrowly and focused on candidates’ accomplishments: The prize was to be awarded “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”</p>
<p>The committee initially remained <a href="http://arcadepub.com/titles/10942-9781611457247-nobel-prize">true to Nobel’s charge</a>. Between 1901 and 1945, over three-quarters of the prizes (33 of 43) went to those who promoted interstate peace and disarmament.</p>
<p>Since the Second World War, however, less than one-quarter of the prizes have gone to promoting interstate peace and disarmament. Just seven of the 37 winners since 1989 fall into this category. Another 11 awards have sought to encourage ongoing peace processes.</p>
<p>But many of these processes had borne little fruit at the time or still had a long road ahead. Consider that three of the most prominent winners in this category were <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/">then Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin</a>. Nonetheless, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process is <a href="https://www.vox.com/cards/israel-palestine/peace-process">today in a coma</a>. </p>
<p>Perhaps for this reason, in the last decade, the committee has given just two awards to encourage peace processes. In 2008 <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/oct/11/finland-unitednations">Martti Ahtisaari</a>, former president of Finland, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his various achievements in Namibia, Kosovo and Aceh. In 2016, Colombia’s President <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/world/americas/nobel-peace-prize-juan-manuel-santos-colombia.html">Juan Manuel Santos</a> was honored with the Nobel in the hope that the prize would help push through his peace deal with the <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36605769">Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)</a> rebels, even though a popular referendum had just rejected it, and thereby end his country’s half-century-long civil war.</p>
<p>The striking change since the 1970s, and especially since the end of the Cold War, has been the Nobel Peace Prize’s growing focus on promoting domestic political change. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188805/original/file-20171004-6724-16mw6mf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188805/original/file-20171004-6724-16mw6mf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188805/original/file-20171004-6724-16mw6mf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188805/original/file-20171004-6724-16mw6mf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188805/original/file-20171004-6724-16mw6mf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=579&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188805/original/file-20171004-6724-16mw6mf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=579&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188805/original/file-20171004-6724-16mw6mf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=579&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Albert Luthuli, winner of the 1960 Nobel Peace Prize.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Between 1946 and 1970, the prize was awarded just twice to dissidents and activists like the <a href="http://www.sahistory.org.za/people/chief-albert-john-mvumbi-luthuli">South African leader Albert Luthuli</a>, who led a nonviolent struggle against apartheid in the 1960s, and the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/1014.html">American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.</a>. Between 1971 and 1988, such figures received the prize <a href="http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165X.2009.tb00660.x">five times</a>. Between 1989 and 2016, more than 40 percent of all winners fell into this category. </p>
<p>The rate has been even higher in the last decade: 57 percent of Nobel Peace Prize laureates since 2007 have been activists and advocates for equality, liberty and human development like educating women and stopping child labor. </p>
<p>These are admirable values. But their connection to interstate, and intrastate, conflict is indirect at best and tenuous at worst.</p>
<h2>Does it bring global attention to issues?</h2>
<p>The Nobel Peace Prize’s <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/themes/peace/lundestad/">defenders</a> insist that the prize works in subtle but perceptible ways to advance the winners’ causes. They say it attracts media attention, bolsters the winners and their supporters, and even focuses international pressure. </p>
<p>But there’s little evidence that the Nobel Peace Prize brings sustained global attention. </p>
<p>First of all, in many instances it is hard to tell whether the prize has made any difference, because the media glare was already intense. For example, in 2005, when the committee <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/id/9618236/ns/world_news-europe/t/iaea-elbaradei-win-nobel-peace-prize/#.WdOjItOGM_U">honored</a> the International Atomic Energy Agency and its director general, Mohammed El Baradei, nuclear proliferation was already of great concern. In other cases – such as South Africa’s transition from apartheid, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the troubles in Northern Ireland – the prize made little noticeable difference to international media coverage. </p>
