Britain’s Game-Changing Middle East Decision
On November 29, 1947 The United Nations General Assembly
passed one single resolution that would impact international relations and
cooperation for more than 65 years. Is there a possibility that after such a
long time these changes could be minimized? Let’s hope so. The resolution that
was passed established a Jewish homeland in the Middle East the following year.
This was the beginning of the conflictual Israeli state.
Due
to the persecutions by the Germans in World War II, the allied forces
(including the United States and the Great Britain) swarmed around the Jewish
community as a support system to bring them back from what they were desecrated
to previously. Great Britain held special interest in the Middle East who held
control of the land of Palestine post-WWI. The influx of the Jewish population
to this land post-WWI and during WWII, the exodus of Britain in 1948, and the
subsequent declaration of Israeli independence that same year marked the
beginnings of a modern Middle East conflict that is still rising and peaking
today.
Whether
it be of guilty conscious or some other reason, Great Britain is now extending
its rhetoric toward this topic again, though not as it has done previously. Reports
are now being released that the British Parliament has voted and agreed upon a
measure to recognize statehood for Palestine “as a contribution to securing a
negotiated two-state solution” (BBC). Members of the legislative body were
quick to call to attention that there was to be no dissolution of the Israeli
state but that there should be two co-equal states working toward a solution.
In
highly-eloquent, stereotypically-British language many interviewed
representatives proclaimed that This was the beginning of changes throughout the
world and that the UK’s decision could alter relations regarding the two
nations involved as well as all other peripheral contributing states.
One
statement of interest comes from the shadow foreign minister, Ian Lucas, who
declared that this would “strengthen the moderate voices of the Palestinians
who want to pursue the path of politics, not the path of violence” (BBC). This
statement rounds out the three levels of analysis in which international policy
making are reviewed and analyzed.
At
the individual level of analysis, Lucas believes that the actions taken with
regards to this parliamentary vote will decrease violence perpetrated by
individuals or small factions within the population. The reputation of the
Middle East has been constantly marred with acts of terrorism for many years
and many nations worldwide have tried to intervene in various ways to control
these occurrences. Could this be the answer the world has been searching for? Although
it is unlikely that all terrorist and ethnicity-based violence will subside
there is great credit to be given in understanding that Palestinians want a
voice and want to be heard equally to those of their neighbors.
The
Palestinian voice has been stifled for many years due to their lack of
legitimacy. From the state level of analysis, the equalization of their voice
could grant leniency and opportunities in Intergovernmental Organizations that
could help them develop internal and international relationships to perpetuate further
than currently possible. In 2012, Palestine was promoted in the eyes of the
United Nations from an illegitimate nation to what is known as a “non-member
observer state” (BBC). Though it can officially sit in on meetings of the UN,
it cannot participate fully nor receive all of the benefits that other nations
do. Britain’s recognition of a Palestinian could lead to similar recognition
from other UN members and eventually lead to full membership which has the
potential to improve negotiating processes for the entire region of the Middle
East.
This
then rounds out the levels of analysis as the international level becomes
complicated yet necessary. The effect of this vote now puts pressure on other
nations that are allies of Israel to re-think their agendas and possibly seek
recognition for Palestine. Also, this would have an impact on the Arab world
that is currently undergoing other major obstacles from factions (ISIL and the
Kurds). Though it is not mentioned of the impact this would have on the Arab
world, it can be assumed that another fortified state could aid in peacekeeping
within the Arab world as a push for law assimilation could be realized.
In
the broad spectrum of analysis, there are a myriad of positive outcomes and
changes that could result from this development in Great Britain and the Middle
East. The negatives have remained only speculative yet do not seem as
influential likely because there is already so much turmoil that many are now
thinking things cannot get much worse in this region of the world. It is with
great hope for humanity that Britain shines forth in forming a new development
to combat tensions that have stood for ages.
Comments
Post a Comment