effects of mulitlateralism on policies regarding human rights

CHRISTINE)SULLIVAN)

Effects)of)Multilateralism)on)Policies)Regarding)Human)

Rights)The)Case)of)the)Israel@Palestinian)Conflict)

!Senior'Seminar'401'

[Pick'the'date]'

!!!

!

Christine!Sullivan!Effects'of'Multilateralism'on'Policies'Regarding'Human'Rights'

2'

!

Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..……….Pg.1 2.0 Background…………………………………………………………………………....Pg.3

2.1 Immigration to Palestine and Presence of Multilateralism………………..…Pg.4 2.2 Partitions and War……………………………………………………..……Pg. 6 2.3 Intifadas and Peace Talks…………………………………………………...Pg. 9

3.0 Methodology…………………………………………………………………...……...Pg. 13 3.1 Selection of Case……………………………………………………………Pg. 13 3.2 Research Design………………………………………………………….…Pg. 13 3.3 Limitations………………………………………………………………….Pg. 14 3.4 Terminology…………………………………………………………….…..Pg. 14 3.5 Philosophy of Science………………………………………………..……..Pg. 14

4.0 Theory………………………………………………………………………………..Pg. 15 4.1 Neo-Realism………………………………………………………….…….Pg. 15 4.2 Idealism………………………………………………………………….…Pg. 16

5.0 Israeli Foreign Policy and Security Paradox……………………………………...…...Pg. 17 5.1 Actors…………………………………………………………………..…..Pg. 17 5.2 Security…………………………………………………………………..…Pg. 17 5.3 Foreign Policy………………………………………………………..…….Pg. 19

6.0 Human Rights……………………………………………………………….…….…Pg. 20 6.1 Human Right in Israel………………………………………………….…..Pg. 21

7.0 Multilateral Intervention………………………………………………………..……Pg. 22 7.1 Soft Power Actors……………………………………………………...…..Pg. 23 7.2 Hard Power Actors…………………………………………………………Pg. 24 7.3 Effect of Multilateralism on Human Rights…………………………….…..Pg. 24

8.0 Analysis ………………..…………………………………………………………….Pg.25 8.1 Foreign Policy and Human Rights……………………………………….....Pg. 26 8.2 Analysis of Multilateral Intervention…………………………………….….Pg.27

9.0 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………...Pg. 28 10.0 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………….Pg. 30 11.0 Appendix I……………………………………………………………………….…..Pg. 35 12.0 Appendix II………………………………………………………………………….Pg. 36

1.0 Introduct ion

Persecution of the Jewish diaspora, or anti-Semitism, has fueled ideals of Zionism since the 18th century.1 The term Zionism, according to Shelia E. McGinn Phd. of John Carroll University, is “the political movement of support for the modern State of Israel, especially that based on the religious belief that Palestine was the Promised Land that God gave to the ancient Israelites and, therefore, ought now to belong to the Jewish people by divine right.”2 This nationalistic movement, along with western support after the holocaust, became the underpinning factor for Jewish immigration and ensuing wars in 20th century Middle East.

Prior to the spread of Zionism, those belonging to the Jewish faith lived within a vast Diaspora in Europe and parts of Russia.3 After the rising of anti-Semitic sentiments, members of this Diaspora faced prosecution within Europe and Russia. From this, the mass calling to return to the homeland enhanced. Jewish immigrants however faced new occupants of their glorious homeland, thus making construction of their return complex. Jumping to 1917, the immigration to Israel increased due to tightening religious and political tensions in the Europe. Although this upheaval was met with strong local opposition, the Zionist movement was then supported by the United Kingdom. This support of the movement along with many

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict: A Basic Introduction (New York: Pluto Press, NY), 49. 2 Shelia E. McGinn, "Glossary," John Carroll University: Biblical Studies and Early Christianisty, October 19, 2009, Zionism , accessed October 08, 2011, http://www.jcu.edu/bible/bibleintroreadings/Glossary.htm. 3 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict, 51.

other themes will be discussed in later sections of this paper.

International support for the Zionist objectives is the beginning of multilateralism within my topic through involvement of the League of Nations, and the United Nations. Multilateralism, according to Geoffrey Wiseman in The new Dynamics of Multilateralism, is “a primary, interrelated norm of diplomatic culture, along with use of force only as a last resort and in self-defense, continuous bilateral dialogue between officially recognized representatives, dialogue that is as open and transparent as possible, and civility and tact as the essence of diplomatic discourse.”4 At the core of this dialogue is the existence of Intergovernmental Organizations. At the conclusion of WWI the United States President Woodrow Wilson introduced his Fourteen Points. These points were the basis for an international organization known as the League of Nations.5 While the league did not have ideal success, it laid the groundwork for the future of the United Nations. The League introduced the idea of an international dialogue which today, is at the heart of multilateralism and furthermore the current international system. The United Nations’ charter was drafted at the conclusion of WWII. With the dissolution of the League of Nations, a new system was to include a higher level of accountability and focus towards human rights. This focus of human rights stems from the genocide committed during

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!4 James P. Muldoon et al., The New Dynamics of Multilateralism: Diplomacy, International Organizations, and Global Governance (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2011), Kindle, Chapter 1. 5 "Woodrow Wilson's 14 Points," Welcome to OurDocuments.gov, accessed September 16, 2011, http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true.


2'

!WWII towards the Jewish Diaspora residing in Europe.

Human rights, according to Timothy Longman and Natalie Zähringer in The New Dynamics of Multilateralism, are the “idea that all people are entitled to a minimum standard of decent treatment simple by virtue of their humanity.”6 This concept of human rights became a core component of international treaties, specifically the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.7 . In 1948, the UDHR was proposed, signed and then ratified within the General Assembly with 48 in favor, 0 against, and 8 abstentions.8 The declaration outlines all human rights which are inalienable and should thus be protected by the members of the United Nations. This declaration along with the declaration and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights makes the International Bill of Human Rights. While these multilateral agreements are set forth to create a commonality between states they do not hold any rule of law, thus they are simply a standard in which this international body hopes member states to abide by. If states have not become members of the International Court of Justice, they cannot be held directly accountable by the international body for their violation of human rights. It is then up to individual states or other collective bodies such as NATO to sanction ramifications. By defining human rights we can thus define the evolving situation in Israel, as it pertains to my thesis to be presented at the end of this section.

According to several nongovernmental organizations human rights

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!6 James P. Muldoon et al., The New Dynamics of Multilateralism, Chapter 8. 7 "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights," Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World, History, accessed October 08, 2011, http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/history.shtml. 8 "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights," History.

violations have been consistently occurring within Israel and the occupied territories.9 These violations include, but are not limited to: home demolitions, forceful removal from “the home,” firing upon unarmed civilians, and the separation of families as a direct result of the ongoing on conflict.10 The response to these claims shall be elaborated on later in this paper. Human rights have, in the 21st century, gained the spotlight of international media and the international community as a whole. Rights groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch work to spread knowledge of violations of human rights around the world. These groups, along with other international bodies attempt to influence change to foster peace within the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Intervention in the region has fostered a level of multilateral intervention from both western powers along with members of the Arab league.

Multilateral actors, such as the European Union and the United Nations, have always supported the Zionist goal of a “Jewish state in Palestine” while others such as the Arab League opposed high levels of immigration and these Zionist goals.11 This support failed to include support for the protection of Palestinian human rights, thus after the mass immigration of Jews to Palestine over 7 million Palestinians have been forced to live as refugees in Israel and neighboring countries.12 Dating back to 1917, !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!9 Human Rights Watch, Separate and Unequal, publication, December 19, 2010, 31, http://www.hrw.org/reports/2010/12/19/separate-and-unequal-0. 10 "Israel and the Occupied Territories," Human Rights Watch | Defending Human Rights Worldwide, accessed October 09, 2011, http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/israel-and-occupied-territories. 11 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict, 69. 12 Esveld Bill. Van, Separate and Unequal: Israel's Discriminatory Treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied


3'

!the Zionist mission was supported by western actors such as Britain. In a letter now known as the Balfour Declaration, Britain openly supports the mission of the Zionists. This declaration will be discussed at length in section 2 regarding the background; however one must know that this declaration along with a selection of “white papers” released by the British government becomes the foundation for all legal Zionist immigration action.

This action took place in the form of mass immigration to Palestine at the conclusion of WWII.13 Movement to Palestine on the part of the European Jewry was seen as a way to start over; free of the anti-Semitic history they had faced in Europe and parts of Russia. During this time, leaders of the relocation movement met opposition by the British government. Such movement to Palestine would upset the balance and create a sense of unstableness in the region, which was not in the interest of the British government. Documents limiting immigration seemingly promised the Arab community a future which included the creation of a Palestinian state.14 Multilateralism became influential in opening immigration boarders for Jews to historic Palestine.15 The United States, under the direction of President Truman joined in a dialogue with the British Prime Minister at the time requesting the “immediate admission

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Palestinian Territories (New York, NY: Human Rights Watch, 2010), 151, accessed October 9, 2011, http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/iopt1210webwcover_0.pdf. 13 The Birth Of Israel | Watch Free Documentary Online, dir. BBC, perf. Jeremy Bowen, Louise Minchin, and Darcy Bussell (London: British Broadcasting Company, 2008), accessed October 09, 2011, http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/birth-of-israel/. 14 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2010), 107. 15 Ibid., 181

100,000 Jewish refugees into Palestine.”16 According to Charles D. Smith in Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents, this dialogue was a signal of “the beginning of direct American involvement in the British handling of the question of Palestine.”17 This western multilateral influence is still today seen in regards to the creation and implementation of International Organizations and its influence on Israeli foreign policy, this along with related topics such as the self-interest of these intervening states, are to be discussed at a later in this paper.

During the aforementioned mass immigration to historic Palestine, neighboring Arab states such as Syria, Jordan, and Egypt became weary of the possible existence of a Jewish state in Palestine. With the growing numbers of Jews immigrating to the territory, the occurrence of conflicts between existing inhabitants and new immigrants increased, forcing many Palestinians to flee the area as refugees. The increase of refugees in these countries created a multilateral need for a resolution of the conflict. This attempt at resolution and the influence of multilateral actors leads me to my thesis. With the influence of multilateral actors and the Zionist’s persistent goal of a Jewish State in Palestine, what is the future of the conflict and what solutions are plausible? Multilateralism has influenced Israeli foreign policy towards the Palestinian population through the use of international accords and resolutions. With this influence there has been an attempt to strengthen the status of human rights in Israel and the occupied territories.

2.0 Background

My thesis aims to discuss multilateral influence of Israeli foreign policy. However, it is important to outline the necessity of a

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!16 Ibid., 182. 17 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict.,182


4'

!historical understanding. One cannot fully understand current conflicts without understanding of the relevant historical roots of a people and the conflict. This section intends to give comprehension to the reader, ergo allowing me to create a well-rounded support for my thesis. As discussed in section one, Zionism lies at the core of Jewish “return to the homeland.”18 This return to the homeland is not one of pure religious want, for Smith states that the return to Israel was “to be decided by god.”19 This relocation to historic Palestine was rather fueled by the effect of anti-Semitic policies of European states.

