Israeli–Palestinian conflict

See also: Arab-Israeli conflict

Israel, with the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an ongoing dispute between the State of Israel and the Palestinian people. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is part of the wider Arab-Israeli conflict and is essentially a dispute between two national identities with claims over the same area of land.

The modern roots of the conflict can be traced to the late 19th century, with the establishment of Zionism, the Jewish national movement, which sought to create a modern Nation-State in Eretz Israel, the historic Jewish homeland, as a means of responding to anti-Semitism. To further the goal of Zionism, the World Zionist Organization and the Jewish National Fund encouraged immigration and funded purchase of land, which was then part of the Ottoman Empire.

Following World War I and the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, the region came under the control of the United Kingdom through Sykes-Picot Agreement and through the League of Nations. Conflict between the Arab and Jewish populations and the heavy cost of World War II led Britain to turn the issue of Palestine to the United Nations which, in 1947, approved the partition of the British Mandate of Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The Arab League rejected the plan, but on May 14, 1948, after numerous attempts to partition the land and hostilities, Israel declared its independence. Five Arab League countries (Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Transjordan and Iraq) invaded Israel, sparking the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Israel captured territory that changed its borders, but left Jerusalem a divided city. In the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan, the Gaza Strip from Egypt, and East Jerusalem including the Old City and its holy sites, which Israel annexed and reunited with the Western neighborhoods of Jerusalem. The status of the city as Israel's capital and the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip has remained a source of bitter conflict.

For decades after 1948, Arab governments had refused to recognize Israel and in 1964 the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was founded with the central tenet that Palestine, with its original Mandate borders, is the indivisible homeland of the Arab Palestinian people. In turn Israel refused to recognize the PLO as a negotiating partner. In 1988, Yasser Arafat stated that he recognized Israel's right to exist, thus providing the first step needed to enable negotiations between Israel and the PLO.

An attempt to broker a 'two state solution', that is the creation of separate Jewish and Palestinian states, was seen in the Oslo peace process, where Israel and the PLO negotiated, unsuccessfully, to come to a mutual agreement. During the Oslo process, which began in 1993, the Palestine Liberation Organization was permitted autonomy to run Palestinian affairs in the Gaza Strip and West Bank in the form of the Palestinian National Authority with the understanding that it would uphold recognition of and mutual co-existence with Israel. However there was continual contention over whether actual events and conditions proved that there was greater acceptance of Israel's existence by Palestinian leaders or a commitment by Israel to stop settlement activity in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The vast majority of Israelis and Palestinians, according to all major polls, agree that a two-state solution is the best way to end the conflict. Most Palestinians view the West Bank and Gaza Strip as part of their future state. Most Israelis also accept this solution. A handful of academics advocate a one-state solution, whereby all of Israel, the Gaza Strip, and West Bank would become a bi-national state with equal rights for all.

Core issues in the conflict as seen by both sides are the future of the remaining Israeli settlements built in the disputed territories, the right of return for Palestinian refugees and their descendants, and the status of Jerusalem, along with the refusal of the Palestinians to recognize the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state and Israel's reluctance to allow the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Israel asserts that one major condition of Palestinian sovereignty over any territory must be acceptance of mutual co-existence and elimination of terrorism by the Palestinians. Some Palestinian groups, notably Fatah, a political party founded by PLO leaders, claim they are willing to foster co-existence if Palestinians are steadily given more political rights and autonomy. In 2006, Hamas won a majority in the Palestinian Legislative Council, where it remains the majority party. While Hamas has openly stated in the past that it completely opposed Israel's right to exist, indeed its charter states this, there is some evidence that its position may have softened somewhat recently. However, Israel contends that Hamas's leaders have consistently refused to recognize Israel in any valid way.

The most recent round of peace negotiations began at Annapolis, USA in November, 2007. These talks aim to have a final resolution by the end of 2008.

History

Main article: History of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict resulted from competing Jewish and Arab national aspirations for the region of Palestine, conflicting promises by the British in the forms of the Hussein-McMahon Correspondence and the Balfour Declaration of 1917, and several outbreaks of violence between Jewish and Arab denizens of the region of Palestine.

Background

The area between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, known to some as Palestine and to others as Eretz Israel, was controlled by various national groups throughout history. A number of groups, including the Canaanites, the Israelites, the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Umayyads, Abbasids, Turks, Crusaders, and Mamluks controlled the region at one time or another. From 1516 until the conclusion of World War I, the region was controlled by the Ottoman Empire.

1915-1917

From 1915 to 1916, the British High Commissioner in Egypt, Sir Henry McMahon, corresponded by letter with Hussein ibn Ali, the father of Pan Arabism. In these letters, later known as the Hussein-McMahon Correspondence, Sir Henry McMahon promised Hussein ibn Ali and his Arab followers the territory of the Ottoman Empire in exchange for assistance in driving out the Ottoman Turks. Hussein interpreted these letters as promising the region of Palestine to the Arabs, although Sir Henry McMahon and the British government claimed that Palestine was excluded from the territorial promises.

In 1916, Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the colonies of the Ottoman Empire between them. Under this agreement, the region of Palestine would be controlled by Britain. In a 1917 letter from Arthur James Balfour to Lord Rothschild, known as the Balfour Declaration of 1917, the British government promised "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people", but at the same time required "that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine".

1920-1945

In 1922, the League of Nations granted Britain a mandate. Like all League of Nations Mandates, the mandate derived from article 22 of the League of Nations Covenant, which called for the self-determination of former Ottoman Empire colonies following a transitory period administered by a world power. The Palestine Mandate recognized the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and required that the mandatory government "facilitate Jewish immigration" while at the same time "ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced."

Disagreements over Jewish immigration as well as incitement by Haj Amin Al-Husseini led to an outbreak of violent Arab disturbances against the Jews of Jerusalem under the British rule (1920). Violence erupted again the following year during the Jaffa Riots. In response to these riots, Britain established the Haycraft Commission of Inquiry. Violence erupted again in the form of the 1929 Palestine riots, the 1929 Hebron massacre, and the 1929 Safed massacre. Following the violence, the British led another commission of inquiry under Sir Walter Shaw. The report of the Shaw Commission, known as the Shaw Report or Command Paper No 3530, attributed the violence to "animosity entertained by the Arabs for the Jews as a result of the disappointment of their political and national aspirations and fear for their economic future".