<p>It is true that in those few cases where coverage was not already strong, there have been occasional successes. For instance, <a href="http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165X.2009.tb00660.x">I found</a> that the committee’s decision to hand the award to Aung San Suu Kyi in 1991 did draw attention to the plight of Myanmar.</p>
<p>But, in general, <a href="http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165X.2009.tb00660.x">my research</a> found little evidence that winning the Nobel Peace Prize boosts international media coverage of the winner’s cause beyond the short run.</p>
<h2>Putting activists in peril</h2>
<p>Of greater concern is that, when the Nobel Peace Prize goes to promote political and social change – as it has so often in recent decades – it can have very real and detrimental effects on the movements and causes it celebrates. </p>
<p>Powerful authoritarian regimes will not liberalize just because the Nobel Committee has chosen to honor a dissident. This is not because regimes dismiss it as a silly award given out by international do-gooders. In fact, they take it very seriously. Fearing that domestic activists would take heart, they have <a href="http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165X.2009.tb00660.x">ramped up repression</a>, shrunk the space for political opposition and cracked down harder than ever. </p>
<p>This is what happened in Tibet and Myanmar after the Dalai Lama and after Aung San Suu Kyi received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 and 1991, respectively. Similarly, the Iranian lawyer and human rights activist <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east-july-dec03-nobel_10-10/">Shirin Ebadi</a> has been forced to lived in <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/26/world/la-fg-iran-lawyers-20110726">exile</a> in Britain since 2009. In China, the peace award did not make the release of the dissident <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/13/world/asia/liu-xiaobo-dead.html">Liu Xiaobo</a> from prison more likely. </p>
<p>The same is true when it comes to social change. Patriarchal societies, with their deeply entrenched gender roles, will not change just because some people in the West think they should and to that end name a women’s rights activist a Nobel laureate.</p>
<h2>What’s at stake?</h2>
<p>The Nobel Committee’s intentions are honorable, but the results, I argue, can be tragic. The award raises the spirits of reformers, but it also mobilizes forces that are far greater in opposition. </p>
<p>Every October, many the world over hail the Nobel Committee for its brave and inspired choice. But it is the truly brave activists on the ground who are left to bear the consequences when anxious leaders bring the state’s terrible power down on them. </p>
<p>And what happens when the Nobel Peace Prize actually helps to promote political change? As state counsellor (prime minister) of Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi has presided over the bloody <a href="http://theweek.com/articles/727552/persecution-rohingya">persecution of the Rohingya</a> and a swiftly mounting <a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/rohingya-migrant-crisis">international refugee crisis</a>. The admired dissident has, in power, turned out <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/18/asia/aung-san-suu-kyi-speech-rohingya/index.html">not to be so great a promoter of peace and tolerance</a>. </p>
<p>The Nobel Peace Prize Committee’s choices have been noble – but, as my research suggests, also sometimes naïve.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84758/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ronald R. Krebs does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A scholar analyzes the history of the Nobel Peace Prize to ask: What difference has it made?Ronald R. Krebs, Beverly and Richard Fink Professor in the Liberal Arts and Professor of Political Science, University of MinnesotaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/497942015-11-04T16:46:35Z2015-11-04T16:46:35ZWhat is the legacy of Yitzhak Rabin?<p>On November 4 1995, Yitzhak Rabin, the prime minister of Israel, was murdered by Yigal Amir, an extremist religious Jew opposed to his peace deals with the Palestinians. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://history.state.gov/milestones/1993-2000/oslo">Oslo process</a>, which culminated with the awkward handshake between Rabin and Yasser Arafat on the White House lawn in September 1993, established limited self-rule for Palestinians and entailed an Israeli redeployment from the West Bank, territory that Amir believed to be the biblical birthright of the Jewish people. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/T8CFL6gHgxI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>It’s common to contend that Rabin’s murder also killed the peace process. But given Rabin’s willingness to change course depending on the circumstances, there is no way to know whether he would have continued with the concessions agreed in the Oslo accords. </p>