Prior to the 20th century European policy towards the Jewish population was one of either exile or pro-assimilation.20 These policies forbade the Diaspora Jews from continuing their cultural practices in a routine manner. Therefore, after years of oppression as a Diaspora, leaders emerged to show the international community the pain and suffering of the Jewish people. Theodor Herzel was such a leader.21 In 1896, Herzel called for the creation of a Jewish state “that would absorb [the global] Jewry and thus end the anti-Semitism that still prevailed.”22 To do so, early Zionist leaders found it necessary to call upon external multilateral actors to convene to discuss the Jewish Question, which was executed through the use of bilateral diplomacy with British policy makers.23 This necessity can be seen in a document written by Theodor Herzel in 1896, when he states “to solve [the Jewish question] we must first of all establish it as an

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!18 Shelia E. McGinn, "Glossary." 19 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 26. 20 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict, 48. 21 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 30. 22 Ibid., 31 23 Ibid., 66.

international political problem to be discussed and settled by the civilized nations of the world in council.”24 This call for multilateralism sets the stage for a consistent multilateral presence in not only the creation of Israel, but also in the conflict occurring today.

2.1 Immigrat ion to Pales t ine and Presence o f Mult i lateral i sm

Prior to WWII, the Ottoman Empire controlled historic Palestine. However, Jews attempting to escape from anti-Semitic policies began slowly to immigrate to the area. This first immigration between 1882 and 1903 consisted of 25,000 Jews into Palestine while approximately 56,997 Palestinians already resided in the area25. The second wave between 1904 and 1914 consisted of 30,000 Jews.26 With this substantial number of immigrants, Zionism became a key underlying presence in their daily lives. They began to buy up land and settle into the society. However, their settlement was not one of assimilation, but rather a creation of a new culture rooted in the beliefs of Zionism. High levels of immigration in comparison to the 995,292 Palestinians Muslims already living there threatened for instability.27

In the interim years between the first waves of Jewish immigration into historic Palestine there was little to no conflict between the existing Palestinian inhabitants and the new immigrants. This lack of conflict can be attributed to the nonexistence of great

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!24 The Zionist Idea: A Historical Analysis and Reader, ed. Arthur Hertzberg (New York, 1960), 204-9, 215-23. 25 Alexander Scholch, "The Demographic Development of Palestine, 1850-1882," International Journal of Middle East Studies 17, no. 4 (November 1985): 487, http://http://www.jstor.org/stable/163415. 26 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 61-62. 27!"Immigration to Israel (1948-2010)."!


5'

!multilateral support the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. However, with the eruption of WWI, conflict began to arise. Palestine had been a part of the Ottoman Empire until the middle of WWI, when Britain was quick to include it into her grand empiric plan with the endorsement of the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916.28 With British control of Palestine, Zionist leaders saw opportunities to fulfill their goals, while Arab leaders also saw this as a positive testament of faith towards their future status in the region.

This achievement began with a letter written in 1917 known as the Balfour Declaration.29 The declaration is a letter written from the British foreign office and it states:

His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the right and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.30

Zionist leaders saw this acceptance of a national home as the beginning of future acceptance of a Jewish state in Palestine. The declaration would become the source of all legitimization of the international questions regarding the Jewish mission in Palestine.

With the Zionist interpretation of the declaration, Britain was quick to release a set of white papers clarifying the sentiment of the Balfour Declaration, including immigration limitations. The United States created a delegation to determine the “wishes of these !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!28 Ibid., 68 29 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 96. 30 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 69.

communities” in hopes of finding a solution to the conflict and the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.31 However, these white papers along with reports from an American delegation were only obstacles for Jewish immigration in the future. This increased immigration however did not begin until the outbreak of WWII, and intensified even further at the conclusion of the world war.

Zionists, disturbed by the treatment of Jews in Germany, pushed for higher immigration to historic Palestine. However, Britain made it clear through these aforementioned white papers released prior to WWII, that peace within Palestine was most important for the stability of the region. The Arab population was against mass Jewish immigration, due to the potential for an unbalancing of power in Palestine Britain moved to protect their status in Palestine. This policy upset Zionists and ultimately ruined their relations with Britain.32

At the conclusion of WWII a common guilt towards Jews in Europe was felt among the remaining powers. With the aftermath of war in Europe and the lack of funds felt by many European powers, the United States (US) stepped in as the power player in the fate of historic Palestine and the future of the Jewish population of Europe. As the US is a democratic state who’s demographic is extremely diverse, the popular opinion of leaders and their actions by ethnic and religious groups is important in leaders’ self-interest. Thus, with the high number of Jews living in the US, a proactive involvement in the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine became a part of their strategic self-interest. Another international player that stepped in, also changing the future of Palestine was the United Nations. Created in 1942 by the allied powers, the United Nations (UN) intervened

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!31 Ibid.,73. 32Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict., 82.


6'

!in the ever-growing conflict between the new Jewish immigrant populations.33 The British, all the while still had a mandate, appropriated by the League of Nations, over historic Palestine, thus the immigration quotas still stood. Post WWII, many Jews in Europe began to see a future of refuge and peace away from the anti-semantic history of Europe.

This refuge took place in historic Palestine. However, with British quotas, this asylum was often denied, and British ships blockaded immigrants from their future in Israel.34 According to Charles D. Smith in Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict “immigration became the nexus of British-American-Zionist interactions.”35 This multilateral interaction was driven by the self-interest of each party. The Americans, led by President Truman, supported in the Zionist goal of an independent Jewish state, perhaps due to the imminent election.36 With this belief, the policy was not to accept any Jewish immigrants into the US, for they belonged in their own state in Palestine.37 Seeing that his policies were to support a Jewish state, and the British government controlled the future of this state, the American government began lobbying the British government to implement a higher immigration level to Palestine. However, the British saw the implications of a massive immigration to Palestine, and continued with the low monthly quotas.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!33 "History of the UN," Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World, accessed October 10, 2011, http://www.un.org/aboutun/history.htm. 34 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 181. 35 Ibid., 182. 36 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict., 182 37 Truman also saw the effect of having Jewish the Jewish vote, thus he supported their cause for a state.

These monthly quotas, implemented by white papers, were seen as a violation of past promises made to the Jewish population in Palestine. This view created the seeds for a future conflict in the region. While the Arab leadership was divided upon the question of their future as a state, the Jewish leadership had become somewhat collective.38 A Jewish agency had been established along with Zionist underground organizations which committed terrorist activities.39 These terrorist activities will be expanded upon during a section later in relation to human rights violations. However, one must note that these activities included but were not limited to attacks upon British soldiers in Palestine, but also towards the existing Arab population in Jewish hopes to gain control over the territory in hopes of creating a Jewish state. Attacks such as that and other factors influenced the British to abdicate their mandate over Palestine.

2.2 Part i t ions and War

In 1947, at the London Conference called by the British government, it became a general consensus to abdicate Palestine. To do so, policy makers such as representatives from Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Transjordan, Yemen, and the Palestinians settled upon the decision to bring the question to the UN.40 European Jews had migrated by the masses to the area, totaling in 2,218,393 immigrants in 1948 alone.41 This mass immigration gave way for religious and territorial conflict to arise culminating in two nationalistic ideologies. At the UN General Assembly a resolution was drafted creating the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine. (UNESCOP) This committee was charged with the duty to find a !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!38 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict., 183 39 These organizations were not affiliated with one another. 40 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict., 189. 41 "Immigration to Israel (1948-2010)."


7'

!proposed solution for the future of the Palestinian territory.42 Discussions were held pertaining to a one or two state solution for the region. Finally in 1947, a partition plan was accepted by the UN General Assembly. The plan proposed that Palestine be split into two separate entities, one Jewish and the other Palestinian. The Zionist/Jewish immigrants began to form an interim government known as the Jewish Agency and electing a leader. The Arab population was less accepting of this partition plan, for the states believed that the Jewish population had no rights to the land they now occupied.43 At the time the Jewish population made up 30% of the population in Palestine, yet they received over 50% of the land in the partition plan.44 This angered the Palestinian population, however without majority representation in the UN or support from other states, due to the self-interest of the powers involved; leaving the Palestinian demand was left unsupported. This lack of support resulted in violent uprisings by the Palestinian leadership organizations, resulting in a civil war in 1948 between the Arab and Jewish population. The UN, in an attempt to keep with the theory of self-determination, felt that intervention was contrary to the purpose described out in the charter. 45 Thus there was no direct multilateral intervention and the civil war of 1948 was quick to follow. On May 14th 1948 David Ben-Gurion, leader of the Jewish Agency, declared Israel’s independence.46 Independence in addition to multilateral

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!42 The United Nations, General Assembly, Resolution Adopted on the Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestine Question, A-B ed., vol. 184 (New York, NY, 1947), http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/resguide/r2.htm. 43 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 201. 44 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 93. 45 Ibid., 93. 46 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 201.

recognition gave Israel legitimacy in the civil war.

The Arab population, having no independence and international political legitimacy, lacked a clear defined leader, and their policy direction was split between two ideological groups those who favored a complete Palestinian state including the Israeli territory and those who felt that co-existence with the Jewish people through the acceptance of the partition plan was acceptable. These two groups split the Palestinian populations, thus leaving them weak in the eyes of the opposition. The Jewish/Zionists, on the other hand were very well organized. They had an interim government in place prior to the abdication of the British, and had formulized a makeshift army to protect the territory designated to them in the UN partition plan.47 With the clear advantage, civil war in May of 1948 was underway and surrounding Arab states became wary of the possibility for regional intervention.

Three military style organizations lead the war for the Jewish. These are the Irgun, LEHI, and the Hagana.48 The Hagana, did not use mass terrorist attacks, however the Irgun and LEHI “specialized in bomb and car-bomb assaults on heavily congregated Arab areas.”49 When war includes the use of terrorist style war, defining the target becomes difficult; consequently innocent civilians are harmed during engagement. Seeing this, the Palestinian activist groups, Fatah and Hamas, began to mimic the Israeli groups by planning similar terrorist activities. These civilians’

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!47 The Birth Of Israel | Watch Free Documentary Online, dir. BBC, perf. Jeremy Bowen, Louise Minchin, and Darcey Bussell (London: British Broadcasting Company, 2008), accessed October 09, 2011, http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/birth-of-israel/. 48 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 196. 49 Ibid., 196.


8'

!(including women and children from both sides) human rights were violated by the execution of these terrorist attacks. As a result, many Palestinians fled the urban areas to the country side, becoming refugees in their own nation, while others sought refuge in neighboring states. However, the violence continued and this marks the beginning of the Jewish-Palestinian conflict. In April of 1948, a massacre occurred in the small down of Dayr Yasin. According to Smith, “a joint Irgun-LEHI force attacked the village, took it after quelling resistance, and slaughtered about 115 men, women, and children whose mutilated bodies were stuffed down wells.”50 This is a clear violation of human rights, and sets an example for the brutal tactics to be utilized in this ongoing conflict. This violation of human rights by both sides brought a great deal of international media attention to the conflict, specifically with the introduction of International human rights agency’s such as Amnesty international and Human Rights Watch.

After the implementation of the partition plan, the Arab league convened to discuss their policy towards interaction in the conflict. Plans had been prepared for mobilization of Arab troops towards Israel if UN partition plan was to be accepted.51 While it was not their states which were directly in danger after the independence of Israel, the League still found it compelling to support their neighbors, the Palestinians. The abrasive behavior displayed by Israel can be characterized as Israel exercising their self-interest. After news was received of the Dayr Yasin massacre, the League concluded to intervene and impede on Israel’s sovereignty by engaging in combat.52 The League consisting of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, and Jordan joined together in a common mission;

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!50 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict., 199. 51Ibid., 195. 52 Ibid., 104

the Israeli army still had a technological and institutionalized advantage. Smith states, “there was no coordination of Arab military movements because the participants were mutually suspicious of one another’s territorial ambitions.”53 The seemingly makeshift nature of League member state’s military and their disorganization made their immediate involvement only a theoretical or political statement. Over the years following this first conflict, Israel and members of the Arab league become intertwined in territorial conflict. The conflict gained international attention culminating the need for multilateral action, specifically by the UN. At the pacification of the opposition by Israel, a series of multilateral armistices were agreed upon in July of 1949, including the acceptance of the partition plan by League member states. 54 The British left the area, and the Jewish had declared independence.55 This war became the catalyst for all conflicts involving the existence of a Jewish state. With the creation of the state, Palestinians residing within the marked borders were given Israeli citizenship and encouraged to assimilate into Israeli culture.