Violence erupted again during the 1936-1939 Arab revolt in Palestine. The British established the Peel Commission of 1936-1937 in order to put an end to the violence. The Peel Commission concluded that only partition could put an end to the violence and proposed the Peel Partition Plan. There was no consensus in the Jewish community regarding the partition plan; while the Jewish community accepted the concept of partition not all members endorsed the implementation proposed by the Peel Commission. The Arab community rejected the Peel Partition Plan in its entirety. The partition plan was abandoned, and in 1939 Britain issued its White Paper.

The White Paper of 1939 sought to accommodate Arab demands regarding Jewish immigration by placing a quota of 10,000 Jewish immigrants per year over a five-year period from 1939 to 1944. After 1944, the White Paper of 1939 required Arab consent for further Jewish immigration. The White Paper of 1939 was seen by the Jewish community as a revocation of the Balfour Declaration of 1917, and due to Jewish persecution in the Holocaust, Jews continued to immigrate illegally in what has become known as Aliyah Bet.

1945-1948

After World War II, continuous Zionist pressure to relocate Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and continuing efforts towards establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine caused difficulties for the British authorities before the international community, since they still rigorously applied the policies against further Jewish immigration outlined in the 1939 White Paper. Arab leaders expressed reservations about this immigration, as well as the political aspirations related to Zionism.

After World War II, some Zionist groups, such as the Haganah and Irgun, began to launch attacks on the British military in Palestine, in order to end British rule of Palestine. As the conflict went on, the British government asked the United Nations to look into the question of how to politically manage conflicting claims within Palestine. The United Nations formed a special committee, UNSCOP, and eventually proposed a two-state solution, with a Jerusalem/Bethlehem enclave internationalized and adopted a Partition Plan on 29 November 1947. The Plan was accepted by Yishuv but rejected by the Arab League representing the Arab states. A civil war broke out immediately in Palestine as British troops began evacuating the country.

Violence intensified. In February, Arab volunteers entered Palestine. The Jewish sector of Jerusalem became isolated. In April, the Haganah took the offensive and defeated Arab Palestinians and volunteers, and took control of different mixed localities. A massive exodus of Palestinian Arabs began.

Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948. Several Arab armies entered Palestine. After six weeks of heavy fighting, particularly around Jerusalem, all parties agreed to a truce. This was used by Israel to reinforce her forces, and after the truce Israel took the initiative and defeated the Arab armies. By the conclusion of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Israel had greatly expanded its borders and signed ceasefire agreements with all its Arab neighbors.

The 1948 conflict led to several massacres that occurred both before and after Israel's Declaration of Independence. Each side of the conflict were responsible for massacres on a case by case basis. Expulsions also occurred on both sides. The 1948 conflict resulting in thousands of casualties on both sides and an exodus of Palestinian Arabs. The exact causes of this exodus are a source of dispute among historians; some claim that the Palestinian villagers were forcibly expelled while others claim that the villagers fled in fear before Israeli forces arrived. Whatever the reasons behind it, this exodus created the Palestinian refugee problem, which has remained unsolved.

Palestinians are defined by the United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA) as those who lived in Palestine between 1946-1948 or their descendants. Aid is given by the United Nations to the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as in refugee camps in Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan. The number of Palestinian refugees has since increased to several million.[3]

1949-1967

PLO	Fatah	Hamas	PIJ	PFLP
	File:Fateh-logo.jpg	File:HamasLogo.jpg		File:PFLP Emblem.gif
The emblems of major Palestinian organizations include a map of present-day Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. (Significant populations of Palestinians and Israelis alike claim a right to the entire region).

By the end of 1949, only 150,123 Palestinians remained within Israel. For this reason, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict took a back seat to the broader Arab-Israeli conflict during this time.

Meanwhile, Palestinian volunteers played a crucial role in the Egyptian-Israeli conflict. Beginning in 1950, Egypt began using fedayeen to conduct a war of proxy against Israel. These units of Palestinians—often trained and equipped by Egypt—would infiltrate across what was then the Israeli-Egyptian border at Gaza, and conduct guerilla raids against Israeli targets (mostly civilian in nature). In the first five years of the 1950s, "884 Israelis were wounded or killed by" Palestinian fedayin trained and sent into Israel by the Egyptians. The fedayeen attacks were cited as being among the factors leading up to the Israeli decision to participate in the Sinai Campaign in 1956.

The scope of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict again broadened after Israel conquered the West Bank from Jordan and the Gaza Strip from Egypt during the Six-Day War.

Oslo peace process (1993-2000)

Main article: Oslo peace process

A peace movement poster: Israeli and Palestinian flags and the words peace in Arabic and Hebrew. Similar images have been used by several groups proposing a two-state solution to the conflict.

In 1993, Israeli and Palestinian leaders from the Palestine Liberation Organization strove to find a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict known as the Oslo peace process. Perhaps the most important milestone of this period was Yasser Arafat's letter of recognition of Israel's right to exist. The crux of the Oslo agreement was that Israel would gradually cede control of the Palestinian territories over to the Palestinians in exchange for peace. The Oslo process was delicate and progressed in fits and starts, but finally came to a close when Arafat and Barak failed to reach agreement. Robert Malley, special assistant to President Clinton for Arab-Israeli Affairs, has confirmed that Barak made no formal written offer to Arafat. Consequently, there are different accounts of the proposals considered. However, the main obstacle to agreement appears to have been the status of Jerusalem.

Map of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, showing areas of formal Palestinian authority in dark green and Israeli-administered areas in light green.

 

Peace Initiatives (2002)

Road Map for Peace

Main article: Road map for peace

One peace proposal, presented by the Quartet of the European Union, Russia, the United Nations and the United States on September 17, 2002, was the Road map for peace. This plan did not attempt to resolve difficult questions such as the fate of Jerusalem or Israeli settlements, but left that to be negotiated in later phases of the process. Israel did not accept the proposal as written, but called out 14 "reservations" or changes before they would accept it, which were unacceptable to the current Palestinian government. The proposal never made it beyond the first phase, which called for a halt to Israeli settlement construction and a halt to Israeli and Palestinian violence, none of which was achieved. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon stated around this period that further unilateral withdrawals from some West Bank settlements might be undertaken if the peace process seemed to be stalled.

Arab Peace Initiative

See also: Arab Peace Initiative and Beirut Summit

The Arab Peace Initiative (Arabic: مبادرة السلام العربية) is a peace initiative first proposed by Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, then crown prince, in the Beirut Summit. The peace initiative is a proposed solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict as a whole, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in particular.

