On April 24th, I had the pleasure to attend a talk by Dr. Lustick about his book Paradigm Lost: From Two-State Solution to One-State Reality.  I found it quite interesting and beneficial that at the beginning of the talk he gave us as he called it “the point of his discussion” right away because he stated that it would be more beneficial to see where he was coming from.  He began by stating and I quote his comment, “What is the future of an occupation without an end.  The forces could withdraw, most occupations end by absorption like how Israel absorbed Galilee, but that is unlikely to occur.  One state solution can create a better state of problem but not a solution.  In his opinion, he believes that the Israeli state will never turn into two independent sovereign states. 

Being a Jewish Scholar himself, I believe that Dr.Lustick’s background and his intense knowledge on the topic made it far more easy for an outsider to learn this topic in depth.  From what I gathered, to recap on the very beginnings of the issue, the conflict’s origins may be traced to the late 19th century, when Zionist Jews started moving to Palestine, which was then a territory under Ottoman rule. The Zionist movement sought to establish a Jewish state in Palestine, and as a result, the Jewish population swelled through time and gained power. The Jewish and Arab populations, who had been coexisting in Palestine for millennia, were tense because of this increase.

The first thing I thought of when comparing our class to this talk was how we spoke of the many impacts world wars have on countries creating damage, such as Israel.  Specifically after World War I, the League of Nations granted Britain a mandate to govern Palestine, and in 1947, the United Nations voted to partition Palestine into two states: one Jewish and one Arab. If we look back at our lessons of how the League of Nations and now the United Nations intervene and manage these international affairs, this topic is a perfect example of that.  To continue he explained that Jewish leadership accepted the plan, but the Arab leadership rejected it, and the resulting violence led to the first Arab-Israeli war. Israel declared independence in 1948, and the conflict has continued to this day, with numerous wars and peace negotiations.

More recently, as Dr.Lustick made me understand, the conflict is not just about land and borders, but also about identity, religion, and national aspirations. Both Israelis and Palestinians have deep emotional ties to the land and believe that they have legitimate claims to it. Additionally, the conflict has been fueled by political, economic, and social factors, such as the role of external powers, the impact of globalization, and the struggle for resources and power.  What came to mind when he said this and what I personally related this analysis was that is was an identity sounding analysis of war.

Not having much knowledge about politics and specific happenings in the Middle East just like our International Relations class has taught me the the Israel-Palestine conflict has had a profound impact on the lives of millions of people, both within the region and beyond. It has resulted in numerous deaths and injuries, displacement, and trauma, as well as political and economic instability. The conflict has also had ripple effects on the global stage, with countries taking sides and engaging in diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict.

So what should we take away? Well I believe that the message Dr. Lustick was trying to relay was that conflict is a difficult problem that is complicated and deeply rooted. It involves a concerted effort over time from all parties, as well as a readiness to recognize the difficulties and feelings involved. In order to end the disagreement peacefully, compromise, mutual respect, and a common commitment to justice and equality are all necessary.  But he doesn’t see two independent sovereign states peacefully coexisting any time soon.