Continuing into history, in 1956 tensions became tighter when Nasser, the Egyptian Prime Minister, nationalized the Suez Canal enticing multilateral intervention by a proposed Israeli-French-British alliance.56 Egypt had taken control of the canal and was restricting ships destined for Israel. After much discussion between this proposed alliance, Israel made advancement on the Suez Canal on October 29th while France and Britain set sail for the port of Said. 57 The

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!53 Ibid, 201. 54 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict., 198. 55 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 95. 56 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 247. 57 Ibid.


9'

!warfare intensified while France and Britain called for an ultimatum, however Egypt refused to agree.58 The conflict persisted until the US entered the diplomatic arena and called for France and Britain to pull out and for Israel to abdicate from the Sinai Peninsula which had been gained during the conflict.59 With this the US called for the placement of UN Emergency Forces (UNEF) and occupy the region known as Sharmal-Shaykh.60 Invasion by either party of the area now occupied by the UNEF would become casus belli, a justification for war.61

In May of 1967, Nasser evicted the UNEF in an “attempt to reassert his prominence in Arab circles.”62 On May 14th, the Egyptian leader orders troops into Israel. Small attacks began coming from both the east by Syria and Jordan, and south boarder by Egypt culminated in condemnation of all from the US and UN. Even with condemnation, reports spread that the Israeli army was formalizing troops along the Syrian border. Worries emanated that if Israel was to attack Syria, then Egypt was to reciprocate, as Syria and Egypt were allies.63 With these reports confirmed by Russia, Egypt requested that the UN troops stationed at the border between Israel be removed, a clear warning sign to the international community and to Israel, war was to follow. Within the first day however, Israel for immediate purposed eliminated the Egyptian air force, their key to victory in the war. Syria and Jordan were quick to follow Egypt into war, however both accepted cease-fire agreements from Israel six days after the skirmish began.64 By the end of

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!58 Ibid. 59 Ibid., 249. 60 Ibid. 61 Ibid. 62 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict. 259. 63 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 109. 64 Ibid., 284.

these six days Israel had gained back the Sinai Peninsula, the city of Gaza, and the West Bank.65 The outcome of the six days war did not sit well with the neighboring states, and added to the source of the animosity towards Israel in the Middle East. The UN Security Council passed a resolution calling for a cease-fire between the four states. (Israel, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan.) 66 Israel disregarded this resolution until it had fully gained control of the Sinai Peninsula. At the close of the skirmish, the US and the UN had condemned Israel as the aggressor and mandated that they retreat from the Sinai Peninsula.67 As an ally of the US, Israel felt that it was in their best interest to comply with the requests of the US. However, complying fully was not a demand, thus Israel retreated only slightly thus still gaining territory at the close of negotiations.68 (For they had learned from the war of 1957.)

2.3 Int i fadas and Peace Talks

On the 8th of December 1987, an Israeli vehicle collided with a truck that was transporting Palestinian workers. Four passengers were killed. The collision became the catalyst for an uprising of the Palestinian population. This marked the beginning of this first uprising known as an Intifada. The Palestinian youth came together, protesting the harsh reality of the refugee status of some 70% of the Gaza strip along with the use of unfair taxation upon those who lived within the occupied territories along with an “offer of coexistence once a Palestinian state was created.”69 Smith notes that “the intifada was a rebellion of the poor and the young… who organized popular committees that then sought to co-opt under their own direction.”70 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!65 Ibid.,110. 66 Ibid., 285. 67 Ibid., 107 68 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 289. 69 Ibid., 408. 70 Ibid., 406.


10'

!Uprisings of the intifada’s magnitude in Israel quickly become violent. During the first Intifada, the violence consisted of “stone throwing, Molotov cocktails, strikes, demonstrations, [and] refusal to pay taxes.”(special, higher taxes were in place within the territories.) 71 Like many rebellions, the consequence was of a higher magnitude than the actual riot. The rioters suffered from “large-scale arrests, imprisonment without trial, deportations, punitive destruction of homes and property, beating, and the use of tear gas and live ammunition against crowds.”72 The Israeli retaliation to the Intifada was more strident than the original protests themselves. Israel, in an attempt to control the uprising, violated the human rights of all the protestors as outlined in the UDHR and the Geneva Convention. These human rights violations will be discussed in section six. Through the strife, the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), the recognized representative of the Palestinian people, called for an independent Palestinian state.73

By declaring the need for the existence of a separate Palestinian state, the rebellion gained an international legitimacy that it was lacking before. Leaders joined together to draft their fourteen points, a set of demands for the Israelis that included a demand of the eradication of special taxes imposed on Arabs in the occupied territories. These points became the riding force behind the Intifada until its conclusion in December of 1989. However, the grapple for power between the Israeli government and the Palestinian people continued. In 1987, the UNSC stepped in calling for the protection of the Palestinian people’s inalienable human rights as outlined in not only the UDHR but also by the fourth

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!71 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 142. 72 Ibid.,. 142. 73 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 406.

Geneva Conference.74 The violence however, continued and by 1988, the UNGA entered the multilateral discussions between the two parties by passing resolution (43/21.)75 The resolution “condem[ed] Israel’s persistent policies and practices violating the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territories.”76 Nonetheless, these human rights violations continued and the cause began to lose momentum due to the fact of internal struggles within the Palestinian faction.77

In 1993, by invitation of the Norwegian government, secret talks between the Israelis and the PLO had begun in Oslo. Self-Image of a state along with the theory of neo-realism (which shall be expanded upon later) gives reason as to why states act in certain manners. Norway’s self-image is one of peace and mediation, thus their involvement in talks between Israel and the Palestinian leaders is not surprising. These set of talks became known as the Oslo Accords. According to the book entitled The Palestine Israel Conflict: A Basic Introduction, the accord wasn’t “a peace treaty or a final settlement of any kind.”78 The accord is formulated in two portions. The first portion is acknowledgement of each party’s existence and the second is a Declaration of Principles (DOP.) The DOP was an outline of “initial responsibilities and a timetable for negotiating various outstanding issues, ” such as the necessity for the PLO to accept UN resolutions 242 and 338 pertaining to the

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!74 United Nations, Security Council, Resolution 605: Territories Occupied by Israel (1987), http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/524/77/IMG/NR052477.pdf?OpenElement. 75 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 147. 76 Ibid. 77 Ibid. 78 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 153.


11'

!partition plan as well as denouncing the use of terrorist tactics.79 These outstanding issues included allocation of territory, and the recognition of the Palestinian people.80

By September 1995, the second wave of the accord was underway. The second wave carried out the agreements from the first wave of the accord multilaterally between the PLO, Israel, and the United States.81 Unlike the first accord, the second agreement was done on a more public level. (The first accord was done without the knowledge any states other than those directly involved until the final acceptance.) At the conclusion of the second agreement, withdrawal of Israel and democracy in the occupied territories were suggested.

Along with the Israeli withdrawal from territory, the Palestinians held elections and formed their own interim government known as the Palestinian Authority (PA.)82 Territory withdrawal consisted of splitting the West Bank into three sections: A, B, and C, rather than complete Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories. Section A consisted of 3% of the west bank which was to be under complete PA control.83 Section B was 24% of the west bank under joint control between the PA and the Israeli government.84 Section C, 74% of the west bank, was then under complete Israeli control85. This break down of the west bank did not sit well with the Palestinian population in its entirety. However, one must understand that at this point, the Palestinian side was not unified as one body, thus peace between all sides could not be expected from the agreement upon the Oslo Accords.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!79 Ibid., 154. 80 Ibid., 155. 81 Ibid., 158. 82 Ibid., 159. 83 Ibid., 156. 84 Ibid. 85 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict.156.

Even with the creation of the PA, there were still extremist groups in existence, for example Hezbollah. Fighting between Hezbollah and the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, continued with the violence escalating.86 Between the implementation of the Oslo Accords and 2000 violence grew due to the lack of united acceptance of a single Palestinian government. From this we can surmise that some Palestinians agreed with Arafat’s decisions and accepted the PLO as the official representative of the Palestinian people while others found that his views no longer co-incited with the general public and through this support for the PA grew. This split of the people across the several Palestinian groups also split the people across the nature of diplomacy with Israel. Agreements were struck between sides with mediation by the United States, agreements which culminated in talks held at Camp David.

In July of 2000, US President Clinton invited Israeli Prime Minister Barak and PA chairman Arafat to Camp David in hopes to find a peace agreement between the two parties.87 During the talks at Camp David each party discussed their ultimate goals with President Clinton as the mediator. (The two parties did not actually discuss these goals together.) These goals were then presented to the other party in conjunction to the situation at hand, unrest in the occupied territories. The United States then drew up prospective map yielding land to each party in accordance to what the U.S. saw as reflective of the talks at Camp David. The PA rejected this map in its entirety, they did so for Arafat as chairman of the PA, had a strict policy against anything which could deter future sovereignty of Palestine.88 The talks lasted two weeks, at the

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!86 Ibid., 160 87 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 483. 88 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 163


12'

!close of the talks not much had been decided and the sight of a second Intifada was near.

The second Intifada began in September of 2000. Much like the first, Palestinian rioter gathered, led by a common hostility towards the proposed new Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. They gathered to protest the growing Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, along with the discriminatory natures of the Israeli government. The response of the Israeli government, with the introduction of harsh policies regarding the Palestinian population, consisted of consistently firing live rounds into crowds of protesters, thus directly violating human rights.89 This response generated a large number of casualties. According to Smith, “an estimated 10,600 Palestinians were injured or wounded… compared to the 362 Israelis,” after only four months of unrest.90 However, unlike the first Intifada, the second’s international attention was focused upon the involvement of terrorist tactics and the Chairman of the PA, Arafat, was held accountable for these terrorist actions.91 In reaction to these tactics Sharon’s Israeli government took over the West Bank as a whole, violating the Oslo II accord, placed checkpoints to protect Israeli security. At this time the United States had elected President George W. Bush into office. President Bush, unlike President Clinton, saw Arafat as a supporter of terrorism.92 The United States has a clear policy that it does not negotiate with terrorists. Thus talks and agreement regarding the Intifada did not include Arafat, consequently leaving out the Palestinian strife.