The initiative was initially published on 28 March 2002 in Beirut Summit, and agreed on again in 2007 in the Riyadh Summit. The peace initiative achieved the unanimous consent of all members of the Arab League, including both the Hamas and Fatah Palestinian factions.

Considered a progressive proposal that would end the Arab-Israeli conflict, unlike the Road map for peace it spelled out "final-solution" borders based explicitely on the UN borders established before the 1967 Six-Day War. It offered full normalization of relations with Israel, in exchange for the withdrawal of its forces from all the Occupied Territories, including the Golan Heights, to recognize "an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital" in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as a "just solution" for the Palestinian refugees.

Although initially rejected by Israel, the Arab Leage continues to raise it as a possible solution, and meetings between the Arab League and Israel have been scheduled.

2003-present

See also: 2006 Israel-Gaza conflict

Prime Minister of Israel Ariel Sharon announced a controversial disengagement plan in December 2003. Israel was to remove all of its civilian and military presence in the Gaza Strip, (namely 21 Jewish settlements there, and four in the West Bank), but continue to supervise and guard the external envelope on land excepting a border crossing with Egypt, which is jointly run by the Palestinian National Authority in conjunction with the European Union. Israel also maintained exclusive control in the air space of Gaza. The Israeli government argued that "as a result, there will be no basis for the claim that the Gaza Strip is occupied territory," while others argued that the only effect would be that Israel "would be permitted to complete the wall (that is, the Israeli West Bank Barrier) and to maintain the situation in the West Bank as is."

Israel implemented their disengagement plan in August-September 2005, and it was initially popular with most Israelis, helping Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to win the following election after Sharon was incapacitated by a stroke. As preparation for Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, Fatah and Hamas had called a cease-fire on attacks against Israel in February 2005. CNN reported in 2006 that Fatah and Hamas "stuck to the cease-fire it announced in February 2005, but other groups did not sign on and have continued attacks against Israel." Nevertheless, Israel continued to target militants inside Gaza whom it alleged had planned or carried out attacks on Israel, including some members of Hamas. Then in June 2006, violence on both sides escalated. Israel killed a Hamas official in a missile attack on June 5; then on June 6 militants from the "Popular Resistance" group fired rockets into Israel which produced no casualties; Israel launched airstrikes against those militants and others, killing five; and then an Israeli navy gunboat fired shells onto a northern Gaza beach, killing seven and wounding 20 amongst the Palestinian families picnicking on the beach. In response, Hamas called off its 16-month-old cease-fire.

Since that time, Israeli military incursions into Gaza and Palestinian rocket attacks towards Israeli cities have continued to this day. Later in June 2006, Corporal Gilad Shalit, a 19-year-old Israeli IDF soldier, was abducted by Palestinian militants. Israel carried out a military operation against targets in Gaza, which it claimed to be in response to Palestinian attacks. Israeli Prime Minister Olmert stated that Israel's goal was not to reacquire control of the Gaza Strip, and that the IDF would withdraw once its operations were completed.

Hamas's victory in the 2006 elections for Palestinian Legislative Council, and Ismail Haniyeh’s ascension to the post of Prime Minister further complicated the peace process. Hamas openly states that it does not recognize Israel's right to exist, although they have expressed openness to a long-term hudna or truce.

In early 2007, Hamas and Fatah met in Saudi Arabia, and reached agreement to form a new unity government. Haniyeh later resigned, and a new unity coalition government of both Fatah and Hamas took office in March 2007. In 2007, the coalition of Hamas and Fatah collapsed, and the two engaged in a physical struggle. Eventually, Fatah was defeated in Gaza, and Hamas took over full control of the Gaza Strip. Fatah retains control of the West Bank. Gaza has been subjected to economic sanctions due to Hamas' non-recognition of Israel, and sporadic fighting between Israel and Hamas in Gaza has continued. Hamas has made recent attempts to renew a cease-fire with Israel, but Israel has so far rejected their offer.

Major issues between the two sides

See also: Peace process in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Since the Oslo Accords, finalized in 1993, the government of Israel and the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) have been officially committed to an eventual two-state solution. However, there are many major issues which remained unresolved between the two parties.

The status of the occupied territories

See also: Israeli-occupied territories, West_bank § Status, Positions on Jerusalem, and Status of territories captured by Israel

The West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem—territories which Israel conquered from Egypt and Jordan in the 1967 Six-Day War—are the subject of contentious legal, ethical and political dispute between Israelis and Palestinians.

Occupied Palestinian Territories is the term used by the UN in the conflict. The Israeli government uses the term Disputed Territories, to indicate its position that some territories cannot be called occupied as no nation had clear rights to them and there was no operative diplomatic arrangement when Israel acquired them in June 1967. The area is still referred to as Judea and Samaria by some Israeli groups, based on the historical regional names from ancient times.

In 1980, Israel outright annexed East Jerusalem. The United Nations rejected this annexation on August 20 of that year. Israel has never annexed the West Bank or Gaza Strip, and the United Nations has demanded the "[t]ermination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force" and that Israeli forces withdraw "from territories occupied in the recent conflict" - the meaning and intent of the latter phrase is disputed. See United Nations Security Council Resolution 242#Semantic dispute.

It has been the position of Israel that the most Arab-populated parts of West Bank (without major Jewish settlements), and the entire Gaza Strip must eventually be part of an independent Palestinian State. However, the precise borders of this state are in question. In 2000, for example, Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat an opportunity to establish an independent Palestinian State composed of the entire Gaza Strip and 92% of the West Bank. Due to security restrictions, and Barak's opposition to a broad right of return, Arafat refused this proposal.

Some Palestinians claim they are entitled to all of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem. Israel says it is justified in not ceding all this land, due to security concerns, and also because the lack of any valid diplomatic agreement at the time means that ownership and boundaries of this land is open for discussion. Palestinians claim any reduction of this claim is a severe deprivation of their rights. In negotiations, they claim that any moves to reduce the boundaries of this land is a hostile move against their key interests. Israel considers this land to be in dispute, and feels the purpose of negotiations is to define what the final borders will be.

Other Palestinian groups, such as Hamas, insist that Palestinians must control not only the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, but also all of Israel proper. For this reason, Hamas views the peace process "as religiously forbidden and politically inconceivable."

