By Vanessa Tomassini.
This opinion article originally appeared on the Italian “Strumenti Politici” on October 16th, 2023.
The world needs real and lasting solutions beyond the law of the strongest, convenience agreements or alliances that guarantee elite interests. The system, where the oppressor becomes the victim and the oppressed the executioner, increasingly attacks the vulnerable. Against minorities who, having nothing left to lose, see violence as the only possibility to survive. Every human being would like to live with dignity. But when even the most essential rights, feeling their identity lost and suffering ignored, violence and armed struggle are seen as legitimate. If we don’t get to the heart of every issue, be it the crisis in the Middle East or immigration, it will never be possible to reach substantial solutions. Political decision-makers should face their responsibilities before the communities they represent, preventing situations from degenerating into inhuman tragedies.
Security and economic prosperity, historical responsibilities
Security and economic prosperity are essential to stability. These two precious ingredients have been well consolidated in Europe since the end of the Second World War but only partially applied in other areas of the globe, particularly in the Middle East. Following the First World War, the British supported the birth of a Jewish State in Palestine, already a land of disagreements and divisions, carrying forward its traditional foreign policy based on the concept of “divide and conquer”, already widely implemented in India, where they fueled the disputes between the tribes who, by fighting against each other, facilitated their domination.Between 1920 and 1921, the Arabs started to express their dissent against the English mandates, not only due to the problem of territorial occupation but, above all, Shiite religious presence. Most of the Islamic world is of Sunni faith and it differs from the Shiite community on the succesion’s leadership in the Islamic community. The Sunnis believed that any Muslim could access a leadership position, provided he had good morality, sufficient doctrine, and a healthy and good constitution; the Shiites, however, believed that the leadership of the Islamic community should be reserved for the descendants of the prophet.Tensions continued until 1936, with the outbreak, on 19 February of that same year, of the Great Arab Revolt, which spread to the entire country. Only after six months, in October 1936, the violence decreased for about a year, until in 1937, the Peel Commission decided to recommend the partition of Palestine between Jews and Arabs, a clear change of direction compared to the political lineup followed by London. The issue was postponed until the end of the Second World War when a new Western actor, the United States, became part of the history of the Middle East.Therefore, Washington found itself within the commission to resolve the problem of the partition of Palestine. In February 1947, the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Clement Attlee, no longer able to maintain order in Palestine, decided to hand over the British mandate to the United Nations. The UN considered two options. The first was the creation of two independent states, one Arab and one Jewish, with the city of Jerusalem placed under international control. The second consisted of the creation of a federal single state which would include Jews and Arabs. This Resolution 181 was rejected by the vast majority of Arabs living in Palestine and all of the already independent Arab States.At first, they rejected any division of Palestine, claiming the entire country. The majority of Jews in Palestine accepted the partition because they rejoiced that the birth of their independent state would be achieved. However, the conclusion was that it was “manifestly impossible” to reach an agreement, as the positions of both groups were incompatible, but that it was also “indefensible” to agree to support only one of the two positions, despite all this being said, the resolution came into force on 14 May 1948, when the independent State of Israel was proclaimed.Without paying too much attention to the security of that part of the globe, on the same day, the withdrawal of British troops from the new State began, immediately recognized by both the USA and the USSR. At the announcement of the resolution, alongside the happiness of the Jewish population, serious riots broke out due to the reaction of the Arabs of Palestine. The armies of Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Iraq, and Lebanon, united in the Arab League, invaded the territory of the new state, giving rise to the first of the Arab-Israeli wars.From that date to now, very little has changed, except for some agreements aimed solely at protecting the geopolitical and security interests of the signatories.
In an interview with Omar Shakir in August 2022, the Israel and Palestine director of Human Rights Watch (HRW) warned that “the agreements between Israel and some Arab countries have not improved the human rights situation on the ground.” Shakir reported “a record number of home demolitions and an increase in settler violence. These abuses continue despite claims by some governments that they have taken these steps to improve the situation of Palestinians.”These words today sound like a confirmation of the global need to find concrete solutions to the challenges of our times rather than obsolete agreements. Israel justifies itself by claiming its right to exist but military control, a presence imposed by force from the beginning, perhaps should have made room for the question: for how long? Whether or not a state can exist to defend itself with weapons forever.
