HOME | DD

Description
Post-colonial conflicts are the bane of many nations throughout the world, most commonly attributed to poorly-drawn boundaries, favoring one ethnicity over another, or perhaps uniquely in the case of the Levant, making promises that couldn't reasonably be settled easily. In the wake of the end of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France eagerly threw out any promises they had made to the Arabs about a unified Arab kingdom so that they could slice up the region in their favor. The aftereffects have been resounding throughout the whole of the 20th and 21st centuries so far, and one problem must be brought up in particular: that of the debate between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine. It should be noted that the term de facto, referring to a situation that does not legally exist but exists in practice, will be used a fair deal here.

In the waning days of WWI, as the British were desperate to mobilize Jewish support for the Entente, Lord Arthur Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, issued a declaration stating that the United Kingdom was in support of creating a Jewish state in what was then simply called Palestine, a region that at that time only had a small Jewish minority but had in the past been the Jewish homeland before the "Diaspora" period set in during the early days of the Roman Empire. Naturally, this only made the Arab tribes in the region that much more angry during the colonial period, leading to a lot of smaller tribal uprisings that took a fair deal of effort from the British to quell.

Skipping ahead to the relevant dates, by 1951 there had been a considerable number of Jewish people from all over the world migrating to Israel, especially after WWII and the harsh treatment many had dealt with under the idea that communism was a "Jewish conspiracy" as a popular narrative at the time went. As the Palestinians grew more and more upset with the British, the British had attempted to restrict immigration, but then the Jews got upset and the British had to allow it again, until finally 1951 came and the United Nations stepped in to say "Look, the age of Empires is over, you need to let it go and figure something out here." So, the United Nations came together and proposed a plan for partition that created a territory for Israel and a territory for the Palestinians. The Palestinians and Israelis both tentatively accepted the agreement, but neighboring Arab countries (particularly Egypt and Saudi Arabia) agitated violence on the Palestinian side until they themselves declared war, resulting in an Israeli victory and the expansion of Israel to roughly the borders that exist today.

Skipping again over a history involving wars between Israel and the Arabs flaring up no less than 3 further times, border disputes all over the place with virtually every neighbor, terrorism, and both anti-Islamism and antisemitism, we arrive at the current state of the Levant, which has been in this current situation since the Good Friday Ceasefire on 10 April 1998, leaving the world with the following problem: the majority of nations recognize both the State of Israel and the State of Palestine as legitimate nations, as per the 1951 UN Resolution on the Partition of the Levant. However, the world is deeply divided over the nature of the borders. For reference, the current de facto borders are the Israeli claims shown above.

Israel's claim is fairly recent, referred to as the "Good Friday Line". Their stance is that as of the Good Friday Ceasefire, Israel had come to a border that they found to be satisfactory to their state's existence, which they also see the UN as de facto supporting given the existence of the UN Buffer Zone that currently separates the two. Palestine, by contrast, maintains that the legitimate border is the "United Nations Line" created in 1951, which is shown under their claim. This claim quite notably divides the city of Jerusalem into an eastern and western portion, with Palestine claiming "East Jerusalem" as their capital (while their current de facto capital remains in Ramallah), and at the same time Israel declares the single unified city of Jerusalem to be its capital, although the bulk of its administrative offices and organizations are centered in the coastal city of Tel Aviv.

The reality of the situation is that it's going nowhere, and the whole thing remains an uncomfortable stalemate. The Good Friday Ceasefire was a ceasefire, yes, but it was not a "peace", meaning that technically, the two nations are still at war and kept from attacking only by a fence and UN soldiers. Jerusalem, the claimed capital of both nations and sacred to Jews, Christians, and Muslims, is currently regarded as one of the poorest major cities in the Middle East, patrolled by UN soldiers while occasionally having to deal with a suicide bomber or a package bomb or even just a plain drive-by shooting of one of the many gangs that riddle the city. And even with this, with both nations having remarkably low GDPs, qualities of life, and international standings; in an informal NAU poll, 64% of respondents across 29 member nations (of a total of about 100,000 people) stated that they had a negative view of both countries.

There are two things that everyone can agree on in respect to the situation in the Levant. The first is that both Israel and Palestine are countries. The second is that they are both going nowhere quickly.
---
I expect a friendly and thoughtful debate in the comments.

