Abstract
The paper provides a detailed assessment of the Arab/Israeli conflict and its influence on tension between the Islamic world and the West. The paper examines a number of religious factors and issues such as the status of Jerusalem and its importance in Islamic tradition which, it contends, is the primary reason for Muslim antipathy towards Israel. According to the paper, it is the West's consistent support of Israeli that has ultimately caused the resurgence of anti western sentiment in the Arab Muslim world and terrorism.

From the Paper
"The historical relationship between the Muslim world and the West has often been one of enmity and distrust. Moreover, in recent years the divisions have appeared to become more protracted and divisive. In definitional terms it is sometimes problematic to use ambiguous terms like Muslim and Western 'Worlds'. However, it is nonetheless important to note that that the history of relations between the two has invariably been characterised by "continuing and deeply conflictual relations between Islam and Christianity".
"This historical tendency towards disagreement and division has manifested itself in a number of ways. Central among these is the ongoing conflict between Israel and her Arab neighbours which since the establishment of the Israeli state in 1948 has come to personify the lasting nature of disagreement between Islam and the West. Moreover, although some academic authorities have attempted to play down its significance; it is certainly possible to see the manner in which religious motivation has often formed the foundation on which age old tensions rest. As such, any assessment of the modern conflict between Israel and the Arabs must ultimately be based on a religious foundation whilst simultaneously accounting for other factors."

Tags:islam, christianity, jerusalem, arab, prophets, religious

Abstract
This paper introduces, discusses, and analyzes the topic of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Specifically, it discusses diplomacy regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict during the period December 1968 - September 1973. The paper concludes that, even though diplomacy throughout the Middle East occurred from the end of the Six-Day War in 1967 to the Yom Kippur War in 1973, it did not solve the crisis in the Arab-Israeli Conflict, and it has not solved the problems in the region even today.

From the Paper
"One of the reasons diplomacy was so necessary was because of the Israeli occupation of several territories during the Six-Day War. They took over eastern Jerusalem, the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights, and streams of refugees left these areas after Israeli occupation, creating widespread relocation and resentment throughout the Arab world. This was the main reason so many Arab nations refused to negotiate with Israel. Even the UN resolution cited the need for Israel to return at least some of the contested territories, but Israel refused without direct negotiations, and the other participants simply refused those direct negotiations. "

Tags:humiliating, defeat, diplomacy, weak, mediator, UN, resolution, peace, agreement

Abstract
This paper presents an interesting look into the Arab-Israeli conflict. It covers the conflict from the early 1900s, up to and including the current Intifada that began in 2000. It also discusses such subjects as the historical background of European Zionism, the emergence of Zionist terrorism during the ill-fated British Mandate and the birth of Israel as the result of a UN vote. According to this author, it is the continued Israeli occupation and not, the refusal of many Arab countries, or of the Palestinians, to recognize the right of Israel to exist, that is at the root of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

From the Paper
"Since 1967, the Palestinians have become bitterly reconciled to the existence of the state of Israel. They have no choice but to do so: Israel is the only power in the region with nuclear weapons. It also has the US for its major backer. (Each year Israel receives between $4 billion and $5 billion a year, mostly in military aid, from American taxpayers.) What Palestinians have demanded since 1967, and are still demanding, is that
Israel withdraws from the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, so that the Palestinian state envisaged in the UN resolution of 1947 can be created. In the meantime, they live in a "protracted state of political subjugation and economic dependence" (Morris 568).
The most critical development in recent years is the Israeli policy of settling the occupied territories with Jewish families. Settlement expansion into the occupied territories was first advocated by the Movement for the Whole Land of Israel and has been official policy in Israel since the rise of the Menachem Begin's Likud (Revisionist Zionist) party to power in May 1977. Between 1977 and 1984, one hundred new settlements were built on occupied land (Morris 567). By 2001, as many as 400,000 Israelis had been settled in areas of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and Jerusalem and its environs. As a result of the illegal settlements, public opinion in many countries has grown much more sensitive to the Palestinians' plight. During the 1970s and early 1980s, the Palestinian cause was not always highly regarded outside the Muslim world on account of its resort to sensational acts of terrorism. However, by the mid-1980s, the PLO was viewed increasingly as representing the victims of the conflict. Many informed people have since come to the conclusion that the well-armed and financed Israelis are no longer simply defending the right of their tiny little state to exist, but are actively using their powers to oppress the Palestinians and prevent them from founding the state to which they are entitled."