One could argue that the second Intifada has continued into recent history. The fighting between these parties has !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!89 Ibid., 163. 90 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 493. 91 Ibid.,493. 92 Ibid.

not come to a continued rest, and both sides violate human rights. What has changed since 2000 is the power structure of the PA and Israel. Extremist Palestinian groups have come together to agree on a common goal, and in September of 2011, representatives of this common goal approached the United Nations requesting recognition of sovereignty.9394 This goal of international recognition gives legitimacy and state sovereignty to the people of Palestine for the first time in history.95

As we have seen in this section, Palestine has historically been under mandate by first the Ottoman Empire, second the British, and lastly by the Israeli state. Complete acceptance of this bid is undetermined at this time. Currently the question sits with the Security Council, which the United States is a permanent member of, meaning that they hold the power to veto the bid. What happens to the conflict if Palestine is granted statehood status is a question of much discussion within the academic arena currently? The United States has, since the creation of the Israeli state, been an ally therefore, many have assumed that they shall veto in the coming months.96 However, the self-interest of the United States may not include vetoing this bid. This question is one !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!93 Roxanne Horesh, "Debating the UN Bid for Palestinian Statehood - Features - Al Jazeera English," AJE - Al Jazeera English, September 9, 2011, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/09/201191910126371759.html. 94 Polls done at the “Palestinian Center for Public Opinion” show that 64.3% support the PA’s action to approach the UN for statehood.!!95 "Abbas Lays out Palestine UN Bid - Middle East - Al Jazeera English," AJE - Al Jazeera English, accessed October 13, 2011, http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/09/20119166105349125.html. 96 "Abbas Lays out Palestine UN Bid - Middle East - Al Jazeera English."


13'

!that is currently unfolding. Themes and historical actions presented in this section will be drawn upon and elaborated in later sections in order to answer my thesis question.

3.0 Methodology

The purpose of this chapter is to outline the specific methods and considerations I have chosen to follow in answering my question. Guiding questions, leading observations, research styles and design, terminology, and limitations are among the topics to be discussed in this section.

3.1 Selec t ion o f Case

The grasp for power and land has plagued the world’s history. The reasoning behind conflicts varies, however the impact of conflict is the same regardless of situational factors. Human Rights abuses are a side effect of war; however the length and intensity of a conflict can determine how detrimental these abuses are. The Middle East has long been an area of conflict and sorrow among inhabitants as the result of long drawn out war, specifically in the historical territory known as Palestine (or Israel today.) The inhabitants of this area have long experienced denial of their human rights through the terror of conflict.

As a student of International Relations I have always had an interest for global conflict. With my prior knowledge and my training in International Relations I began to question the legitimacy of the Israeli state and its power, and furthermore the methods which it used to grow and gain this power.

The grasp for power is seen as a zero sum game by several theorists; however there are side effects on civilians. These side effects are the aforementioned human rights violations. The goal of this paper is to outline these violations as a subsequent effect of foreign policy and multilateral intervention.

3.2 Research Design

The research design for my thesis first begins with literature regarding the historical aspect of the Israel-Palestine conflict. My questions surrounding this part of my thesis include how did the Zionist want to create a Jewish state in Palestine gain legitimacy, and how does this legitimacy continue to affect the growing nature of the state? Has this growth in territory through force affected the multilateral views of western powers upon the policies of Israel? Have these policies changed over time, and if so how have these policies affected the human rights of the inhabitants of the region. With multilateral influences, has Israel changed these abusive polices? Have the different organizations that represent the Palestinian view created a common goal? If so, how could this affect the future of Israel in the region?

I will split this topic up into sections to answer the question that I have formulated. First I will outline the theories to be used in connection to my topic. Theoretical knowledge is key in formatting and supporting hypotheses; it allows one to give rational to the actions and policies of states thus lending a hand in formatting of hypothetical answers. After this section I will continue on to explain Israeli foreign policy and its security paradox. The foreign policy of a country outlines the point of view of said country. This added with the security paradox of this growing state, creates a distinct policy towards the growing notion of a Palestine state. In regards to the creation of policy and its execution, sections will outline the effect upon violations of human rights. The sections to follow refer to multilateral intervention and then to hypothetical solutions suggested by scholars.

With all of the information given in the sections listed above the paper will move into an analysis of the thesis. The analysis will combine information regarding the topic, theories, and explanation of


14'

!hypothesis. The goal of the analysis is to ultimately answer my thesis question through utilizing facts presented in sections prior to this analysis.

3.3 Limitat ions

My main limitations in answering my thesis question are funding and time. Due to the fact that I am an undergraduate student and that I have only had one semester to formulate and answer my question. This has made it so I am unable to design and conduct my own independent study on the correlation between Israeli foreign policy and human rights violations. In order to combat these limitations, I will rely solely on secondary data and accounts. This style of research has many benefits; however it also yields many limitations. In my preliminary research I found many several reliable secondary sources as well as jumping off points from past researcher’s analyses. The main limitation in using secondary data is the information must be tailored and in some cases scaled down or refined to better fit my thesis. The research I have used was not researched specifically for my topic. In formulating my thesis I attempted to identify what conclusions I can find using such data to support my thesis concisely and accurately. These conclusions are essential in answering my question. I must realize however, that there are limitations that restrict how directly I can relate this secondary research and data to my thesis question. Therefore reliance upon primary documents, such as United Nations resolutions is key in answering my question.

Furthermore, I do not speak Arabic or Hebrew; ergo I will face some obstacles in understanding some primary resources in these languages which pertain to my research. Sources which explain the Arab League’s current involvement and views of the status of human rights in Palestine as primary sources exist solely in Arabic, thus my understanding may be limited. I have been able, however, to find reliable resources in

English, as well as English resources that cite the resources that I cannot read. To protect the integrity of my thesis I have attempted to only select the most reliable and relevant secondary and primary data to ensure my conclusion.

3.4 Terminology

Foreign Policy refers to, according to Muldoon, “the formulation of a state’s grand strategy, or world view.”97 While Palestine is not an international recognized state, the population located in Israel is still defined as a nation. The foreign policy of Israel has directly affected the human rights of the Palestine nation, thus I will use it to answer my thesis question.98

Multilateralism and Bilateralism are also important terms in relation to my thesis. Multilateralism is a key norm of international diplomacy. It involves multiple actors working in concert on a specific issue, in my case the question of Palestine and Israeli aggression. Bilateralism is another key concept, meaning the relations and actions between two specific states. All of these terms are to be applied to my topic in order to support my thesis. Self-Image of a state according to Laura Neak in The New Foreign Policy, “consist[s], at least in part, of idealized stereotypes of the ‘in-nation’ which are culturally shared and perpetuated.”99 These idealized stereotypes are closely linked to nationalism. The idea of self-image can be used to explain the “siege mentality” of Israeli foreign policy in regards to the human rights of the Palestinian population in the occupied territories.

3.5 Phi losophy o f Science

From the readings presented in International Relations 401 Senior Seminar, I

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!97 James P. Muldoon et al., The New Dynamics of Multilateralism. Chapter 1. 98 Human Rights Watch, Separate and Unequal. 99!Neack, Laura. The New Foreign Policy: Power Seeking in a Globalized Era. 88.!


15'

!saw a reoccurring theme of multilateral intervention and influence upon states foreign policy. I wanted to further investigate themes from these readings in order to understand international roles of governments, and create a well-rounded thesis regarding my topic. My knowledge prior to researching Israeli foreign policy consisted mostly of news stories presented by the American media and agencies such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. I have found from our seminar meetings that multilateralism has the potential to have great influence upon the execution of foreign policy and the aggression of war. This knowledge leads me to question whether multilateral influence could potentially decrease the severity of human rights abuses occurring in Israel and the occupied territories.

In designing my thesis I have tried to keep the hypothesis as open ended as possible so that I can investigate the situation without expecting a specific outcome. I have come to understand that when investigating something as widespread as multilateral intervention and influence upon a specific state’s foreign policy, it is hard to come to finite conclusions upon the direct effect multilateralism has upon the situation. With this realization, I have recognized that I will have to be selective when choosing actors involved in the situation.

4.0 Theory

To fully analyze my research and draw conclusions that support my thesis, it is important that I utilize a theoretical framework. This framework will allow me to show reason and connectivity between the sections of my thesis. I will make use of several theories: Neo-realism, and Idealism. Each lends a hand in understanding the actions of actors and how come states choose particular policies by position a framework in which thesis questions such as mine can be answered.

4.1 Neo-Real ism

International relations theory is commonly rooted in the observed actions of human nature. With the utilization of Neo-Realism, changes in foreign policy of the Israeli state will be more easily understood and connected throughout all parts of my paper. How comprehension will be supported by neo-realism is to be outlined in this section.

Realism depends heavily upon the assumption that human nature is acquisitive and states’ decisions are influenced by human nature and therefore act in their own self-interest. There are three core concepts of classical Realism. First, states are the most important actors in International Relations.100 Second, there is a contrast between domestic and international politics and third, international politics is a continuing battle between power and peace between actors.101 While these three points of Realism allow for theoretical conclusion drawing, the more evolved theory of Neo-realism lends a hand specifically parts of my thesis question, specifically to rationalizing the choices made by involved actors in relation to the Palestine question.

In his critique of Realism, Kenneth N. Waltz founded a new stream of thought now known as Neo-realism. According to realist theories such as Hans Morgenthau it is human nature to strive for power, leading to a self-interested nature of nations.102 Waltz, however

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!100 Pedro Alexis Tabensky, "Realistic Idealism: An Aristotelian Alternative to Machiavellian International Relations," Theoria 54, no. 113 (August 31, 2007): 97, doi:10.3167/th.2007.5411306. 101 Keith I. Shimko, "Realism, Neorealism, and American Liberalism," The Review of Politics 54, no. 02 (Spring 1992): 286, accessed September 16, 2011, doi:10.1017/S0034670500017848. 102 Joseph S. Nye, "Review: Neorealism and Neoliberalism," World Politics 40, no. 2 (January


16'

!argued the pursuit of power was a means, but not an end, as Morgenthau had claimed. The international system is anarchy, because there is no multilateral system of governance which has the ability to hold states directly accountable. Also, states act in self-interest, and will not put their own interests second to another’s. According to Keith L. Shimko in The Review of Politics, “Over the past few decades we have witnessed a slow and steady transformation of Realism which reached its logical conclusion in Waltzian Neo-realism.”103 With this I have choose to utilize Neo-realism in replace of classical Realist theory.

In section two I discussed two multilateral systems of talks between Israel and Palestine. In both, a multilateral presence has influenced the outcome, i.e. the failure of Camp David. Choices were mad by involved actors at these talks, how have these choices affected the talks and accords presented in the background section? An example of this is the Arab League, attempting to work together during the Six Years war failed, for the participating states were weary of one another’s self-interest.

4.2 Idealism

Another influential, contemporary international theory is idealism. Woodrow Wilson perhaps best personified the concepts of idealism. In a speech given to the American Congress following WWI, Wilson outlined fourteen points he thought would ensure a peaceful international community in the post-war period. His fourteen points encouraged the formation of the League of Nations.104 This League would be a “general association of

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1988), accessed September 16, 2011, http://www.jstor.org/stable/201036. 103 Keith I. Shimko, "Realism, Neorealism, and American Liberalism," The Review of Politics 54, no. 02 (Spring 1992): 287, accessed September 16, 2011, doi:10.1017/S0034670500017848. 104 “Woodrow Wilson’s 14 Points.”

nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.”105 The belief was that if an international community, with shared ideals and goals, were working in concert, they would not be at war with one another. Other points outlined principles to facilitate free trade, such as openness of the seas. This principle is shown within my thesis during the Israeli-Egyptian conflict regarding the Suez Canal. Egypt, through soft aggression, had blocked any Israeli ships from passing through the Suez Canal. Realizing their international right to this waterway Israel appealed to the international community, who then notified Egypt of this right and instructed them to desist.106

Again, idealist belief was that if countries had common economic interest they would not go to war with one another. Although the Fourteen Points were not approved by Congress, nor successfully carried out by European nations, they laid the groundwork for the future United Nations. According to the United Nation’s charter, the organization was founded by nations who are “committed to marinating international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights.”107

The concept that the international community can affect and regulate the actions of other nations in a cooperative system is largely idealistic. My paper will discuss whether or not the international community, through multilateral channels, has influenced

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!105 Ibid. 106 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 107 "Charter of the United Nations," Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World, Preamble, accessed October 07, 2011, http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/.