Holy places

Main articles: Western wall and Temple mount

Israel has grave concerns regarding the welfare of Jewish holy places under possible Palestinian control. When Jerusalem was under Jordanian control, no Jews were allowed to visit the Western Wall. In 2000, a Palestinian mob took over Joseph's Tomb, a shrine considered sacred by both Jews and Muslims, looted and burned the building, and turned it into a mosque. There are unauthorized Palestinian excavations for construction on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, which could threaten the stability of the Western Wall. Israel, on the other hand, has seldom blocked access to holy places sacred to other religions, and never permanently. Israeli security agencies routinely monitor and arrest Jewish extremists that plan attacks, resulting in almost no serious incidents for the last twenty years. Moreover, Israel has given almost complete autonomy to the Muslim trust (Waqf) over the Temple Mount.

Palestinians have grave concerns regarding the welfare of Christian and Muslim holy places under Israeli control. They point to the several attacks on the Al-Aqsa Mosque (Masjid al Aqsa) since 1967, including a serious fire in 1969, which destroyed the south wing, and the discovery, in 1981, of ancient tunnels under the structure of the mosque which some archaeologists believe have weakened the building structures on the Al Aqsa (Haram ash-Sharif). In the ensuing confrontations, more than 70 Palestinians died [4]. Some advocates believe that the tunnels were re-opened with the intent of causing the mosque's collapse. The Israeli government claims it treats the Muslim and Christian holy sites with utmost respect (see previous paragraph).

Mutual recognition

The Oslo peace process was based upon Israel ceding authority to the Palestinians to run their own political and economic affairs. In return, it was agreed that Palestinians would promote peaceful co-existence, renounce violence and promote recognition of Israel among their own people. Despite Yasser Arafat's official renouncement of terrorism and recognition of Israel, some Palestinian groups continue to practice and advocate violence against civilians and do not recognize Israel as a legitimate political entity. Simultaneously, at the time of Hamas's victory in the 2006, polls indicated that 66% of Palestinians supported mutual recognition and a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict.

It is widely felt among Israelis that Palestinians did not in fact promote acceptance of Israel's right to exist. Palestinians respond that their ability to spread acceptance of Israel was greatly hampered by Israeli restrictions on Palestinian political freedoms, economic freedoms, civil liberties, and quality of life. Many feel that their own opposition to Israel was justified by Israel's apparent stifling of any genuine Palestinian political and economic development.

Israel cites past concessions, such as Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip in August, 2005, which did not lead to a reduction of attacks and rocket fire against Israel, as an example of the Palestinian people not accepting Israel as a state. Palestinian groups and Israeli Human Rights organizations (namely B'tzellem) have pointed out that while the military occupation in Gaza was ended, the Israeli government still retained control of Gaza's airspace, territorial water, and borders, legally making it still under Israeli control. Practically, they also point out that mainly thanks to these restrictions, the Palestinian quality of life in the Gaza Strip has not improved since the Israeli withdrawal. Furthermore, given that the Israeli army has run incursions into the Gaza Strip on various occasions, closed off its borders, and placed an embargo on the region, the Gazan economy has since gone into free fall. This has led and continues to result in warnings of the Palestinian population becoming more radicalized unless conditions improve.

Many significant Palestinian militant groups refuse to recognize Israel's existence, based on their belief that Israel has repeatedly taken Palestinian resources and violated their perceived rights. Based on this, they seek to destroy Israel at some point in the future. It is unclear how much popular support they have. In response, some Israeli groups and individuals oppose any territorial or political concessions to Palestinians.

The question of Palestinian refugees

See also: Palestinian Right of Return, Palestinian refugee, and Palestinian Exodus

The number of Palestinians who fled Israel following its creation and their descendants now stands at around four million.

Palestinian negotiators have so far insisted that refugees, and all their descendants, from the 1948 and 1967 wars have a right to return to the places where they lived before 1948 and 1967, including those within the 1949 Armistice lines, citing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 as evidence.

The Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 declared that it proposed the compromise of a "just resolution" of the refugee problem. It is not currently understood what is meant by "just resolution"; a similar concept was offered by the Israeli government, but rejected outright by the Palestinians in the Summer 2000 Camp David negotiations.

Although many Israelis are open to compromise on the issue, by means such as the monetary reparations and family reunification initiatives offered by Ehud Barak at the Camp David 2000 summit, the majority of Israelis find a literal, comprehensive right of return for Palestinian refugees to be unacceptable. The most common arguments given for this opposition are:

• Israel's official response is that one factor in the persistence of the Arab refugee problem was the refusal of any Arab government except Jordan to offer the Palestinian Arabs citizenship. This produced much of the poverty and economic problems of the refugees, according to MFA documents. There were other much larger refugee problems after World War II which were eventually solved, while this one persisted.
• Palestinian flight from Israel was not compelled, but voluntary. During the 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the Arab Higher Committee and the Arab states encouraged Palestinians to flee, in order to make it easier to rout the Jewish state. This point, however, is a matter of some contention. Certain actions on the part of Jewish militias were considered to provoke Palestinians to leave Israel. Still, such cases were relatively rare, and the vast majority of Palestinians fled of their own accord. Since most Palestinians chose their status as refugees themselves, some argue that Israel is therefore absolved of responsibility. In fact, a 1952 memorandum submitted to the League of Arab States by the Higher Arab Committee reveals that Arab states officially agreed to take responsibility for these refugees at the height of the Palestinian exodus, until such time as Israel would be destroyed:

Arab leaders and their ministries in Arab capitals ... declared that they welcomed the immigration of Palestinian Arabs into the Arab countries until they saved Palestine.

• Historical legal precedent from the Middle East supports this contention. Since none of the 900,000 Jewish refugees who fled anti-Semitic violence in the Arab world were ever compensated or repatriated by their former countries of residence—to no objection on the part of Arab leaders—a precedent has been set whereby it is the responsibility of the nation which accepts the refugees to assimilate them.
• Most Israelis hold that the inflow of millions of poor refugees (almost none of whom were properly integrated by the surrounding Arab countries) will simply exceed the region's dwindling resources.
• Although Israel accepts the right of the Palestinian Diaspora to return into a new Palestinian state, their return into Israel would be a great danger for the stability of the Jewish state; an influx of Palestinian refugees would lead to the destruction of the state of Israel. Because a right of return would make Arabs the majority within Israel, this would essentially seal the fate of the Jewish state. As Fatah explains: “To us, the refugees issue is the winning card which means the end of the Israeli state.”

