• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Have Powers From Outside the Middle East Helped or Hindered in the Search for a Resolution to the Arab-Israeli Conflict since 1948?

Extracts from this document...


Deepika Reddy Have Powers From Outside the Middle East Helped or Hindered in the Search for a Resolution to the Arab-Israeli Conflict since 1948? The tension in the Middle East is a constant problem; originating from both historical and religious claims to the area. It is strengthened, as both parties have convinced themselves that they are right, and are victims of the other side. Furthermore, it has been fuelled by the involvement of the Western powers, as well as the stubbornness of the Middle Eastern powers, not wanting to go the peace talks with the political incentive to resolve the problems at hand. As the Middle East is valuable for oil, and trading access (such as the Suez Canal), outside powers only seem to have their own interests at heart; since they are so dependant on these factors. A significant involvement, with the superpowers in 1948, is seen in the American recognition of the new state of Israel. This involvement, would have many motives, the US wanted to have an ally, in the area, in order to be able to have a source of oil, and trade route, with the Middle East. The involvement will also lead to the area becoming an extension of the Cold war, where the outside powers help arm either side, pushing them towards peace from war, rather than peace from negotiations. ...read more.


The Arabs were also armed by the USSR, providing military support, had they not done so, the Arabs may not have fought for as long, or even started initially. Thus, the USSR had hindered the peace process, in supporting the violence. By 1973, tension had further increased, resulting in the Egyptian attacks during Yom Kippur. Egypt was advised to ceasefire while they still held Sinai; an important area of land by the Suez Canal. However, it is suggested that the Russians wanted the ceasefire, so they had access to the Suez Canal and an ally in an oil-rich area. As the Arabs still had oil, it could be used against the US, and so they intervened with self-interest; ordering a ceasefire. The UN were persuaded to support this, however they did so, but not with political will, but force. Thus thrusting them further from peace as both sides would feel resentful. Subsequently; outside powers started to realise that wars do not help in peace processes, but terrorist attacks grew. This caused the outside powers to intervene, again, using political pressure to help. The Oil War was a large factor, as the outside powers were so dependant upon it. However, they still had their own interests in the forefront of their minds. ...read more.


Even if they did, neither side would be able to control their extremist groups, so there always be continuous friction between the two states. Meanwhile ,the US zigzag policy form trying to be an 'honest broker,' left both sides weary of them, and suspicions arose when they seemed to either to be fair or to take a side. The UN refugee camps were of such poor conditions, discontentment grew widely amongst the Palestinians in them, resulting in the rise of terrorism, showing how easily it is to start off violence, even though both sides are seen to have come to a political end. Due to the initial involvement of the outside powers, peace through negotiation I feel is now impossible. The Israelis believe that they can win through fighting, so they do not have the political will, during the peace talks. Similarly with the Arabs, as no one seemed to be consistently backing them, no peace talks were seen to represent them fairly. Also, by trying to stick to the so-called 'Road Map to peace' the outside powers have only arose suspicion from the Arab side, again making it near impossible to create a solution. Peace talks were impossible as they constantly avoided the initial problem of land; until this is done so, and supported by an unbiased power, peace will never be achieved. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Middle east section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Middle east essays

  1. Explain why the UNO decided to partition Palestine in 1948?

    Once Britain handed over Palestine to the UNO, it meant that it wasn't controlled by anyone, and the UNO could not really enforce any laws or measures unless both sides agreed. Due to the increasing violence and deaths, and also the fact that more and more Jewish immigrants were coming

  2. The Arab-Israeli Conflict - Have powers from outside the Middle East helped or hindered ...

    The losers in this treaty were the Palestinian Arabs who were confined to refugee camps which were inhumane and became the breeding grounds for the acts of terrorism you see and hear of today. In 1956 the Suez crisis involved two of Europe's major powers France and Britain who were

  1. History Coursework: The Arab-Israeli Conflict

    The already existing tension in Palestine grew yet stronger as the Palestinians became afraid that they would lose their country to the growing amount of Jews. In 1937, the British government recommended the partition of Palestine into two separate countries due to terrorism. An Arab country and a Jewish country.

  2. Nationalism in the Middle East

    not fixed and altered throughout the late part of the 20th century. Determination of the Palestinians to create a state in which they could govern themselves and be relieved of Israeli occupation of the territory was growing at a consistent rate with the feeling of nationalism in that region; the

  1. Arab and Israeli conflict - source related study.

    The extent that sources F, G and H support the impression of Yasser Arafat given in source E. As well as, source D contradicts historical evidence. " No such country" this shows that we know that the Palestinians were living in their land for centuries.

  2. The Significance of Canada's Contribution to the Resolution of the Suez Crisis.

    As British, French and Israeli troops began to move into Egypt, the Soviet Union encouraged Nasser to hold his ground, providing him with weapons and critical intelligence. The Crisis soon escalated from a small territorial dispute, into a threat toward another world war.

  1. It is ironic how many wars have begun due to religion.

    The remaining Palestinian Arabs that stayed behind all 150,000 of them became known as citizens of Israel. The warring countries regarded them as traitors. Even within the country of Israel they are second-class citizens. Their movements were monitored by Israeli soldiers and sometimes stories of Israeli soldiers attacking Palestinians spread.

  2. The Arab-Israeli Conflict.

    Bush and Baker put pressure on the hardline Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzhak Shamir, to start talking to the PLO. The message from the Americans was that unless progress was made, American financial support might be reduced. Shamir finally agreed to peace talks with Palestinians but not with official members of the PLO leadership.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work