17'

!the outlook of Israeli foreign policy toward the Palestinian population, and the subsequent affect upon the population’s human rights. Ideally, the United Nations is to link countries together by providing a network for shared ideals and beliefs. While the UDHR is not an enforceable legal document, it defines human rights thus allowing agencies such as Human Rights Watch along with the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly to determine if and when violations occur. However, my work will access where or not these shared beliefs are mere words, or if they actually exist.

5.0 Israe l i Fore ign Pol i cy and Securi ty Paradox

In my thesis I outlined that multilateralism has affected the formation of Israeli foreign policy towards Palestine, and that this policy has affected the Palestinian population’s human rights. This section aims to give understanding to the first part my thesis. First, I will outline actors involved in creating Israel’s foreign policy, and secondly, I will outline the security and foreign policy paradox. I will not, however, be able to outline the security paradox utterly for that would require another essay in its entirety. In this section, I only aim to structurally outline and give slight reasoning and explanations behind the foreign policy of the state.

5.1 Actors

Security has been one of the key concepts in relation to foreign and domestic policy since Israeli independence. In Israel, combinations of actors are united to create policy which wholly aims to protect the existence of the Israeli state. The high importance of security requires multiple actors to create, and exercise policies. At the center of the security policy is the seat of the Prime Minister. Since Israeli independence, the Prime Minister has had a great deal of influence upon the security and foreign policy

of Israel. However, it is not up to that position solely to create such a complex policy. Thus, organizations have been created to aid in this construction. These organizations are the National Security Council (NSC), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Department of Policy Research and Planning (DPRP), and the Knesset Committee on Foreign and Security affairs.108 According to Zeev Maoz, former academic director of the M.A. Program at the Israeli Defense Forces’ National Defense College in his book titled Defending the Holy Land: A Critical Analysis of Israel’s Security & Foreign Policy, these institutions are mostly civilian and this allows for the security community to be dominated by central governmental organizations.109

Central governmental organizations include the Intelligence community, the military bureau, and the executive branch. These institutions create, implement, and support foreign policy. Since the creation of the state, Israel has been involved in conflict with not only the Palestinian population in the occupied territories, but also its neighbors. An example of such an encounter is after the passing of resolution 181, “partition plan.”

5.2 Securi ty

Zeev notes that, “Israel is a small country whose very existence has been repeatedly challenged by its neighbors.”110 This geographical difficulty along with the constant threat of terrorism and war, has lead Israel to has develop a militarized state. A

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!108 Zeev Maoz, Defending the Holy Land a Critical Analysis of Israel's Security & Foreign Policy: With a New Preface and Afterword (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2009), 501. 109 Ibid., 501 110 Zalman F. Shiffer, "The Debate Over the Defense Budget in Israel," Israel Studies 12, no. 1 (Spring 2007): 193, doi:10.2979/ISR.2007.12.1.193.


18'

!security dilemma exists among all states, meaning that states are unaware of the intentions of their neighbors; in this case Israel is weary of the intentions of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan.111 However, states including Israel assume in that they will act in their own self-interest.112 The Israeli Defense Force (IDF) has taken over the military procedure, strictly enforcing policies created by the above-mentioned actors.113 This militarization of the state supports the implementation of polices created by creating an “always at risk” atmosphere among the population. To be a state with a high chance of conflict the foreign policy must encompass a large budget. According to Zalman F. Shiffer in The Debate over the Defense Budget in Israel, the total cost of the defense budget in 2006, “could amount to some 57 billion shekels, namely about ten percent of the [gross domestic product.]”114 This price in comparison to the region was the “combined dollar value of the published defense budgets of the four countries with it shares borders.”115 This atmosphere of defense, along with the high defense budget allows for policy makers to fully believe in the following assumptions outlined by Zeev Maoz.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111 Zalman F. Shiffer, "The Debate Over the Defense Budget in Israel,"193. 112 Laura Neack, The New Foreign Policy: Power Seeking in a Globalized Era (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2008), Kindle, 42. 113 A multiparty system exists in Israel and changes in policy can be seen during their history, notably in the period marking the beginning of the second Intifada in 2000 after Camp David. Prime Minister Netanyahu had accepted the agreements at Camp David however, his successor Ariel Sharon preferred to use other forms of negotiating with the Palestinian leaders. 114 Zalman F. Shiffer, "The Debate Over the Defense Budget in Israel," 195. 115 Ibid., 195.

1. The Arab world is fundamentally hostile towards Israel. It would attempt to destroy the Jewish state given the right chance.

2. Fundamental asymmetries exist between Israel and the Arab world.

3. The international community is an unreliable ally.

4. Israel’s geography is a major constraint on its ability to fight.116

These assumptions lead the way for policy construction in Israel. As outlined in section two, Israel has seemingly been constantly in a violent skirmish since its independence. While there have been periods of peace through the use of the Middle East peace process,117 an overall air of violence has been felt throughout Israel and the occupied territories. The first assumption is based on the aggression shown by members of the Arab League. The second is an assumption drawn from religious differences. Religion is a fundamental part of not only Israel’s policies but also in some of their neighbors’ policies. This rudimentary difference has the capability of leading states to different conclusions regarding territorial rights to Palestine. The third assumption discussed by Maoz, is the unreliability of the international community, meaning multilateral organizations such as the United Nations and their bilateral allies such as the United States.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!116 Zeev Maoz, Defending the Holy Land a Critical Analysis of Israel's Security & Foreign Policy, 7-9. 117 The Middle East Peace Process is according to Dannreuther “was to provide some degree of insulation for the key actors from domestic pressure groups that could potentially weaken the governmental capacity to assert strategic coercion and/or develop greater cooperation with the different parties to the dispute.”(Dannreuther, 1995)!


19'

!The assumption is based on the long history of peace talks and accords drawn up and mediated by the international community. None have resulted in complete peace in the region. Specifically speaking in regards to multilateralism in organizations such as the UN. The international community has also not looked upon the action taken by Israel in a favorable manor, thus they have become an unreliable ally. The fourth assumption deals with the geographical constraints during war. Israel is comprised of different territories of political affiliation.118 They are not separate but painfully intertwined, thus internal conflict is to be expected. If Israel were to be attacked by one of her neighbors, the conflict level between these intertwined territories would rise, leading perhaps to another civil war. To avoid this, Israel has historically engaged in preemptive war. An example of this is the Sinai war. As the aggressor, Israel also loses loyalty from her international allies as seen through resolutions post Sinai war. However, as a self-interested state weighing the cost and befits of war, Israel will always choose to self-preserve. These assumptions regarding the situational factors of the security of Israel lead to the guiding principles. The first principle is the “qualitative edge” meaning that the “strength of the Jewish state lies in the quality of its manpower, in its technological and educational capability, and in the social cohesion and motivation of its population.”119 Thus, conscription into the army is a necessity, along with powerful military allies to supply military technology and education. Nationalism is also key. Nationalism is a subjective feeling among citizens of a nation involving kinship, religion, and culture. By using nationalistic feelings

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!118Different political affiliations meaning some areas are inhabited by only Palestinians, and others by only Israelites. 119 Zeev Maoz, Defending the Holy Land a Critical Analysis of Israel's Security & Foreign Policy, 12.

among the Israeli population, the policy makers are able to create an atmosphere in which the population is ready to defend. The second principle is “A Nation at Arms”, conveying the need for society to be “fully mobilized in times of crisis and ready and willing to extract all of its resources for the struggle for survival.”120 This along with the third principle of “strategic defense and operational offense” and the fourth, “short wars aimed at quick decision,” make for a securitized state that is quick to go to war. These guiding principles are seen in Israel’s use of preemptive tactics and the continuation of conflict, which in turn escalates the frequency of human rights violations in the area. This frequency has gained international attention from the United States and the United Nations. Bilaterally, the US has attempted through the Camp David talks, to create stability between the two nations within Israel. Multilaterally, accords such as those in Oslo, and resolutions passed by the UN have attempted at creating solutions to the territorial and religious battle at hand. In spite of this, distrust in the international community as a whole and the assumption of the fundamental asymmetries between Israel and the Arab world, aspirations for stability are unattainable. 5.3 Fore ign Pol i cy Israeli foreign policy is greatly shaped by the security paradox outlined in the subsection above. (Section 5.2) Maoz states “one of the key problems of Israel’s policy-making architecture is that its foreign policy system was always weak and subordinate to the security community.”121 Factors such as sovereignty of the state, international treaties signed and passed by Israel, and the “always at risk” atmosphere are imperative in the creation of foreign policy by the security

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!120 Ibid., 13. 121 Zeev Maoz, Defending the Holy Land a Critical Analysis of Israel's Security & Foreign Policy., 500.


20'

!paradox outlined in section 5.2. Thus, “foreign policy has always been a servant of [the] security policy.”122 As outlined in section two, Israel gained sovereignty after a long history of Jewish immigration to Palestine. After gaining sovereignty, Israel has engaged in many wars to protect this ideal. To be a state with a high chance of conflict, the foreign policy must encompass a large budget to protect the goals and ideals of the state. Neo-realism argues that this increased defense budget is a means of protecting the self-interest of the Israeli state. Israeli foreign policy drafters have several goals that are dictated by the principles and assumptions of the security of the state, an ideal that dates back to the creation of Zionism. The need to retain strategic military stability the region is a core concept in Israeli foreign policy. In addition to this the assumptions made by Israeli policy makers regarding the interest of their neighbors, the foreign policy of Israel is one of defense.

To protect themselves against their self-interested neighbors, Israeli has adopted a policy of preemptive war, for example the Sinai war with Egypt. Egypt had extracted the UN troops from the border signifying to Israel that war could be in the near future. Taking into consideration the geographical concerns, Israeli government policy dictated that Israel be the aggressor as to protect the sovereignty and civility of their state. However, these preemptions have caused a void between allies and the international community causing the Israeli policy makers to lose a smattering of international legitimacy. Professor Sholomo Ben-Ami, a former Israeli foreign minister and minister of internal security, states, “Israelis are not yet fully aware that the world has changed and international legitimacy has become a very important pillar of international relations.”123

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!122 Ibid., 7. 123 Shlomo Ben-Ami, "Internationalizing the Solution: Multilateralism and International

The international human rights regime has become a standing requirement for the construction of many ally relationships in the 20th century. Lack of this understanding could theoretically create a void within Israel’s ally relationships. Human rights violations and deviations from the various peace treaties and accords have created a sense of we don’t need you mentality by Israel towards the international community. This attitude could diminish the legitimacy of Israel in the eyes of the international community.124 Ben-Ami declares that Israel uses the “international community à la carte.”125 This has worked in prior occasions, such as ostracizing Hamas by the international community, however situations have led to the Palestinian community organizing under the PA thus leading to the bid for international recognition as a state.

6.0 Human Rights

This section aims to outline the various human rights atrocities committed by the Israelis. Human rights, according to Jack Donnelly, are “the core concepts of human rights [are] the idea that all people are entitled to a minimum standard of decent treatment simply by virtue of their humanity.”126 At the center of this increasingly global discourse is the International Bill of Human Rights.(IBHR) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Legitimacy.," Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics 13, no. 4 (2007): 1, Academic Search Complete. 124 Legitimacy in regards to international human rights norms is dependent upon basic security and order, meaning protection of human rights, and the institutionalization of these human rights norms, rules, and procedures. Without this Israel then lacks political participation in the international human rights community, thus creating a lack of overall international legitimacy for the state. (In connection with human rights institutions.) 125 Shlomo Ben-Ami, "Internationalizing the Solution: Multilateralism and International Legitimacy.," 1. 126 James P. Muldoon et al., The New Dynamics of Multilateralism. Chapter 8.