Palestinian and international authors have justified the right of return of the Palestinian refugees on several grounds:

• Several authors included in the broader New Historians assert that the Palestinian refugees were chased out or expelled by the actions of the Haganah, Lehi and Irgun. A report from the military intelligence SHAI of the Haganah entitled "The emigration of Palestinian Arabs in the period 1/12/1947-1/6/1948", dated 30 June 1948 affirms that:

"At least 55% of the total of the exodus was caused by our (Haganah/IDF) operations." To this figure, the report’s compilers add the operations of the Irgun and Lehi, which "directly (caused) some 15%... of the emigration". A further 2% was attributed to explicit expulsion orders issued by Israeli troops, and 1% to their psychological warfare. This leads to a figure of 73% for departures caused directly by the Israelis. In addition, the report attributes 22% of the departures to "fears" and "a crisis of confidence" affecting the Palestinian population. As for Arab calls for flight, these were reckoned to be significant in only 5% of cases...

• The traditional Israeli point of view arguing that Arab leaders encouraged Palestinian Arabs to flee has also been disputed by the New Historians, which instead have shown evidence indicating Arab leaders' will for the Palestinian Arab population to stay put.
• The Israeli Law of Return that grants citizenship to any Jew from anywhere in the world is viewed by some as discrimination towards non-Jews and especially to Palestinians that cannot apply for such citizenship nor return to the territory from which they were displaced or left.
• The strongest legal basis on the issue is UN Resolution 194, adopted in 1948. It states that, "the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible." UN Resolution 3236 "reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return". Resolution 242 from the UN affirms the necessity for "achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem," however, Resolution 242 does not specify that the "just settlement" must or should be in the form of a literal Palestinian right of return.

Israeli settlements

Main article: Israeli settlements

In the years following the Six-Day War, and especially in the 1990s during the peace process, Israel re-established communities destroyed in 1929 and 1948 as well as established numerous new settlements on the West Bank. These settlements (which Palestinians and most international observers regard as illegal) are now home to about 350,000 people. Most of the settlements are in the western parts of the West Bank, while others are deep into Palestinian territory, overlooking Palestinian cities. These settlements have been the site of much intercommunal conflict.

Insistence by some Palestinians that all Jewish communities within the territories to be part of a Palestinian state be removed. This includes ancient communities (Hebron), communities destroyed in 1948 and since re-established (Gush Etzion), and settlements established since 1967. The Palestinian position on the Jews of the Old City of Jerusalem is unclear.

The issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and, until 2005, the Gaza Strip have been described as an obstacle to a peaceful resolution of the conflict, by the international media; as well as the international political community (including the US, the UK, and the EU). These actors have also called the settlements illegal under international law, however Israel disputes this. Furthermore, the ICJ as well as international and Israeli human rights organizations consider the settlements illegal. Whilst several scholars and commentators disagree, citing recent historical trends to back up their argument, it has not changed the view of the international community and human rights organizations.

As of 2006, 267,163 Israelis lived within the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The establishment and expansion of these settlements in the West Bank and (at the time, the) Gaza Strip have been described as violations of the fourth Geneva Convention by the UN Security Council in several resolutions. The European Union and the General Assembly of the United Nations consider the settlements to be illegal. Proponents of the settlements justify their legality using arguments based upon Article 2 and 49 of the fourth Geneva Convention, as well as UN Security Council Resolution 242. On a practical level, some objections voiced by Palestinians are that settlements divert resources needed by Palestinian towns, such as arable land, water, and other resources; and, that settlements reduce Palestinians' ability to travel freely via local roads, owing to security considerations.

In 2005, Israel's unilateral disengagement plan, a proposal put forward by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, was enacted. All Jewish residents in the Gaza strip were evacuated, and all residential buildings were demolished.

Various mediators and various proposed agreements have shown some degree of openness to Israel retaining some fraction of the settlements which currently exist in the West Bank; this openness is based on a variety of considerations, such as: the desire to find real compromise between Israeli and Palestinian territorial claims, Israel's position that it needs to retain some West Bank land and settlements as a buffer in case of future aggression, and Israel's position that some settlements are legitimate, as they took shape when there was no operative diplomatic arrangement, and thus they did not violate any agreement.

President George Bush has stated that he does not expect Israel to return entirely to the 1949 armistice lines, due to "new realities on the ground. One of the main compromise plans put forth by the Clinton Administration would have allowed Israel to keep some settlements in the West Bank, especially those which were in large blocs near the pre-1967 borders of Israel. In return, Palestinians would have received some concessions of land in other parts of the country.

Israeli security

Further information: Violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Without the West Bank, Israel would be only nine miles across at its narrowest point, close to its greatest population center. Many fear that this would leave it vulnerable to any future attacks by an Arab alliance. Moreover, such an army would be fighting from the higher ground of the West Bank, and would find its invasion made easier, since it would not have to cross the Jordan River.

The threat of Qassam rockets fired from the Palestinian Territories into Israel is also of great concern. In 2006--the year following Israel's disengagement from the Gaza Strip--the Israeli government recorded 1,726 such launches, more than four times the total rockets fired in 2005. Many Israelis see this as evidence that greater Palestinian autonomy necessarily comes at the expense of Israel's ability to defend itself against threats from the Palestinian territories.

Contrarily, many maintain that Israeli concessions will result in reduced friction between Israelis and Palestinians, and that this will in turn bring about a reduction of violence.

The division of resources

Further information: [[:Water Politics in the Middle East]]

Palestinians note, as one of their most central concerns, that their society must be given land and resources with enough contiguity to give them a viable society, and that they must therefore not be forced to give up too many resources to Israel, as this may cause economic collapse.

In the Middle East, water is a resource of great political concern. Since Israel receives much of its water from two large aquifers which are sprawled across Green Line, the use of this water has been contentious in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Since some of the wells used to draw this water lie within the Palestinian Authority areas, there are many who question the legality of using their water for Israeli needs.

But critics of this argument point out that even though Israel withdraws some water from these areas, it also supplies the West Bank with 40 MCMs--77% of its consumption. While Israel's consumption of this water has decreased since it began its occupation of the West Bank, it still consumes the vast majority of it: in the 1950s, Israel consumed 95% of the water output of the Western Aquifer, and 82% of that produced by the Northeastern Aquifer. This water was drawn entirely on Israel's own side of the pre-1967 border. By 1999, these numbers had declined to 82% and 80%, respectively.

