Nowadays, it is generally accepted to consider that the Arab-Israeli confrontation is at the heart of all the Middle East region problems. As a result, the willingness of the international community to see a panacea of all the Middle East troubles in a peaceful settlement of the conflict became an axiom. In such a way, the main thesis is the following: the decision of the Arab-Israeli conflict is possible in the case of the absolute refuse of imposition specific rules of political behavior on the Arab world community, and implementation into practice the own rules of the right political and social existence.
The first step in the problem solving process is to identify the problem. Thus, the Arab-Israeli conflict is often represented as a confrontation between Israel and the Arab world, united in a monolithic block (with the support of a wide range of Muslim countries) that is notable by implacable hostility toward Israel, and by a firm determination not to recognize the legitimacy of its creation and existence, and the desire to destroy it as a ‘cancer on the body of the Arab world’ . According to this interpretation, the Arab League is a kind of permanent institutional expression of the total war of Arabs against Israel, claiming to be a kind of ‘demographic exceptionality’ in the region, and seeking to prevent the existence of any non-Arab ethnic entities in the heart of the Arab world, using the Palestinian problem as a preposition, and the Palestine Liberation Organization as an instrument of de-legitimization of Israel and its physical destruction.
The second step in the problem solving process is to identify who is adversely affected and who has the power to solve the problem. In such a way, Israeli people are adversely affected party because the whole Arab world is trying to destroy Israeli nation, and Israeli political leaders have the power to solve the problem because the destiny of the country is in their hands.
The third step is to propose possible solution and identify possible benefits to both Israeli people and Israeli leaders. Taking into account the fact that the vast majority of Arab and Muslim countries do still believe that Israel was established illegally and the Arabs are not going to recognize its legitimacy, Israeli leaders should implement strict rules to all the Arab-Israeli citizens who run counter to their political regime and social existence.
To explain this kind of solution it is possible to state that it will benefit Israeli side because any country needs to keep a certain political order on its territory and to be confident in own citizens. Israeli people should remember that they do not only have rights but also duties, and it is in the efforts of Israeli leaders to test the citizens of the country on their readiness not only to protect the own land but also to be anxious about its development and prosperity. For the purpose to test the own citizens in practice, Israeli leaders may implement obligatory service either in military or labor army. For instance, if the Arab – Israeli citizen does not want to serve in the Israeli army, it is his right, and society cannot prosecute him for this. But society, in its turn, can give the person another right to serve in the army of labor: it means to give the person a hand shovel instead of submachine gun. This means no service – no voting rights, because people who are not going to work for the sake of the own country should be deprived of the right to vote and be elected. The benefit of such policy would be great because Israeli society would deprive itself from unnecessary members among political elite, as well as the Arab electorate. The Israeli leaders would benefit of the absence of possible political competitors, while Israeli people would benefit from the feeling of total freedom and safety on the territory of the own state.
Rejwan stated that the Arab side strives for creation of Arab state in Palestine and for elimination of Israel. Thus, basing on this statement it is possible to suppose that the Arab side is trying to destroy Israel from inside, and for the purpose to exclude such possibility Israeli leaders should deprive the Arabs (who do not want to carry out their duties to the democratic society) of all social benefits. The savings can be distributed among all the loyal members of Israeli society who need help. As a result, the Arab citizens of Israel are a natural incentive to emigrate from Israel; the socially disadvantaged strata get the right to vote for the right-wing, while the left-wing parties will lose much of their electorate.
Finally, the Israeli leaders should be guided only by the national priorities, without any regard for the international community, especially the European Union and Russia, in all areas of their policy because the strategic interests of the latter do not include the existence of Israel. In addition, the truth is the following in the Arab-Israeli conflict: there is no and cannot be Arab states friendly to Israel, because geographical location of Israel in the heart of the Islamic world is a challenge to the latter.
In conclusion, it was explained all the necessary points how to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict in a civilized and democratic way. The national will and the Israeli leaders (who are interested in the problem) may solve the conflict only by implementing the right steps and political strategies because Israel not having taken the opportunity to solve the problem of the Arab presence between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea many years ago, has no right to lose the opportunity to remove the Arab inhabitants of Israel state by democratic process nowadays.
Khalidi, R. Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness. Columbia University Press, 1997.
Reich, Bernard. Arab-Israeli Conflict and Conciliation: A Documentary History. Greenwood Press, 1995.
Rejwan, N. Israel’s Place in the Middle East: A Pluralist Perspective. University Press of Florida, 1998.