21'

!The IBHR is made up of three parts, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. There are several international human rights regimes that aim to protect these inalienable rights. All parts of the IBHR have become central to membership of the United Nations, thus it has become expected of all member-states to fully accept and implement the IBHR. However, due to the non-binding nature of the UN itself, this request has become seemingly unrealistic.

At the center of the international human rights institution is the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. The commission aims to create and define international human rights norms.127 However, the commission has been unable to enforce the acceptance of these norms and has faced much criticism. In 2007, former Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was quoted criticizing UNCHR for their “decision to single out only one specific regional item given the range of human rights violations throughout the entire world.”128 Criticisms such as this, along with the inability of the commission to implement agreements, create a weakness within the multilateral human rights system. This weakness is exacerbated by the anarchic state of the international system. Consequently, the creation of regimes, which exist independently from the U.N., have become influential upon the recognition of human rights worldwide.

For the purposes of this paper and clarification I will only by discussing one, Human Rights Watch. (I will be discussing

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!127 Jack Donnelly, Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989), 206. 128 Alexia Bedat, "UN Watch Statement Human Rights Council Agenda Item 7," UN Watch, September 26, 2011, http://www.unwatch.org/site/c.bdKKISNqEmG/b.1289203/apps/s/content.asp?ct=11233451.

various U.N. resolutions and actions in concert with this organization.) Human Rights Watch began in 1978, with the creation of the Helsinki Watch.129 Its aim “is to [conduct] accurate fact-finding, impartial reporting, [the] effective use of media, and targeted advocacy, often in partnership with local human rights groups. Each year, Human Rights Watch publishes more than 100 reports and briefings on human rights conditions in some 90 countries, generating extensive coverage in local and international media.” 130 While these reports have acquired a substantial about of criticism form watch groups, their research and accusations have been independently supported by other groups such as Amnesty International. These reports will be utilized to demonstrate how Israeli policy has affected the Palestinian population.

6.1 Human Rights in The Occupied Terr i tor ies

During the civil war in Israel, many Palestinians were urged to leave their homes, doing so they assumed that the skirmish would be quick and they would be able to return to home. At the close of the conflict, those who left returned to find their homes now occupied by new Jewish immigrants. Years later, these Palestinians are still considered to be refugees within an ever growing diaspora by the international community, a status that some entitle “forced refugee status.”131 The Palestinian people, in the occupied territories, have also been denied their right to self-determination, guaranteed by the United Nations charter132 and supported by the International Covenant on Civil !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!129!"Our History," Human Rights Watch | Defending Human Rights Worldwide, accessed October 12, 2011, http://www.hrw.org/node/75134.!130 "Our History," Human Rights Watch | Defending Human Rights Worldwide. 131 The Birth Of Israel | Watch Free Documentary Online. 132 "Charter of the United Nations.”


22'

!and Political Rights.133 Along with these violations, specific and inalienable human rights have been violated. These violations include, but are not limited to, the right to life, discrimination under law, freedom of movement, right to property and, Article 25 pertaining to the standard of living.134

Specifically addressing the violation to the right to life, Israeli forces during not only the civil war, but during subsequent skirmishes have violated this set of rights. The use of unauthorized phosphorus and live ammunition by the Israelis coupled with the explosions of suicide bombings executed by Palestinian organizations has directly affected innocent women and children.135 As stated in section 2.3, during the Intifada the reaction of the Israeli government towards the rioters was zealous in comparison to the rebellious actions taken by the rioters. Harms states that “the act of leveling homes was usually carried out in response to stone throwing, and based on the suspicion that the perpetrator lived there.”136 Repercussions such as this are a clear violation of not only the UDHR, but also Security Council resolution 605 reprimanding Israel’s “persistent policies and practices against the Palestinian people.”137

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!133 Arabs living in Israel are granted equal status with Jew, thus the inequality is seen only within the occupied territories. 134 United Nations, General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, by Charles Malik, Alexandre Bogomolov, Peng-chun Chang, René Cassin, Eleanor Roosevelt, Charles Dukes, William Hodgson, Hernan Santa Cruz, and John P. Humphrey, http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/. 135 Gregory Harms and Todd M. Ferry, The Palestine Israel Conflict. 147. 136 Ibid., 147. 137 United Nations, Security Council, Resolution 605: Territories Occupied by Israel (1987), 15, http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/524/77/IMG/NR052477.pdf?OpenElement.

After the United Nations passed the non-binding General Assembly resolution 181 regarding the partition plan to Israel and the occupied territories, the right to self-determination was bequeathed to both parties. However, as stated in the background section, the exercising of this right has not been completed by both parties. The people of Palestine have also been stripped of their entitlement to land, as it has been reappraised for uses by the Israeli government, thus elongating and intensifying their status as refugees.138

According to Human Rights Watch, Israeli military forces have taken part in the demolition of Palestinian homes in the occupied territories.139 The Israeli government has justified these demolitions on the basis that the Palestinian owners of the homes, did not have the required permits to build on the land. However, as pointed out in the article by HRW, attaining such a permit as a Palestinian is highly impossible.140 These demolitions along with the “impossibility” of obtaining a building permit violate the UDHR, in regards to discrimination and the right of property.

7.0 Mult i lateral Intervent ion

As specified in section 3.3 (terminology,) multilateralism is the “relations among three or more states at permanent or ad hoc international conferences.”141 I have extended this definition to include the direct involvement of said multilateral actors directly in a problem-context, i.e. UN observer forces in the Sinai Peninsula after conflicts between

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!138 Human Rights Watch, Separate and Unequal. 139 "Israel and the Occupied Territories," Human Rights Watch | Defending Human Rights Worldwide, accessed October 09, 2011, http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/israel-and-occupied-territories. 140Human Rights Watch, Separate and Unequal. 141 James P. Muldoon et al., The New Dynamics of Multilateralism. Chapter 1.


23'

!Israel and Egypt. There are also two different power distributions involved in multilateral intervention, soft and hard power. Soft power refers to the use of international regimes and diplomacy such as the United Nations’ issuing of decorations and resolutions, and bi-lateral economic persuasion.142 Hard power refers to the use of military force and direct involvement in a problem area. First the actors must be identified to discuss multilateral intervention in the regards to the situation in Israel and the occupied territories.

7.1 Sof t Power Actors

The central actor in this question is the United Nations. Composed of 193 members with the admission of Southern Sudan in 2011, the UN is clearly a multilateral actor by definition.143 The Charter of the UN sets out to provide an arena for the international community to convene and discuss important issues. During this correspondence between members, resolutions are drafted regarding issues plaguing the world. In connection to the question at hand, resolutions have allowed immigration of Jews into historic Palestine. Another has set up a partition plan for Israel and the occupied territories, while others have called upon Israel to halt their aggressive activities towards not only the Palestinian people, but also towards her neighbors. Even though these resolutions are not enforceable due to the core principle of state sovereignty, they effectively call for international attention, hopefully thus bringing about change.

The arena has given way to the acceptance of the binding Universal

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!142 Economic persuasion comes in forms of aid, technological advancements, and foreign investment in developing nations. 143 "United Nations Member States," Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World, June 28, 2006, http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/org1469.doc.htm.

Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR.)144 As discussed in the previous sections, this document outlines all inalienable rights that all humans have.145 It has become the underpinning contract between members of the United Nations regarding human rights. Civil society organizations such as Human Rights Watch have used this contract to define when violations are occurring and subsequently “name and shame” states that violate these rights.146

Members of the UN have also worked in concert to produce another non-binding agreement known as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs.) The MDGs are a list of issues plaguing our world ranging from hunger to maternal health.147 In relation to the situation in Israel and the occupied territories the MDGs ask Israel to halt the violations of human rights to reach the goals by the proposed date of 2015.148 The acceptance of this UN action by states such as Israel, who have had difficulty achieving some goals, can be explained through the theory of idealism. As outlined in section 4.2, idealism argues that with the creation of a common goal, states will avoid war. However, with the demolition of homes, the forceful refugee

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!144 The UDHR is a binding document for it has been ratified by the General Assembly, thus in accepting membership to the UN, states also accept and agree to uphold norms put forth in the UNHR and the following covenants. However, with understanding of state-sovereignty the UN in its entirety is a non-binding organization, thus one can also argue that the UDHR is also non-binding. 145 United Nations, General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 146 "Who We Are | Human Rights Watch," Human Rights Watch | Defending Human Rights Worldwide, accessed October 13, 2011, http://www.hrw.org/node/75136. 147 "Millennium Development Goals," Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World, accessed September 18, 2011, http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/. 148 Ibid.


24'

!status of approximately 1,365,343 Palestinians, and the lack of an elongated period of peace, completion may not occur unless there is a drastic international change in the acceptance of a Palestinian state.149 Acceptance of this state could, ideally, bring about a form of peace and accountability upon a legitimized Palestinian institution. Without a change in the international community, the Palestinian population will again forego their right to self-determination, a possible precursor to civil war, similar to that of the first and second Intifadas. Israel has stated however, that the critiques of the international communities are often misplaced and bias towards the Palestinian population. In 1988, Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement which “regret[ted] the adoption of security council resolution 23… [and] reject[ed] the rebuke of its policies in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza and the placing of responsibility on it in connection with the events [which took] place there.”150 Reactions such as this have attempted to explain policies implemented, which according to UN bodies and Human Rights Watch, have violated human rights.

Peacekeepers and resolutions by both the Security Council and the General Assembly are a key forces behind the U.N. as a multilateral institution. Peacekeepers are sent specifically into conflict areas to attempt to keep the peace between two bodies of people. Recalling specifically section two, during the 1958 and 1967 wars with Egypt, peacekeepers were implemented in accordance with Security !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!149 Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, Estimates of the Number of Palestinian Refugees, 2006, raw data, Palestine, Bethlehem. 150 Israel, Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, "311 Foreign Ministry Statement on Security Council Resolution," news release, December 23, 1987, http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign%20Relations/Israels%20Foreign%20Relations%20since%201947/1984-1988/311%20Foreign%20Ministry%20Statement%20on%20Security%20Council.

Council’s 23rd resolution to help stabilize the situation. The MDGs, the International Bill of Human rights, Security Council and General Assembly resolutions are all workings of the UN as a multilateral actor.

7.2 Hard Power Actors

Hard power as defined in 7.0, is the use of military or direct sanctions towards a specific state. In regards to the question of Israel and the occupied territories, members of the Arab League have largely attempted to utilize direct hard power, i.e. the war directly following Israel’s independence. Regional organizations also have the opportunity to act as a multilateral actor when it works in concert. As discussed in the background section (2.2) the Arab League met to discuss the situation of the people of Palestine, as many had become refugees in neighboring countries. In 1948, with the acceptance of the partition plan on the part of the Israeli government, Arab League took action, and a unilateral invasion followed. While this invasion was not followed by victory, the unified action of Arab League member states illustrates the use of multilateral hard power. This hard power however, also gave way to more human rights abuses such as civilian death and displacement. Thus one questions the motives of members of the Arab League in this invasion of Israel. Today, the Arab League has been working in concert to support the objectives of the Palestinian population to obtain internationally recognized statehood.151 (See appendix for corresponding maps.)