Finally, Israel cites the Oslo II Accord. In this treaty, both sides agreed to maintain "existing quantities of utilization from the resources." In so doing, the Palestinian Authority established unequivocally the legality of Israeli water production in the West Bank. Moreover, Israel obligated itself in this agreement to provide water to supplement Palestinian production, and further agreed to allow additional Palestinian drilling in the Eastern Aquifer. Many Palestinians counter that the Oslo II agreement was intended to be a temporary resolution, and that it was not intended to remain in effect more than a decade later. Indeed its name is "The Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement."

This agreement also established the right of the Palestinian Authority to explore and drill for natural gas, fuel and petroleum within its territory and territorial waters. It also delineated the major terms of conduct regarding regulations on the parties' facilities.

House demolition in the occupied territories

Main article: House demolition in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

A factor in the ongoing conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is the demolition of homes in the areas conquered in the 1967 Six-Day War. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have demolished and continue to demolish Palestinian homes in the occupied territories. The reasons for these demolitions are a subject of heated dispute.. Israel justifies the demolition of Palestinian homes on the grounds of deterrence against alleged terrorists and their families and as a means of counter-terrorism and as self-defense to protect Israeli citizens. Human Rights groups such as Amnesty International oppose the demolitions claiming they are in violation of international law, and accuse the Israelis of Collective punishment against innocent Palestinians and annexation of Palestinian land for the benefit of Israeli settlements.

Borders and international status

In the past Israel has demanded control over border crossings between the Palestinian territories and Jordan and Egypt, and the right to set the import and export controls, asserting that Israel and the Palestinian territories are a single economic space.

Palestinians insist on contiguous territory which will in turn rupture the existing territorial contiguity of Israel. In the interim agreements reached as part of the Oslo Accords, the Palestinian Authority has received control over cities (Area A) while the surrounding countryside has been placed under Israeli security and Palestinian civil administration (Area B) or complete Israeli control (Area C). Israel has built additional highways to allow Israelis to traverse the area without entering Palestinian cities. The initial areas under Palestinian Authority control are diverse and non-contiguous [5]. The areas have changed over time because of subsequent negotiations, including Oslo II, Wye River and Sharm el-Sheik. According to Palestinians, the separated areas make it impossible to create a viable nation and fails to address Palestinian security needs; Israel has expressed no agreement to withdrawal from some Areas B, resulting in no reduction in the division of the Palestinian areas, and the institution of a safe pass system, without Israeli checkpoints, between these parts. Because of increased Palestinian violence to occupation this plan is in abeyance. The number of checkpoints has increased; resulting is more suicide bombings since the early summer of 2003. Neither side has publicized a proposal for a final map. (Some maps have been leaked. These, purporting to show Israeli proposals, are reputed to come from the Israelis [6] and the Palestinians[7]).

Government

Some groups in Israel assert that the Palestinian Authority is corrupt, that it provides tacit support for extremists via its relationship with Hamas and other Islamic militant movements, and at times calls for the destruction of Israel. This makes it, in Israeli perception, unsuitable for governing any putative Palestinian state or (especially according to the right wing of Israeli politics), even negotiating about the character of such a state. Because of that, a number of organizations, including the previously ruling Likud party, declared they would not accept a Palestinian state based on the current PA. (Likud's former leader Ariel Sharon, publicly declared that he rejected this position as too radical).

A PA Cabinet minister, Saeb Erekat, declared this indicates that Israel is seeking to maintain its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza [8]. Israel has not recognised a Palestinian state, and has resorted to extrajudicial killings of suspects within the West Bank and Gaza who it claims have planned and led terrorist attacks within Israel. Some international observers have recommended that negotiations proceed anyway, claiming that internal Palestinian reform can be undertaken if negotiations make progress.

Airspace

The West Bank and Israel form a strip only up to 80 kilometers wide. Israel has insisted on complete Israeli control of the airspace above the West Bank and Gaza as well as that above Israel itself. A Palestinian compromise of joint control over the combined airspace has been rejected by Israel.

Palestinian army

Israel does not wish the Palestinians to build up an army capable of offensive operations, considering that the only party against which such an army could be turned in the near future is Israel itself. However, Israel has already allowed for the creation of a Palestinian police that can not only conduct police operations, but also carry out limited-scale warfare. Palestinians have argued that the IDF, a large and modern armed force, poses a direct and pressing threat to the sovereignty of any future Palestinian state, making a defensive force for a Palestinian state a matter of necessity. To this, Israelis claim that signing a treaty while building an army is a show of bad intentions.

Current status

The Oslo peace process obligated both sides to work towards a two-state solution, as noted above. However, during the process itself, there were numerous acts of violence by both sides. Israelis claimed they were acting only in response to Palestinian acts of terrorism. Palestinians claimed they were only carrying out legitimate resistance, against numerous violations by Israel of Palestinian rights, and political sovereignty.

In addition, during this process, both sides expressed dissatisfaction and grievances with the other side. The main Israeli allegation was that Palestinians were actively inciting and funding terrorism against Israel. The main Palestinian complaint was that Israel was repeatedly violating Palestinian rights, which made it pointless to attempt to persuade ordinary Palestinians to accept Israel.

In 2006, Hamas won a majority in the Palestinian Legislative Council, prompting the United States and many European countries to cut off all funds to the Palestinian Authority. The US cited three conditions that the Palestinian government would need to satisfy for a resumption of aid: an end to violence, recognition of Israel, and adherence to the Road Map for Peace. Palestinian critics stated that the US and Israel themselves complied with none of these conditions, and that Israel's support of the Road Map was accompanied by 14 reservations which, they say, drain it of its substance. Furthermore, they assert that Israeli violence against Palestinians continues without discussion. Israel states that its recent military operations are in response to Hamas's frequent rocket attacks from Gaza into Sderot, and on other Israeli cities.

In early 2007, Hamas and Fatah met in Saudi Arabia, and reached agreement to unite their respective parties, and a new unity coalition government of both Fatah and Hamas took office in March 2007. There remained much debate as to whether the PNA was now a credible negotiating authority, and whether sanctions should be lifted. When the Fatah-Hamas coalition collapsed, and the two parties engaged in a physical conflict, the debate changed to whether the newly separated Fatah was a credible negotiating partner.