<p>So, 20 years on, how to assess Rabin’s legacy? </p>
<h2>The 1990s – a relatively secure decade</h2>
<p>Rabin knew that by the 1990s, Israel was more secure than it had ever been since its establishment in 1948. </p>
<p>By the time he became prime minister (for the second time) in 1992, Israel had a peace treaty with Egypt and a close alliance with the United States. It was the strongest military power in the region, with the most advanced weapons systems and a powerful domestic arms industry, while its most vociferous enemies – Iraq and the Palestine Liberation Organization – had either been defeated (Iraq in the First Gulf War) or were at the nadir of their influence and appeal (the PLO at the end of the First Intifada). It was also in the early 1990s that the country established diplomatic relations with key states in the world, including Russia, China and India. Israel could, Rabin felt, afford a peace process with the Palestinians. </p>
<p>That realism also led Rabin to the belief that a Palestinian state was inevitable as a result of Oslo, as he told his close aide Eitan Haber (who in turn told me during an interview). </p>
<p>Rabin <a href="http://ejt.sagepub.com/content/16/4/687.abstract">didn’t like or trust</a> Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, and it’s not clear whether he had a sense of what such a state would look like. But he knew ruling over another people was no longer viable. And he was <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Israels-National-Security-Woodrow-Wilson/dp/0801862175">already thinking</a> about Iran as the primary strategic threat to the country. </p>
<p>At the same time, however, Rabin was capable of using brute force when he deemed it necessary. </p>
<h2>A ‘risk’ for peace?</h2>
<p>Rabin’s “break their bones” <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=hHQe4qn-EmUC&pg=PA259&lpg=PA259&dq=Rabin+break+their+bones+Yaari+intifada&source=bl&ots=DYWWXxPDDe&sig=ZuuOCDui6ZacxF-1QNcJIsWNcks&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDgQ6AEwBGoVChMIgdKc4tP0yAIVDGs-Ch0WAgmC#v=onepage&q=Rabin%20break%20their%20bones%20Yaari%20intifada&f=false">instructions</a> regarding Palestinian protesters and rioters in the First Intifada helped legitimize a harsh Israeli response to civilian rallies against the occupation. </p>
<p>He used deportation and border closures as he thought necessary. In other words, he did not hesitate to use force and coercion. But he was, at the same time, willing to innovate for the sake of Israeli security, and to adopt nonmilitary means as well. </p>
<p>It’s become a cliché to talk of “risks for peace,” and Rabin used similar language in defending Oslo. </p>
<p>But Rabin didn’t see things as gambles. As a military man, he saw issues as having best solutions, which might still fail. But it was important to try. </p>
<p>Almost all of Israel’s leaders have dismissed this part of his legacy – his willingness to take risks.<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/03/19/the-weakening-of-the-israeli-left/"> Even those on the left and in the center</a> worry that the Israeli public doesn’t want to hear about an end to the occupation while Palestinian terrorism continues. Unlike Rabin, they have been unwilling to confront public opinion on the matter.</p>
<h2>A golden era for Jewish-Arab relations in Israel</h2>
<p>There is another important issue of Yitzhak Rabin’s time in office that has been eclipsed in the past 20 years. </p>
<p>Rabin’s second tenure as prime minister is known as the “golden era” of Jewish-Arab relations in Israel. Rabin paid more attention to Arab citizens of Israel, about 20% of the population, <a href="https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/israel/2015-10-14/arab-israelis-step-out">than any other Jewish Israeli leader had before or has since</a>.</p>
<p>In addition to <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Soldier-Peace-Life-Yitzhak-Rabin/dp/0060186844">directing more resources</a> to the community, he responded to their concerns by dropping the traditional paternalistic attitude the Zionist parties had long held regarding the Arab minority.</p>
<p>Perhaps more importantly, for the first and only time, Arab political parties played an indirect role in policymaking. </p>
<p>In 1993, as a result of the Oslo accords, Rabin lost his majority in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. Two Arab parties propped him up from outside his own coalition, voting with the government on no-confidence measures brought by the opposition.</p>
<p>Rabin’s views on Israel’s Arab minority reflected his analysis of Israeli-Palestinian relations more broadly – namely, that coercion was simply untenable as a solution to Israel’s relations with Palestinians inside and outside of Israel.</p>