7.3 Effec t o f Mult i lateral i sm on Human Rights

When human rights violations are occurring routinely in a state, multilateral actors such as the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly have

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!151 Al Jazeera, "Arab States 'to Back Palestine Statehood Bid'" September 13, 2011.


25'

!historically convened to discuss a potential for action. Resolutions have been passed by the U.N., and non-governmental organization such as Human Rights Watch release reports describing the violations in detail. In regards to Israel, the international community has convened many times to discuss not only the future of the Palestinian people, but also the human rights violations arising in the region. The question remains, can these multilateral actors affect the implementation of security and foreign policy which directly violates these innate rights? Neo-realism believes in self-interested tendencies of states, while idealism argues for the common need for international cooperation seen by all states. With this we can understand the actions of the Israel state, for throughout history we have witnessed pattern of semi acceptance of the prior mentioned multilateral actions.

8.0 Analys is

The idea of Zionism is at the raison d’être of Israel. With this reason for existence, one can understand the rationalization behind the ongoing conflict. Culture is a “the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an institution.”152 In Israel today, there are two separate nations, with two separate cultures. The culture of a nation, and its ensuing nationalism, has the ability to effects its outlook upon others. Israeli and Palestinian cultures have evolved where co-existence under the direction and policies of one state have proven to be unsuccessful for the protection of human rights. Claim to the land, and specifically the holy city of Jerusalem has fueled the conflict for over 70 years. ! Conflict, such as that in Israel and the occupied territories, beckons attention from

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!152 "Culture - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary," Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online, C, accessed October 13, 2011, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture.

the international community. This form of multilateral diplomacy is seen through the creation and acceptance of resolutions drafted by bodies of the United Nations. However, there has been a gap between the implementation and effectiveness of this multilateral diplomacy. Effectiveness of resolutions for peace, according to Idealist thought, depends on the ideal of all nations working together as one and agreeing upon common solutions. In regards to the question of Palestine, Idealist thought requires Palestine to be a full member of this body to ultimately discover peace within the conflict. The pure existence of these resolutions and accords displays the importance of the conflict and integration in which the international community has come to enjoy. ! The integration of norms between members of the international community can be rationalized through the application of neorealism. As articulated in section 7.1, Israel has demonstrated their interest in gaining multilateral recognition from the western hegemonic powers. To do so, a set of “western” political norms must be accepted, including resolutions and agreement pertaining to human rights. Acceptance of which has been partial for Israel. While they have agreed upon international norms pertaining to human rights, seen through their status as a UN member state, the implementation of such norms is lacking. Israel, conversely, argues that there have been seldom violations on the part of the Israeli government. When NGO’s accuse their government of discriminatory and abusive policies, the Israeli government maintains that it is in their sovereign ability to protect their borders, and that there are equal or worse violations are being committed by their counter Palestinian organizations. ! The lack of implementation has led to a cultural upheaval and to the violation of human rights. Then requiring the attention and periodically the intervention of, the


26'

!international community. Dating back to the first wars of attrition, specifically the Sinai war, Israel has attempted to grown not only in size, but also in regional power. Aggressive behavior on the part of Israel has been criticized by many western powers. Why does Israel then continue with this foreign policy? Theories of Neo-Realism, specifically Watlz, believe that states weigh options when drafting foreign policy.153 All sovereign states, according to neo-realism, are tools of human nature: self-interest. It is in the self-interest, to agree to western norms, along with the acceptance of the international community as a whole. It is also in their self-interest to maintain stability in the occupied territories as well with the neighboring states. With discussing the historical background of Israel, these decisions are clear in regards to foreign policy choices made by the Israeli government. Along with this, the consistency of turmoil in the region adds to the “always at risk” atmosphere. With the growing risk atmosphere in Israeli foreign policy construction, and the importance of sovereignty, neo-realism suggests that the rights of the sovereign state will rise above the states duty to protect individual human rights.! With theoretical knowledge I can presently create a hypothesis to support my thesis. Neo-Realism and Idealism argue the self-interest and reasoning of the Israeli state in regards to the creation of security and foreign policy, and the acceptance of international norms. There is a paradoxical relationship between the international community’s standards and the self-interest of Israel. Israel’s history has shown the importance of a highly militaristic state, however retaining a stable relationship with western powers is also of great importance to the core raison d’être of the Israeli state. At the nexus of this relationship are human rights. !

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!153Keith I. Shimko, "Realism, Neorealism, and American Liberalism," !!

Protecting human rights is one of the fundamental concepts included in the United Nations charter. Acceptance of the International Bill of Human Rights is expected of members of this international organization and adoption of the UDHR has become central to membership of the UN. Thus as a member, Israel has accepted the definition of human rights and has made an international commitment to the protection human rights. Despite this agreement, human rights violations are still in occurrence. As discussed in section 6.1, there are several habitual violations committed by the Israeli government; some of these are direct results of discriminatory foreign policy. !8.1 Foreign Pol i cy and Human Rights !

The West Bank and Gaza are legally, according to the Israeli government, not a part of Israel. However, within these occupied territories there is a strong sense of not only Israeli military presence but also, direct involvement of the Israeli government.154 In addition to this environment, policies of Israel towards the Palestinian populations in the occupied territories are, according to HRW, perpetually discriminatory.155 ! A clear example of such discrimination and aggression carried out by the Israeli government is the proposed “separation wall” currently under construction in the West Bank.156 According to Peter Lagerquist in his article Fencing the Last Sky, the construction of this wall will “[encyst] major Palestinian population concentrations and any future Palestinian state in cantons comprising roughly half the West Bank, while consolidating Israeli control over the

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!154 Human Rights Watch, Separate and Unequal. 31. 155 Human Rights Watch, Separate and Unequal. 31 156 Peter Lagerquist, "Fencing the Last Sky: Excavating Palestine After Israel's "Separation Wall"" Journal of Palestine Studies 33, no. 2 (Winter 2003): 5, doi:1533-8614.


27'

!remainder.”157 The construction of the wall is directly correlated to the security and foreign policies of Israel. While other states, such as the United States, have begun to build walls of their own. Israel’s new attempt at protection has also simultaneously also attempted to expand her boundaries past the 1967 agreed borders.158 ! By constructing a wall with the intentions of separating the two nations to increase security, Israel has begun to again, to violate human rights. First, by constructing the wall through the occupied territory Israel is again preventing the Palestinian population from their collective right to self-determination.159 Secondly, the wall has begun to separate families. Travel between the two areas (inside and outside of the wall) has become difficult, particularly for those inhabitants who carry Palestinian identification.160 While Palestinians are allowed access to Israel, movement is dependent upon individual’s papers, and the security threat level of the state. This clear case of discrimination and the separation of families are in clear violation of the International Bill of Human Rights. ! However, one must take into consideration the principles and assumptions of Israeli security and foreign policy, in addition to the construction of Israel’s history since independence. With the construction of the separation wall, Israeli is merely attempting to protect their sovereignty through the use of high security. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!157 Peter Lagerquist, "Fencing the Last Sky: Excavating Palestine After Israel's "Separation Wall"" , 6 158 I must note that Israel does have a sovereign right to build this wall for their security. 159 The proposed plans for this wall are located in the second Appendix. In Lagerquist’s article in combination with this map, we see that Israel is building outside of the agreed 1967 borders. Thus they are again expanding their boundaries. 160 Human Rights Watch, Separate and Unequal.

8.2 Analys is o f Mult i lateral Intervent ion !With the creation of the United Nations

in 1946, there was great debate on the involvement of Human Rights. Many nations hesitated in joining the new body and it was not until an unofficial promise was made to draft a declaration specifically aimed at understanding and protecting human rights that membership was wholly agreed to. Idealism stresses the importance of states working in concert for the betterment of the world. As stated previously, membership to the UN includes the adoption of the UDHR. When states are in clear violation of this document it has become an international norm for multilateral or bilateral intervention. For the intentions of supporting my thesis I intend to only analyze the effects of multilateral intervention. !

From the multitude of international action, and literature regarding the standard of human rights in the occupied territories, one can conclude that there has always been a multilateral influence. Since the immigration of Zionists to mandated Palestine, multilateral actors such as the UN, the EU, and the Arab League, have attempted to influence the creation and implementation of Israeli foreign policy. However, over the years, the international community has witnessed continual unrest resulting in human rights violations.161 The denial of self-determination, however, has systematically suppressed the Palestinian population located within the occupied territories. Associated with this denial is the erection of the “separation wall.” By raising this structure through parts of the occupied territory, Israel is directly attempting to expand her borders once again. With this expansion the territory of a second Palestinian state diminishes. !

In seeing this, the PA has recently approached the international community through a multilateral manner. The result of

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!161 Including in Israel and the occupied territories.


28'

!this bid for full membership has yet to be determined by the Security Council.162 When decisions are reached, the future of Israel and the occupied territories shall be decided. !

Foreign policy of the state has directly affected the status of human rights in the occupied territories. In many instances it is directly the foreign policy of Israel that violates these human rights. Multilateralism has had a growing impact on the protection of these rights through influences exercised; protection of these rights can be seen within changes made to Israeli foreign policy. With this conclusion I can support my thesis. Multilateralism does affect Israeli foreign policy, and this policy does affect the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories. Thus, there is interconnectedness between multilateralism and human rights. !9.0 Conclus ion ! There is a curious linking between multilateralism, foreign policy, and human rights. In a globalized world, Idealism argues that all states are essentially influenced by multilateralism for a global system is necessary for the advancement of all states. Human rights discourse is fundamentally based within multilateral discourse, thus its discussion and implementation depends solely upon multilateral influences of national and foreign policies. In the introduction to this essay I stated that multilateralism has the potential to influence the outlook of Israeli foreign policy towards the Palestinian population and that it effects foreign policy had upon the population’s human rights.

As noted in the analysis section of this essay, implementation of human rights discourse depends entirely upon the effective influence of multilateral regimes upon a state’s !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!162 On November 1st 2011, the UN Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization accepted Palestine as a full member, thus recognizing Palestine as a legitimized state.

foreign policy. In the case of Israel and the occupied territories, this foreign policy is driven by the underlying Security policy. Throughout much of Israel’s history human rights violations have ensued, and the international community has not sat idly by. With a change in discriminatory policies towards the occupied territories we can see that multilateralism has effectively influenced the creation of foreign policy. Idealism aids in understanding how the multilateral system has done so. As indicated earlier in this paper, Israeli policy makers consider the state of Israel to be more developed than her neighbors. From this conclusion, one can see that Israel strives to be considered “western” by the international community. The importance of security within foreign policy dictates the need for intense militarization and control to create stability within the state and the occupied territories. Threats of instability have historically come from the heartache of the Palestinian people seen through the first and second intifada, hence why Israeli’s foreign policy has become discriminatory towards the Palestinian population in the occupied territories. This discrimination has culminated in the violation of human rights. Multilateralism can and has in many instances, effected the foreign policy of Israel. This foreign policy has historically violated the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories. For these habitual transgressions against human rights to desist, an answer must be found.

At the core of the international system is a discourse on human rights. The system is multilateral by nature. Thus, generally speaking, human rights are fundamentally multilateral. Protection of these inalienable rights is delegated to this international body, again implementing the multilateral nature of human rights discourse. When violations of the International Bill of Human Rights occur, it is the duty of the United Nations to point out these violations, and make efforts to correct the wrong doings. However, due to the non-


29'

!binding nature of the UN as a whole, there is a weakness at the core of multilateralism. This weakness in relation to human rights lies within the inability to directly enforce the International Bill of Human Rights.