In June 2007 Hamas militarily defeated Fatah in the Gaza Strip in response to attacks which critics of Fatah said were an overthrow and possible coup attempt funded and assisted by the United States, Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, engineered by US National Security Advisor for Global Democracy Strategy Elliott Abrams and executed by Fatah militants, led by Mohammed Dalan. The various forces affiliated with Fatah engaged in combat with Hamas, in numerous gun battles. Most Fatah leaders escaped to Egypt and the West Bank, and some were captured and killed. Fatah remained in control of the West Bank, and President Abbas formed a new governing coalition, which some critics of Fatah said subverts the Palestinian Constitution and excludes the majority government of Hamas.

The current policy of Israel, the United States, and several allied governments, is to censure Hamas for its non-recognition of Israel, and to assist and deal with President Abbas and Fatah, in support of their stance in favor of recognition of Israel. It is the position of the UN, the International Criminal Court, and a vast majority of the international community that Israel and the Palestinians should come to a peaceful resolution based on international laws, UN Resolutions, reciprocal recognition of self-determination and human rights.

Casualties

The ongoing conflict is continuously monitored by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs for the occupied Palestinian territory, who publish casualty figures for both sides.*

Casualty figures for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from the OCHAoPt
(numbers in brackets represent casualties under the age of 18)

Year	Deaths		Injuries
	Palestinians	Israelis	Palestinians	Israelis
2005	216 (52)	48 (6)	1260 (129)	484 (4)
2006	678 (127)	25 (2)	3194 (470)	377 (7)
2007	396 (43)	13 (0)	1843 (265)	322 (3)
Total	1290 (222)	86 (8)	6297 (864)	1183 (14)

Arab-Israeli peace diplomacy and treaties

• One State Solution
• Paris Peace Conference, 1919
• Faisal-Weizmann Agreement (1919)
• 1949 Armistice Agreements
• Camp David Accords (1978)
• Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty (1979)
• Madrid Conference of 1991
• Oslo Accords (1993)
• Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace (1994)
• Camp David 2000 Summit
• History of the Arab-Israeli conflict
• Peace process in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
• Projects working for peace among Israelis and Arabs
• List of Middle East peace proposals
• International law and the Arab-Israeli conflict

See also

Geography

• Palestine
• Geography of Israel
• Israeli Settlements

General background and information

• History of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
• Media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Ideology and ideas

• Criticism of religion
• Islamism
• Jewish state
• Pan-Arabism
• Proposals for a Palestinian state
• Zionism

Elements of the conflict

• Children and minors in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
• Child suicide bombers in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
• Palestinian political violence
• Peace process in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Peace organizations in the region

• OneVoice Movement (non-partisan)
• Peace Now (left wing)
• Seeds of Peace (neutral)
• Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (left wing)

Documentaries

• At the Green Line
• Death In Gaza
• Occupation 101
• Promises
• Relentless: The Struggle for Peace in the Middle East
• The Land of the Settlers
• ...more films

Further reading

General History

• Bregman, Ahron (2002). Israel's Wars: A History Since 1947. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-28716-2
• Bregman, Ahron Elusive Peace: How the Holy Land Defeated America.
• Bard, Mitchell. The Complete Idiot's Guide to Middle East Conflict. 2nd ed. (Alpha, 2002), ISBN 0-02-864410-7
• Bickerton, Ian J. and Carla L. Klausner. A Concise History of the Arab–Israeli Conflict. 4th ed. (Prentice Hall, 2001), ISBN 0-13-090303-5
• Cohn-Sherbok, Dan. The Palestine-Israeli Conflict: A Beginner's Guide (Oneworld Publications, 2003), ISBN 1-85168-332-1
• David, Ron. Arabs & Israel for Beginners (Writers and Readers Publishing, Inc. 1996), ISBN 0-86316-161-8
• Dowty, Alan. Israel/Palestine (Polity, 2005), ISBN 0-7456-3202-5
• Fraser, T. G. The Arab–Israeli Conflict. 2nd ed. (Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), ISBN 1-4039-1338-2
• Gelvin, James L. The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War (Cambridge University Press, 2005), 0521618045
• Harms, Gregory with Todd M. Ferry. The Palestine-Israel Conflict: A Basic Introduction (Pluto Press, 2005), ISBN 0-7453-2378-2
• Hirst, David. The Gun and the Olive Branch. 3rd ed. (Nation Books, 2003), ISBN 1-56025-483-1
• Hurewitz, J. C. The Struggle for Palestine (Shocken Books, 1976), [out of print]
• Khouri, Fred J. The Arab–Israeli Dilemma. 3rd ed. (Syracuse University Press, 1985), ISBN 0-8156-2340-2
• Morris, Benny. Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist–Arab Conflict, 1881–2001 (Vintage Books, 2001), ISBN 0-679-74475-4
• Mandel, Neville J. The Arabs and Zionism Before World War I (University of California Press, 1976), [out of print]
• Roraback, Amanda. Palestine in a Nutshell or Israel in a Nutshell (Enisen Publishing, 2004), ISBN 0-9702908-4-5
• Safran, Nadav. Israel: The Embattled Ally (The Belknap Press, Harvard, 1978), [out of print]
• Sela, Avraham. "Arab-Israeli Conflict." The Continuum Political Encyclopedia of the Middle East. Ed. Avraham Sela. New York: Continuum, 2002. pp. 58-121.
• Smith, Charles D. Palestine and the Arab–Israeli Conflict. 5th ed. (Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2004), ISBN 0-312-40408-5
• Sykes, Christopher. Crossroads to Israel (Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1965), [out of print]
• Tessler, Mark. A History of the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict (Indiana University Press, 1994), ISBN 0-253-20873-4
• Thomas, Baylis. How Israel Was Won (Lexington Books, 1999), ISBN 0-7391-0064-5
• Wasserstein, Bernard. Israelis and Palestinians (Yale University Press, 2003), ISBN 0-300-10172-4