Democracy or hypocrisy, people without identity and ignored rights
Over the centuries, European Jews emigrated to the holy city of Judaism in search of a homeland in the territories of Palestine where they could profess their beliefs. In the region, which gave birth to the prophets of the great monotheistic religions, a Jewish minority has always existed, as in North Africa, as demonstrated by the synagogues, the ancient finds, as well as the artistic and architectural testimonies in Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt. Countries that today do not hesitate to describe themselves as “Arab Republics”, effectively eliminating any diversity in the affirmation of their own national identity.The Palestinian question does not differ substantially from many other minorities who have found themselves deprived of their identity. In Libya, the Tuareg and Tebu, without national numbers but with an administrative number, were deprived of the right to vote by the electoral law approved last week by Parliament. It is no coincidence that in southern Algeria, the Twareg rose against the government, accused of taking a position of support for distant Palestine while remaining silent in the face of the Azawad tragedy.The Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh recently saw their world collapse. For about thirty years, they had been living in a de facto independent territory within the self-proclaimed Republic of Artsakh until, last September, Azerbaijan launched a lightning offensive to wipe out any resistance from the Armenians. The authorities of Stepanakert, the capital of Nagorno-Karabakh, were forced to lay down their arms and then announce their dissolution starting from 1 January 2024. A hard blow for the population, already hit by almost ten months of blockade imposed by activists Azerbaijanis, who deprived them of food and medical supplies. Thus began the exodus, fearing ethnic cleansing, with columns of cars lined up towards Armenia. Families took what they could, leaving most of their possessions behind.While Israel’s offensive on Hamas in Gaza continues, Turkey still signs Kurdish and Syrian terrorist groups in various forms, including the military option. Following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, the Allies had envisaged a Kurdish state in the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres. However, this promise was forgotten three years later when the borders of modern Turkey were established in Lausanne, leaving the Kurds with minority status in their respective countries. That also resulted in numerous nationalist claims resulting in various rebellions activities and systematic genocides, particularly in Syria and Iraq. And then there is the issue of the Uighurs, a cultural genocide characterized by a violent series of human rights violations perpetrated by the Chinese government under the direction of Xi Jinping’s Communist Party, which persecuted the Uighurs and other ethnic minorities and religious in Xinjiang and its surroundings. Since 2014, China has pursued a policy that has led to over a million Muslims being detained in re-education camps without legal proceedings in what some describe as the largest detention of ethnic and religious minorities since the Second World War.
The spiral of hatred and violence
Violence can only widen the spiral of hatred, death, and desire for revenge across borders. Palestine represents a visceral cause for millions of Arab Muslims, which beats at the bottom of the hearts of even the youngest. With the recent escalation of violence, the political issue has taken on the tone of a religious war. Political leaders’ statements risk fueling the extremists’ rhetoric. Instead of avoiding motivating, justifying, or fueling terror by supporting one party or another, social pages have transformed into stadium banners, as for our squares, divided between those carrying Israeli flags in defense of democracy and those who join the Palestinian cause. Life is worth more or less depending on the nationality of those who lost it. Are the families suffering more or less according to the color of their passports?If only we took to the streets with the colors of peace, a white flag, a sign of surrender, but above all of the new beginnings, in addition to military control, walls, and barbed wire, condemning every form of terrorism and, at the same time, every violation of human rights. The world needs to promote a liberal and democratic solution, whether a two-state solution or a federal organization, if we believe in every individual’s right to live in peace rather than a religious war, which history is already full of bloody pages. Death and destruction only fuel the rhetoric of terrorist organizations that proliferate and survive in this climate, feeding off darkest feelings and innermost fears of human beings.