30'

!

10.0 Bibl iography

"Abbas Lays out Palestine UN Bid - Middle East - Al Jazeera English." AJE - Al Jazeera English. Accessed October 13, 2011. http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/09/20119166105349125.html.

Al Jazeera. "Arab States 'to Back Palestine Statehood Bid'" September 13, 2011. Amichai, Cohen, and Cohen A. Stuart. "Israel and International Humanitarian Law: Between the

Neo-Realism of State Security and the 'Soft Power' of Legal Acceptability." Israeli Studies 16, no. 2 (Summer 2011): 1-23. doi:10.2979/israelstudies.16.2.1.

Amnesty International. "Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories: 2011's Annual Report."

September 2011. http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/israel-occupied-palestinian-territories/report-2011#section-67-5.

Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights. Estimates of the Number of

Palestinian Refugees. 2006. Raw data. Palestine, Bethlehem. Bedat, Alexia. "UN Watch Statement Human Rights Council Agenda Item 7." UN Watch.

September 26, 2011. http://www.unwatch.org/site/c.bdKKISNqEmG/b.1289203/apps/s/content.asp?ct=11233451.

Ben-Ami, Shlomo. "Internationalizing the Solution: Multilateralism and International Legitimacy."

Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics 13, no. 4 (2007): 9-14. Academic Search Complete. Bennis, Phyllis. "The United Nations and Palestine: Partition and Its Aftermath." Arab Studies

Quarterly 19, no. 3 (Summer 1997). Religion and Philosophy Collection. The Birth Of Israel | Watch Free Documentary Online. Directed by BBC. Performed by Jeremy Bowen,

Louise Minchin, and Darcey Bussell. London: British Broadcasting Company, 2008. Accessed October 09, 2011. http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/birth-of-israel/.

"Charter of the United Nations." Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World. Accessed

October 07, 2011. http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/. "Culture - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary." Dictionary and

Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online. Accessed October 13, 2011. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture.

Dannreuther, Roland. "Understanding the Middle East Peace Process: A Historical Institutionalist

Approach." European Journal of International Relations 17, no. 2 (June 2011): 187-208. doi:10.1177/1354066110366045.


31'

!Daoudi, Mohammed S. Dajani. "The Arab Peace Initiative." CrossCurrents 59, no. 4 (December

2009): 532-39. doi:10.1111/j.1939-3881.2009.00096.x. Donnelly, Jack. Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989. Elgindy, Khaled. "Palestine Goes to the UN." Foreign Affairs 90, no. 5 (October 2011): 102-13.

MasterFILE Elite. Farsakh, Lelia. "The One-State Solution and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Palestinian Challenges

and Prospects." Middle East Journal 65, no. 1 (Winter 2011): 55-71. Accessed September 16, 2011. doi:10.3751/65.1.13.

Golan, Galia. "Israel's Positions on Jerusalem." Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics 17, no. 1/2 (2011):

207-13. Business Source Complete. Haas, Ernst B. Human Rights and International Action; the Case of Freedom of Association. Stanford:

Stanford University Press, 1970. Haas, Ernst B. "The Study of Regional Integration: Reflections on the Joy and Anguish of

Pretheorizing." International Organization 24, no. 04 (Autumn 1970): 606-46. Accessed October 8, 2011. doi:10.1017/S0020818300017495.

Harms, Gregory, and Todd M. Ferry. The Palestine Israel Conflict: A Basic Introduction. New York: Pluto

Press, NY. "History of the UN." Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World. Accessed October 10, 2011.

http://www.un.org/aboutun/history.htm. Horesh, Roxanne. "Debating the UN Bid for Palestinian Statehood - Features - Al Jazeera English."

AJE - Al Jazeera English, September 9, 2011. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/09/201191910126371759.html.

Human Rights Watch. Separate and Unequal. Publication. December 19, 2010.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2010/12/19/separate-and-unequal-0. "Immigration to Israel (1948-2010)." Jewish Virtual Library - Homepage. Accessed November 10,

2011. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Immigration/Immigration_to_Israel.html.

"Israel and the Occupied Territories." Human Rights Watch | Defending Human Rights

Worldwide. Accessed October 09, 2011. http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/israel-and-occupied-territories.

"Israel: Halt Home Demolitions." Human Rights Watch | Defending Human Rights Worldwide.

June 21, 2011. Accessed September 16, 2011. http://www.hrw.org/print/news/2011/06/21/israel-halt-home-demolitions.


32'

!Israel. Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "311 Foreign Ministry Statement on Security Council

Resolution." News release, December 23, 1987. Jones, Bruce, and Andrew Hart. "Keeping Middle East Peace?" International Peacekeeping 15, no. 1

(February 2008): 102-17. doi:10.1080/13533310701879944. Khan, M. A. Muqtedar. Jihad for Jerusalem: Identity and Strategy in International Relations. Westport, Conn.

[u.a.: Praeger, 2004. Ebook. Kukali, Nabil. "Support for Statehood." Palestinian Center for Public Opinion. July 26, 2011.

http://www.pcpo.org/polls.htm. Lagerquist, Peter. "Fencing the Last Sky: Excavating Palestine After Israel's "Separation Wall""

Journal of Palestine Studies 33, no. 2 (Winter 2003): 5-35. doi:1533-8614. Mallison, Thomas, and Sally V. Mallison. "The National Rights of the People of Palestine." Journal of

Palestine Studies 9, no. 4 (Summer 1980): 119-30. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2536127. Maoz, Zeev. Defending the Holy Land a Critical Analysis of Israel's Security & Foreign Policy: With a New

Preface and Afterword. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2009. McGinn, Shelia E. "Glossary." John Carroll University: Biblical Studies and Early Christianity.

October 19, 2009. Accessed October 08, 2011. http://www.jcu.edu/bible/bibleintroreadings/Glossary.htm.

"Millenium Development Goals." Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World. Accessed

September 18, 2011. http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/. Morphet, Sally. "Multilateralism and the Non-Aligned Movement: What Is the Global South Doing

and Where Is It Going?" Global Governance 10 (October/November 2004): 517-37. doi:http://journals.rienner.com/doi/abs/10.5555/ggov.2004.10.4.517?journalCode=ggov.

Muldoon, James P., JoAnn F. Aviel, Richard Reitano, and Earl Sullivan. The New Dynamics of

Multilateralism: Diplomacy, International Organizations, and Global Governance. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2011. Kindle.

Neack, Laura. The New Foreign Policy: Power Seeking in a Globalized Era. Lanham, MD: Rowman &

Littlefield Publishers, 2008. Kindle. Nye, Joseph S. "Review: Neorealism and Neoliberalism." World Politics 40, no. 2 (January 1988): 235-

51. Accessed September 16, 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/201036. Ott, David H. Palestine in Perspective: Politics, Human Rights & the West Bank. London: Quartet Books,

1980. "Our History." Human Rights Watch | Defending Human Rights Worldwide. Accessed October 12,

2011. http://www.hrw.org/node/75134.


33'

! Schmitter, Philippe C. "Three Neo-Functional Hypotheses about International Integration."

International Organization 23, no. 1 (January 01, 1969): 161-66. Accessed September 16, 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2705772.

Scholch, Alexander. "The Demographic Development of Palestine, 1850-1882." International Journal

of Middle East Studies 17, no. 4 (November 1985): 485-505. http://http://www.jstor.org/stable/163415.

Shiffer, Zalman F. "The Debate Over the Defense Budget in Israel." Israel Studies 12, no. 1 (Spring

2007): 193-214. doi:10.2979/ISR.2007.12.1.193. Shimko, Keith I. "Realism, Neorealism, and American Liberalism." The Review of Politics 54, no. 02

(Spring 1992): 281-301. Accessed September 16, 2011. doi:10.1017/S0034670500017848. Shultziner, Doron. "Contemporary Israel: Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Security Challenges (review)."

Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies 28, no. 1 (Fall 2009): 177-79. doi:10.1353/sho.0.0508.

Smith, Charles D. Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2010. Steinberg, Gerald M. "The Politics of NGOs, Human Rights and the Arab-Israel Conflict." Israeli

Studies 16, no. 2 (Summer 2011): 24-54. doi:10.2979/israelstudies.16.2.24. Tabensky, Pedro Alexis. "Realistic Idealism: An Aristotelian Alternative to Machiavellian

International Relations." Theoria 54, no. 113 (August 31, 2007): 97-111. doi:10.3167/th.2007.5411306.

Tyler, Aaron. "ENCOUNTERS WITH ZIONISM: A RIPENED VISION FOR

PEACEMAKING?" International Journal on World Peace 28, no. 1 (March 2011): 67-84. Academic Search Complete.

"UNGA Partition Plan, 1947 (UN 181)." Map. In United Nations General Assembly. 1949. Accessed

October 13, 2011. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-H70vmOj1C5s/TezUUxteqKI/AAAAAAAAA5g/_k9k46EBayA/s1600/palestine_partition_map_1947s.jpg.

United Nations. General Assembly. Resolution Adopted on the Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the

Palestine Question. A-B ed. Vol. 184. New York, NY, 1947. http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/resguide/r2.htm.

United Nations. General Assembly. The Uprising of the Palestinian People. 21st ed. Vol. 43.

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/530/00/IMG/NR053000.pdf?OpenElement.


34'

!United Nations. General Assembly. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. By Charles Malik, Alexandre

Bogomolov, Peng-chun Chang, René Cassin, Eleanor Roosevelt, Charles Dukes, William Hodgson, Hernan Santa Cruz, and John P. Humphrey. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/.

"United Nations Member States." Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World. June 28, 2006.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/org1469.doc.htm. United Nations. Security Council. Resolution 605: Territories Occupied by Israel. 1987. "Universal Declaration of Human Rights." Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World.

Accessed October 08, 2011. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/history.shtml. Van, Esveld Bill. Separate and Unequal: Israel's Discriminatory Treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied

Palestinian Territories. New York, NY: Human Rights Watch, 2010. Accessed October 9, 2011. http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/iopt1210webwcover_0.pdf.

Watson, Geoffrey R. The Oslo Accords: International Law and the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Agreements.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. "Who We Are | Human Rights Watch." Human Rights Watch | Defending Human Rights

Worldwide. Accessed October 13, 2011. http://www.hrw.org/node/75136. "Woodrow Wilson's 14 Points." Welcome to OurDocuments.gov. Accessed September 16, 2011.

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true. The Zionist Idea: A Historical Analysis and Reader, ed. Arthur Hertzberg (New York, 1960), 204-9, 215-

23.


35'

!

11.0 Appendix I PLO- Palestinian Liberation Organization PA- Palestinian Association Knessett- Israeli Parliament HRW- Human Rights Watch AI- Amnesty International JA- Jewish Agency IGO- International Governmental Organization NGO- Non-Governmental Organization UDHR- Universal Declaration of Human Rights UN- United Nations GA- General Assembly SC- Security Council UNEF- United Nations Emergency Forces Binding or Non-Binding: Non-Binding is when a state has approved an agreement; however compliance with this agreement is not legally necessary. Binding is the opposite, so when an agreement is binding, states have no choice other than to accept consequences.


36'

!

12.0 Appendix II

Pales t ine Under Ottoman Empire

UNGA Part i t ion Plan, 1947 (UN 181)


37'

!

Arab Invasion o f Israe l

Post-June 1967 War: Terr i tor ies occupied by Israe l


38'

!

Oslo II Map

Camp David Proposed Map


39'

!

Separat ion Wall

!!

!

!!