Analytical / Focused

• Carey, Roane, ed. The New Intifada: Resisting Israel's Apartheid (Verso, 2001), ISBN 1-85984-377-8
• Chomsky, Noam. The Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel and the Palestinians. Rev. ed. (South End Press, 1999), ISBN 0-89608-187-7.
• Dershowitz, Alan. The Case for Israel (John Wiley & Sons, 2004), ISBN 0-471-67952-6
• Enderlin, Charles. Shattered Dreams: The Failure of the Peace Process in the Middle East, 1995-2002 (Other Press, 2003), ISBN 1-59051-060-7
• Falk, Avner Fratricide in the Holy Land: A Psychoanalytic View of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. University of Wisconsin Press, 2004, ISBN 0-299-20250-X
• Finkelstein, Norman. Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. 2nd ed. (Verso, 2003), ISBN 1-85984-442-1 2nd ed. introduction
• Flapan, Simha. The Birth of Israel: Myth and Realities (Pantheon Books, 1987),[out of print]
• Flapan, Simha. Zionism and the Palestinians (Croom Helm, 1979), [out of print]
• Green, Stephen. Taking Sides: America's Secret Relations with a Militant Israel (William Morrow and Co., Inc., 1984), [out of print]
• Maniscalco, Fabio. Protection, conservation and valorisation of Palestinian Cultural Patrimony (Massa Publisher, 2005), ISBN 88-87835-62-4
• Martin, Dom. COEXISTENCE: Humanity's Wailing Wall TransGalactic Publications, 2006, ISBN 0-9616078-8-2
• Pappe, Ilan, ed. The Israel/Palestine Question (Routledge, 1999), ISBN 0-415-16948-8
• Pearlman, Wendy. Occupied Voices: Stories of Everyday Life from the Second Intifada (Nation Books, 2003), ISBN 1-56025-530-7
• Quandt, William B. Peace Process. 3rd ed. (Brookings Institution Press, 2005), ISBN 0-520-24631-4
• Reinhart, Tanya. Israel/Palestine: How to End the War of 1948 (Seven Stories Press, 2002), ISBN 1-58322-538-2
• Ross, Dennis. The Missing Peace: The Inside Story of the Fight for Middle East Peace (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005), ISBN 0-374-19973-6
• Safran, Nadav. The United States and Israel, ISBN 0-674-92490-8 [out of print]
• Said, Edward W. The Question of Palestine (Vintage Books, 1992), ISBN 0-679-73988-2
• Salinas, Moises. Planting Hatred, Sowing Pain: The Psychology of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (Greenwood-Praeger Publishers, 2007), ISBN 0-275-99005-2
• Selby, Jan (2003). Water, Power and Politics in the Middle East: The Other Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. I.B.Tauris. ISBN 1860649343
• Shipler, David K. Arab and Jew: Wounded Spirits in a Promised Land. Rev. ed. (Penguin Books, 2002), ISBN 0-14-200229-1
• Swisher, Clayton E. The Truth About Camp David (Nation Books, 2004), ISBN 1-56025-623-0
• Tilley, Virginia. The One-State Solution, (University of Michigan Press, May 24, 2005), ISBN 0472115138

Peace proposals

• A Comparison Of Three Drafts For An Israeli-Palestinian Peace Agreement

External links

Academic, news, and similar sites (excluding Israeli or Palestinian sources)

• Plan of Israeli—Palestinian Resolution. A Conclusive Arrangement.
• Israeli-Palestinian ProCon.org Pros and Cons of hundreds of issues related to the conflict.
• Global Politician - Middle-East Section
• Middle East Policy Council
• The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
• Aix Group - Joint Palestinian-Israeli-international economic working group.
• The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict--An overview of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians from 1948 through the present day. From the History Guy Website.
• The Media Line - A non-profit news agency which provides credible, unbiased content, background and context from across the Middle East.
• Inter Press Service - Israel-Palestine: Holy Land, Unholy War Independent coverage of the Middle East conflicts

Conflict resolution groups

• OneVoice Movement - One Million Voices to End the Conflict

Human rights groups

• Human Rights Watch: Israel/Palestine
• B'Tselem - The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories
• Al-Haq: Palestinian Human Rights Group: West Bank affiliate of the International Commission of Jurists
• Palestinian Centre for Human Rights: Gaza affiliate of the International Commission of Jurists

Jewish and Israeli academic, news, and similar sites

• Resources >Modern Period>20th Cent.>History of Israel>State of Israel The Jewish History Resource Center, Project of the Dinur Center for Research in Jewish History, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
• MidEastWeb.org
  • A Timeline of Israeli-Palestinian history and the conflict
  • A history of Israel, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict
• Current breakdown of fatalities in conflict - Institute for Counter-Terrorism
• Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs, Jerusalem

Pro-Israel advocacy and watchdog sites

• Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs Palestinian Violence and Terrorism
• Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America
• Palestine Facts
• Eretz Yisroel: A comprehensive collection of news, articles and book excerpts
• Jewish Virtual Library
  • Palestinian Maps Omitting Israel and Maps of "Palestine" as a means to instill fundamentally negative messages regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
  • Myths and facts online: a guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict
• Honest Reporting UK monitoring mideast media
• Gamla shall not fall again
• NAAMZ, Revisionist Zionist group
• True Peace - Chabad-Lubavitch site

Pro-Palestinian advocacy and watchdog sites

• UN Security Council Resolutions Against Israel 1955-1992
• International Solidarity Movement; includes an extensive collection of links to its affiliates and to other similar organizations
• Palestine Solidarity Campaign UK
• Palestinian Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign
• Palestinian Campaign for the Cultural and Academic Boycott of Israel
• Palestine Media Watch
• Electronic Intifada

Jewish and Israeli "peace movement" news and advocacy sites

• The Other Israel, newsletter of the Israeli peace movement since 1983
  • http://israelipalestinianpeace.org The Other Israel, online archive under construction]
• "Barak's Generous offer" from Gush Shalom. Macromedia Flash version
• The Origin of the Palestine - Israel Conflict, Published by Jews for Justice in the Middle East
• Background to the Israel-Palestine Crisis--Q & A format overview by Stephen Shalom, who teaches political science at William Paterson University in New Jersey.
• Occupation Magazine

Other sites:

• century-intifada-israel-palestine-aufheben Behind the 21st Century Intifada - an analysis of Israel/Palestine - a leftist, working-class history of the conflict
• axisglobe.com a Russian perspective site
• Arabs and Israelis held hostage by a common enemy Salom Now! And METalks are two experimental initiatives which sought to rewrite the script of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, such popular, grassroots action is held hostage by some common enemies: despair, hatred, antipathy and distrust. (Jan, 2007)
• Exchange of friendly fire Anat el-Hashahar, an Israeli and founder of METalks, debates the Arab-Israeli conflict – from Oslo to Lebanon – with Khaled Diab, an Egyptian journalist and writer.