<p>Since 1995, Arab citizens have either disengaged from the political process or <a href="https://theconversation.com/can-israels-minorities-bring-about-a-change-in-government-38764">voted for Arab parties in increasing numbers</a>, at the expense of Rabin’s party, Labor. The percentage of Arab citizens’ votes for the top three Arab parties, for example, has climbed from 68.7% in 1999 to 80% in 2015.</p>
<p>Wars between Israel and Hamas have cast Palestinian citizens of Israel as potential fifth columns, while Arab participation in the political process has been delegitimized by some Jewish leaders. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, running for reelection in 2015, <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-apologizes-to-arabs-for-voter-turnout-remark/">warned</a> his supporters that Arabs were coming out to vote “in droves” and thus endangering his party’s rule, and that of the right wing more generally. (Netanyahu later apologized for the remark, though many Arab leaders remained skeptical and unsatisfied.)</p>
<p>At the same time, a new generation of Arab leaders has adopted a more confrontational approach, most notable in their rhetoric. In addition to calls for the Arab community to be recognized as a national minority that would give the equal status to the Jewish community, some Arab politicians have also cast Jewish Israelis as among the evildoers of the world. Knesset member Haneen Zoabi, for example, has <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Zoabi-says-IDF-worse-than-ISIS-379241">compared</a> the Israeli military to the Islamic State. Not surprisingly, this caused the Zionist parties to view the Arab parties with suspicion and hostility. </p>
<p>It’s difficult, then, to speak clearly about Rabin’s legacy because of changed domestic and regional conditions, only some of which are related to the Oslo process that Rabin promoted. </p>
<p>But I would argue that he should be remembered for trying – for understanding that Israel needed to change, to focus on achieving domestic harmony and an accepted place in the Middle East. </p>
<p>The right in Israel, by contrast, views <a href="http://www.momentmag.com/qa-explaining-israels-wave-of-violence/">the recent wave of violence</a> as simply the latest outburst of anti-Jewish activity and threat that stretches back to the Roman age. </p>
<p>Rabin also proposed serious ideas for how to scale down the occupation, even in the face of domestic opposition. The left in Israel forgets this, and tends to react to public opinion rather than try to shape it with bold policies.</p>
<p>Rabin’s was a gritty peace, requiring constant effort to fend off challenges. It was not the “clean” version many expect today – that the occupation will be easy to end, that Palestinian hostility will cease once Israel withdraws from the West Bank, that Israel’s security concerns are exaggerated. That he pushed forward in the face of these challenges makes Rabin a peacemaker in the true sense of the word.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/49794/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brent E Sasley receives funding from UT Arlington.</span></em></p>Twenty years ago, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin – the man who ushered in the Oslo Accords with the Palestinians – was assassinated. Today’s Israel is a very different place.Brent E Sasley, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Texas at ArlingtonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/327942014-10-13T00:32:56Z2014-10-13T00:32:56ZAdmirable Nobel decision unlikely to spur India-Pakistan peace<p>The awarding of a shared Nobel Peace Prize award to a 17-year-old Pakistani girl, <a href="https://theconversation.com/nobel-peace-prize-extraordinary-malala-a-powerful-role-model-32839">Malala Yousafzai</a>, and a 60-year-old Indian man, <a href="http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/who-is-kailash-satyarthi/1/395118.html">Kailash Satyarthi</a>, is historic and aimed at conveying multiple messages to global policy-makers. Both awardees have worked tirelessly for the rights of an estimated 180 million children worldwide who continue to be <a href="http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@dgreports/@dcomm/@publ/documents/publication/wcms_publ_9221124169_en.pdf">used for harsh labour</a>. The impacts on their right to schooling are crippling. </p>
<p>No doubt, the common cause of child welfare has touched the Nobel committee, but this year’s prize is not unprecedented. <a href="http://www.unicef.org/about/history/index_56072.html">UNICEF</a> was awarded the prize in 1965 for a similar cause. </p>
<p>What is perhaps more consequential is the nationality, religions and age of this year’s recipients. A collective award to nationals of two rival nuclear powers hailing from two different religious groups that harbour immense animosity for each other is noteworthy. The age difference of the recipients highlights the transgenerational importance of fighting for children’s rights and for peace-building more generally.</p>
