Home » Politics & Society » Middle East Politics » Whose Peace Is It Anyway??

Whose Peace Is It Anyway??

© lawhawk

I'm sure that everyone has a pretty good idea of the definition of the word peace. Generally one would equate peace with the absence of war and normalized relations with neighbors. Well, the Middle East appears to have many different interpretations of this seemingly simple word.

Many of the members of the PLO would like to believe that peace is possible, although that peace would have to be on their terms. These terms are spelled out in their Palestinian Charter which was created at the same time as the creation of the PLO. It agitates for the destruction of the State of Israel and the creation of a Palestinian State with its capital in Jerusalem. The PLO-Israeli peace agreements required the PLO to revoke these statements and make vigorous efforts to effectuate peace in the region.

Since the anti-Israel statements have not been removed from the Charter, many Israelis (most notably those in Likud and the right wing parties), believe that peace can only be maintained through superior firepower and control over the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Of this group, the moderates within Likud understand that giving Gaza to the Palestinian Authority to control does not undermine their efforts since Gaza has given all countries who sought to control that area trouble. However, these right wingers all believe that returning land for peace is a fundamentally flawed process since it would not give Israeli Defense forces the opportunity to react against an attack from hostile forces. Land for peace reduces the warnings times for security forces to react against missiles, terrorist raids and general attacks. This land would be balanced by the words of a government leader who says they believe in the peace process.

With the exception of Egypt, nearly all Arab countries do not have a democratic process which transfers power from one leader to the next. Countries in the region are generally dominated by authoritarian regimes which do not allow for criticism or dissent. Peace with one leader does not mean their successor will abide by the agreement and use the disputed lands to their advantage to launch an attack.

For countries outside the region, the view of peace in the region generally means a lack of significant conflict affecting the cheap flow of petroleum. However, there are also important humanitarian interests and giving Palestinians the ability to determine their own future is part of that interest is chief among those interests.

The copyright of the article Whose Peace Is It Anyway?? in Middle East Politics is owned by lawhawk. Permission to republish Whose Peace Is It Anyway?? in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.