Description
Post-colonial conflicts are the bane of many nations throughout the world, most commonly attributed to poorly-drawn boundaries, favoring one ethnicity over another, or perhaps uniquely in the case of the Levant, making promises that couldn't reasonably be settled easily. In the wake of the end of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France eagerly threw out any promises they had made to the Arabs about a unified Arab kingdom so that they could slice up the region in their favor. The aftereffects have been resounding throughout the whole of the 20th and 21st centuries so far, and one problem must be brought up in particular: that of the debate between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine. It should be noted that the term de facto, referring to a situation that does not legally exist but exists in practice, will be used a fair deal here.

In the waning days of WWI, as the British were desperate to mobilize Jewish support for the Entente, Lord Arthur Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, issued a declaration stating that the United Kingdom was in support of creating a Jewish state in what was then simply called Palestine, a region that at that time only had a small Jewish minority but had in the past been the Jewish homeland before the "Diaspora" period set in during the early days of the Roman Empire. Naturally, this only made the Arab tribes in the region that much more angry during the colonial period, leading to a lot of smaller tribal uprisings that took a fair deal of effort from the British to quell.

Skipping ahead to the relevant dates, by 1951 there had been a considerable number of Jewish people from all over the world migrating to Israel, especially after WWII and the harsh treatment many had dealt with under the idea that communism was a "Jewish conspiracy" as a popular narrative at the time went. As the Palestinians grew more and more upset with the British, the British had attempted to restrict immigration, but then the Jews got upset and the British had to allow it again, until finally 1951 came and the United Nations stepped in to say "Look, the age of Empires is over, you need to let it go and figure something out here." So, the United Nations came together and proposed a plan for partition that created a territory for Israel and a territory for the Palestinians. The Palestinians and Israelis both tentatively accepted the agreement, but neighboring Arab countries (particularly Egypt and Saudi Arabia) agitated violence on the Palestinian side until they themselves declared war, resulting in an Israeli victory and the expansion of Israel to roughly the borders that exist today.

Skipping again over a history involving wars between Israel and the Arabs flaring up no less than 3 further times, border disputes all over the place with virtually every neighbor, terrorism, and both anti-Islamism and antisemitism, we arrive at the current state of the Levant, which has been in this current situation since the Good Friday Ceasefire on 10 April 1998, leaving the world with the following problem: the majority of nations recognize both the State of Israel and the State of Palestine as legitimate nations, as per the 1951 UN Resolution on the Partition of the Levant. However, the world is deeply divided over the nature of the borders. For reference, the current de facto borders are the Israeli claims shown above.

Israel's claim is fairly recent, referred to as the "Good Friday Line". Their stance is that as of the Good Friday Ceasefire, Israel had come to a border that they found to be satisfactory to their state's existence, which they also see the UN as de facto supporting given the existence of the UN Buffer Zone that currently separates the two. Palestine, by contrast, maintains that the legitimate border is the "United Nations Line" created in 1951, which is shown under their claim. This claim quite notably divides the city of Jerusalem into an eastern and western portion, with Palestine claiming "East Jerusalem" as their capital (while their current de facto capital remains in Ramallah), and at the same time Israel declares the single unified city of Jerusalem to be its capital, although the bulk of its administrative offices and organizations are centered in the coastal city of Tel Aviv.

The reality of the situation is that it's going nowhere, and the whole thing remains an uncomfortable stalemate. The Good Friday Ceasefire was a ceasefire, yes, but it was not a "peace", meaning that technically, the two nations are still at war and kept from attacking only by a fence and UN soldiers. Jerusalem, the claimed capital of both nations and sacred to Jews, Christians, and Muslims, is currently regarded as one of the poorest major cities in the Middle East, patrolled by UN soldiers while occasionally having to deal with a suicide bomber or a package bomb or even just a plain drive-by shooting of one of the many gangs that riddle the city. And even with this, with both nations having remarkably low GDPs, qualities of life, and international standings; in an informal NAU poll, 64% of respondents across 29 member nations (of a total of about 100,000 people) stated that they had a negative view of both countries.

There are two things that everyone can agree on in respect to the situation in the Levant. The first is that both Israel and Palestine are countries. The second is that they are both going nowhere quickly.
---
I expect a friendly and thoughtful debate in the comments.