A Geographical Analysis of the Roadmap for Peace in the Middle East
The longstanding conflict between Israel and Palestine has had rippling effects on the world community. Not only has it devastated a community in both nations, but the war has transcended globally, as both nations gather allies to their diplomatic defense.
The seemingly never ending war has left countless dead, homes destroyed and a hope for a normal life dismayed. In light of this, the United States took the initiative of creating a roadmap towards peace for both nations. Designed to create a Palestinian State that co-exists with Israel, both nations were handed down a set of conditions in 2002.
Though accepted formally in 2003, both nations have failed to act upon the roadmap and have thus, once again, left a yearning for peace in the region (Steinberg, 2002). This paper will discuss the long detailed plan of achieving peace in the Middle East, relating the geographical and political elements, problems and prospects of implementation, and the short and long term consequences of success.
The roadmap to peace
Overview on the geographical and political elements
In July 2000, former US President Bill Clinton, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat have initiated the meeting with the agenda to finalize the initial peace agreements signed during the “1993 Declaration of Peace Principles” between Israel and Palestine.
Sadly, the meeting ended at no point of further agreements unless critical issues on peace pact would be strongly determined (Migdalovitz, 2006). The uncompromising leverage to peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine was futile to the peace initiative mediation of the “Mitchell Commission and the Paris Summit”, wherein the spate of violence were unabated (Steinberg, 2002).
Violence intensified which highlighted the March and April 2002 serial bombings that accounted death toll of more than 100 Israelis as a result of Palestinian aggression. The US initiative to refocus a new approach to peace negotiation was then attempted by former President George W. Bush sometime in June 2004, mediating the lull of Palestinian aggression against the Israelis (Steinberg, 2002).
The initiation of the “Plan for Palestinian State” has been laid down to outline the peace pact which follows the establishment of the Middle East Quartet or peace process international cooperation in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, consistent with the United Nation’s peace pact proposal which is being negotiated by the US and other countries in the Middle East and European Union (Migdalovitz, 2006).
Problems and prospects of implementation
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long been waged since the 19th century. In which case, it is noteworthy that the peace negotiations in the 21st century can be facilitated by mediating non-Arab countries, like the United States and the rest of European Union through the guiding peace pact proposals of the United Nations.
Accordingly, only the leaders in the Middle East could dutifully institute the peace pact, in which the “presence” of the United States only tries to “systematize the outlining of a roadmap” for the peace process to be concluded in a short or long term basis (Migdalovitz, 2006).
However, the continuing peace process negotiation could meet a “sticking point” which the “roadmap” for the peace negotiations can be blurry as a result of the perceived political interests of major countries that get involve in the Middle East Quartet. The critical roles of involvement of major countries must be redefined, focusing on the elemental issues of achieving substantial peace accord between Israel and Palestine (Steinberg, 2002).
One more additional impediment in the Middle East Quartet could be the internal establishment of confidence among the negotiators. Of which political interests may not be a “détente” or intent to easing the tensions or strained relations between Israel and Palestine. It may be critically reconsidered that the Arabs accuses the Israelis for being an illegitimate which has been the campaigns of Yasser Arafat to remove 3,000 years of Jewish history in Jerusalem.
The abhorrence of the Arabs to Israelis is likewise entangled in the envisioning of independent Arab states, from which Israel’s foreign relations have indicated bluntness with the European countries, as hostile stance has even contributed by the United Nations Security Council’s 2002 Anti-Israel Resolution upon attack in Gaza Strip (Steinberg, 2002). These critical reconsiderations equate a far-reaching disposition that would pave the way for an expedited peace pact and settle the long-time conflict on top of the negotiating table of the Middle East Quartet.