Realism and the Israeli Palestinian Conflict

The Gaza Strip conflict between Israel and Palestine has been at the forefront of international relations debates for the past few decades. Though a complicated and hard to describe issue, it is relatively clear that both sides are using realism as their bases for interaction with their enemies. Clearly, this realist ideology, and the actions it causes have done nothing to resolve the conflict, and a change in thinking may be needed. Realism can be defined as a very self-empowering theory, in which a state’s primary goal is to be more powerful than other states, usually militarily. Basically, the state is the most important entity, and the main focus should be on maintaining and strengthening the state, usually to the detriment of other states. That being said, both sides should start to look at different methods of interaction, because there is still only bloodshed and animosity between them.

           

            The conflict has taken an extremely realist approach on both sides, especially recently as there seems to be even more armed conflict that may boil over into international war. Realism places an intense focus on self-preservation and even improvement, often at the expense of other states or peoples. Both Israel and Palestine demonstrate these kinds of ideals, especially in a military sense. Specifically, in the past few years Israel has completely revamped its defense system and now has one of the most technologically advanced and trained militaries in the entire world. This is because they are worried about their own security and feel they must do whatever it takes to protect them and improve their current situation. The safety of citizens and the protection of the state are the ultimate goal, and Israel has improved its defensive and offensive capabilities in order to achieve these goals.

            On the other side, the Palestinian people fighting for their own land and rights also take up realist tactics. Even though there is no actual Palestinian state, leaders and citizens, especially Hamas, are constantly focusing on better equipping themselves to forcibly win back the land that used to belong to them. By using other humans as shields, constantly bombing cities and even committing ground invasions on the other side, both Israel and Palestine are using violent, state sponsored realist ideologies in order to better themselves, often at the detriment of their enemies.

            This realist ideology has not been effective, however, at curbing violence and war that has led to bloodshed and death for both sides. The emphasis on military might and violent conflict has led to thousands of misplaced people, death and further animosity between the two sides. In my opinion, both sides should switch to a more liberalist view of the situation and focus on mutual interdependent to hopefully find a good solution for each of them. Though this is a lot easier said than done, I believe in the end this viewpoint would be the best in making sure that both sides get what they want, and don’t lose people through war while getting it. Liberalism has a heavy emphasis on rationality and interdependence in order to strengthen both sides, and in turn, the rest of world that is involved. Liberalism is one of the best methods for this situation, as it would lead not only to a drop off in military presence and violence, but it would also lead to interdependence between both states, and a betterment of the situation for both parties.

            Right now, both the Israeli state and the Palestinian freedom fighters are thinking within the realist scope of thinking and this has led to unheralded violence and death. Though not a reasonable assertion right now based on the history and the current situation of the conflict, both sides should undertake more liberalist principles. Liberalism would be a better result for both sides as there would be less violent war and more assisting of each other.