中文
By Bobby Naderi
An old and explosive battle in the Middle East has flared up once again with the current escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict following Hamas's unexpected attack on southern Israel, storming towns and killing soldiers and civilians alike. The surprise offensive prompted Israel to declare a "state of war" and launch retaliatory strikes on Gaza, one of the most densely populated areas in the world.
There are no simple answers to this complex and entrenched issue. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict's enduring and combustible nature is a result of historical grievances, territorial conflicts, security worries, leadership difficulties, global participation, settlement growth, and a lack of respect and trust amongst parties. Emphasizing neutrality in the face of this new war is crucial since choosing sides will only fuel further hostility and violence.
The protracted conflict has severely damaged the basic foundations of international law in addition to wreaking devastation on the lives of those directly involved. Global stability, human rights, and diplomatic standards are tragically eroding as the violence increases and the humanitarian crisis widens. With a complicated past and several facets, this conflict has far-reaching effects that go well beyond the boundaries of Gaza and Israel.
The danger of a two-front conflict involving Israel and both the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in Gaza and the armed group and political party Hezbollah in Lebanon is ever-present. Such a scenario could have devastating consequences for the Middle East. There are already reports of the Israeli Defense Forces taking preventive measures along the Lebanon-Israel border during the ongoing violence, underscoring the potential for escalation. More importantly, a two-front conflict can sabotage the reconciliation process between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Multiple entities involved in an escalation in the unstable region run the risk of causing extensive destruction and escalating instability. It is imperative that all parties understand the need to de-escalate the situation and create an atmosphere that is supportive of global diplomatic efforts.
The folly of taking sides
Choosing sides in the face of the ongoing violence has repeatedly shown to be ineffective. Supporting one side over the other increases animosity, widens gaps, and eventually lengthens the suffering experienced by ordinary Israelis and Palestinians. What's needed is a fair, balanced approach rather than showing favoritism and double standards.
In the past, the U.S. has been a major player in mediating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, confidence among Palestinians and the larger Arab world in the U.S. ability to mediate has decreased due to Washington's favoritism towards Israel. The vital perception of impartiality necessary for successful mediation is further undercut by the close political and military ties between Washington and Tel Aviv.
Recent U.S. actions, such as recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital and moving the American embassy there, have come under fire for potentially jeopardizing East Jerusalem's status as the future Palestinian capital in negotiations for a two-state solution – Israel for the Jewish people and Palestine for the Palestinian people. And so alas, U.S. President Joe Biden pledged support for Israel after Hamas carried out the October 7 attack. Predictably, these acts have increased Palestinian doubts about Washington's ability to serve as an unbiased arbitrator.
In the face of mounting casualties, however, it is imperative to put a stop to this new war without resorting to more political gimmicks. It is crucial to understand that merely taking sides in the battle will not do much to solve the underlying problems. Instead, both Israelis and Palestinians must put their people's welfare first and choose a peaceful route over a futile, inextricably entwined conflict.
The case for international mediation
International mediation of the Israeli-Palestinian issue is not just a need but a preferable choice. Due to its prior involvement in these negotiations, the United Nations is well-positioned to lead the international effort. The international organization's objectivity and competence in resolving conflicts make it an excellent mediator.
China, Russia, the United States, and the European Union can all be included in a coalition of varied states that is assembled as part of an international effort, each of which brings its own perspectives and negotiation strategies.These international actors can contribute to a comprehensive, multilateral approach that takes into account not only the primary conflict but also refugee problems, and economic development.
The two-state solution is still seen as the most practical way to improve ties, resolve historical resentments, and move toward cohabitation and mutual trust. By applying pressure to both Israelis and Palestinians to uphold their obligations, stopping any slide to a wider conflict, and returning to the negotiating table for genuine engagement and cooperation, international intervention can translate the two-state consensus into action.
In these tumultuous times, the risks of escalation, regional instability, and human suffering are too great to ignore. It will take perseverance, flexibility, and a dedication to resolving these fundamental problems for there to be a permanent peace and security. While there are obviously obstacles in the way, resolving this lengthy conflict will require international communication, diplomacy, and a shared vision of peace and prosperity for Israelis and Palestinians.
Bobby Naderi, a special commentator on current affairs for CGTN, is a London-based journalist, guest contributor in print, radio and television, and documentary filmmaker.