<p>The Nobel committee has perhaps also redeemed itself by recognising Satyarthi, an intellectual protege of Mohandas Gandhi. The untimely assassination of Gandhi in 1948, and the provisions in Alfred Nobel’s will for awarding the prize to living individuals only, was <a href="http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/themes/peace/gandhi/">symbolically noted by the committee</a> in awarding no peace prize that year. </p>
<p>It is also important to recognise the hidden hands of doctors in Pakistan and the UK who saved Malala Yusufzai after her assassination attempt. If she had not survived, she too would have been deprived of this honour.</p>
<h2>History of prize is sobering</h2>
<p>Now let us get to the other matter of any peace dividends this prize might have for the ongoing <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/spotlight/kashmirtheforgottenconflict/2011/06/2011615113058224115.html">conflict between India and Pakistan</a> or between Hindus and Muslims. Unfortunately, the history of the prize in galvanising peace between acrimonious countries predicated in ethno-religious differences is very discouraging. </p>
<p>For example, the awarding of <a href="http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/">the 1994 prize</a> to Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin has had absolutely no impact in moving Arabs and Israelis closer to conflict resolution 20 years on. </p>
<p>The success of the prize in motivating intrastate political peace or protecting dissidents is perhaps slightly more heartening. Yet here too the time it takes for any impact to be realised muddles any causality.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1991/">Aung San Suu Kyi</a> was perhaps protected from extreme persecution in Myanmar by her Nobel award. However, more than 22 years hence her participation in any electoral process remains elusive despite the ostensible “opening up” of the country.</p>
<h2>Sustained international engagement is needed</h2>
<p>The only way the peace dividends from this year’s prize could potentially be harnessed for Indians and Pakistanis alike would be if external powers with influence in the region played a meaningful mediating role. The asymmetry in power between the countries, both demographically and economically, trumps any nuclear equalisation factor one might envisage. Any expectations that both countries will somehow sort out their political issues and see the light of peace following the joint Nobel would be naïve. </p>
<p>India has far more economic might than Pakistan and any incentives for peace-building, despite their logic on ecological and even trade-related grounds, are easily subverted by security hawks. In such a situation, the only way to motivate a lasting peace would involve some form of international mediation on the long-standing territorial dispute between the countries. Major powers, particularly economic trading partners with India such as the United States, would need to invest political capital. </p>
<p>Gulf States such as the UAE or Saudi Arabia could exert similar influence on Pakistan and its powerful military, which maintains strong ties in the region. The Gulf states could also help counter the fundamentalist fervour and conspiratorial rhetoric that have forced Yousafzai into exile. (She lives in the UK for fear of further assassination attempts in Pakistan.)</p>
<p>Norway, which hosts the Nobel prize, tried its hand at mediation in South Asia in the case of the Sri Lankan conflict a decade ago. A military solution prevailed instead, so one may wonder how effective mediation might be. </p>
<p>India and Pakistan both realise their conflict has no long-term military solution. However, the “cool war” status quo serves the political elite in both nations. </p>
<p>Perhaps where the joint Nobel Peace Prize could make a slow but generational shift would be through changing public perceptions of regional conflicts. Both countries have to contend with abject poverty and human rights issues, which neither can afford to trivialise. A campaign to channel public funds from military expenditure towards joint human development goals could be an important next step for Yousafzai and Satyarthi.</p>
<p>However, only concerted international engagement can hope to secure lasting peace. Territorial conflict sadly continues to eclipse the collective good of securing a better future for Indian and Pakistani children.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/32794/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Saleem H. Ali does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The awarding of a shared Nobel Peace Prize award to a 17-year-old Pakistani girl, Malala Yousafzai, and a 60-year-old Indian man, Kailash Satyarthi, is historic and aimed at conveying multiple messages…Saleem H. Ali, Director, Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining and Affiliate Professor of Politics and International Studies, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.