Tags:occupation, terrorism, zionist, united, states, soviet, union, britain, hostility, population, rebellion, plan, peel, palestinian, international, immigrants, existence, settlements, bombings, suicide

Abstract
The paper demonstrates how the Arab-Israeli conflict started before the 1948 creation of the modern state of Israel. The paper provides the background of Zionist ideology, the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the Balfour Declaration, the Hebron Massacre, the British restrictions on immigration and the impact of World War Two. The paper discusses the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) proposal for a two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict that was ignored. The paper chronicles the War of Independence and the Six Day War and contends that the only reasonable way to end the conflict is to create a Palestinian State. The paper believes that Israel must be willing to surrender some of its territories, and anti-Israeli terrorist organizations must be squelched systematically.

From the Paper
"The genesis of the Arab-Israeli conflict predated the 1948 creation of the modern state of Israel. Ottoman colonialism had scarred the Middle East for centuries. During World War One, French and especially British intervention in the region exacerbated an already heated conflict between Arabs and Jews in Palestinian region. The political trend toward nationalism also encouraged the Zionist ideology.
"Zionism began as a loosely organized grassroots movement in Europe during the late nineteenth century that encouraged Jews in Diaspora to claim a homeland territory in Palestine. Zionism was not a universal theme among Jews, and in fact many Jews living in Palestine and abroad opposed the creation of a modern Israeli nation-state (Beinin & Hajjar). The primary impetus of Zionism was to create a political nation-state with distinct geographic boundaries in Palestine. The new nation would encompass ancient Jewish territories including those regions and cities held sacred by both Muslims and Jews."

Tags:Zionism, Ottoman, Empire, British, Balfour, Declaration, Palestine

Abstract
This paper argues that the present manifestation of the Arab-Israeli conflict is basically a conflict over land. The paper claims that this conflict is rooted in the strong and ancient claims of two peoples--Jews and Palestinians--to the same small piece of land in the Middle East. A history of the State of Israel is presented, including a synopsis of the wars fought. The different Israeli prime ministers and governments are discussed.

From the Paper
"Ben-Gurion stepped down as prime minister in June 1963. His efforts at building the Israeli state had brought him into conflict with his own party's ideology, and the international Zionist movement. Gathering about him a group of younger leaders in 1965, notably Shimon Peres and Moshe Dayan, Ben-Gurion organized a new political party, Rafi, though he eventually retired from politics permanently in 1970 when that party failed to generate support. Ben-Gurion's successor, Levi Eshkol , had much less experience in defense issues and relied heavily on Rabin. Neither the Jordanian nor the Syrian borders were quiet during the years leading up to the Six-Day War, but all Israelis were taken by surprise when in May 1967 increasingly violent clashes with Palestinian guerrillas and Syrian army forces along Lake Tiberias led to a general crisis."

Tags:ben-gurion, eshkol, zionism, dayan, peres

Abstract
This book covers the reasons for the Arab-Israeli Conflict and its escalation. The paper describes how the book presents an historical overview of events that all combined to lead up to the conflict. The paper quotes the authors who maintain that European intervention provoked the Muslim world in the late 1700s causing the Muslims to established a long-standing tradition of fighting to hold on to their land and their way of life. The paper notes the professionalism and techniques employed throughout this book. The paper concludes that Israel and the Arab world need to work together for peace, but this book suggests that there may simply be too many barriers in the way of that ever actually occurring.

From the Paper
"Ultimately, the two groups fighting seem to be fighting a no-win war. The text calls this the "zero-sum" approach and notes, "[O]bservers argue that Arabs will never really accept Israel's legitimacy and its permanent presence in the region and that Israelis will never accept the right of the Palestinians to national self-determination and statehood. This view holds that the conflict is zero-sum" (Lesch, and Tschirgi 4). However, others do not hold to this approach and believe that somehow peace can ultimately be achieved in the Middle East. Some cite the American and European involvement in current affairs as adding fuel to the conflict, and others cite how the two nationalist movements are so dissimilar, accord will be extremely difficult to reach and maintain."

Tags:Palestine, peace, legitimacy, terrorism

Abstract
This paper looks at how the recent history of the Middle East has been dominated by the long-standing Arab-Israeli conflict or more specifically the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It evaluates the strategic importance of the area because of its vast oil reserves makes the continuing volatility in the area doubly important. It explores the history of the problem, identifies some key areas of controversy and looks at the differing perspectives of the people belonging to the left, the neoconservatives and the far right in the U.S.. It also examines which branches of the U.S. government have been involved with the issue and analyzes whether the government's response has been effective and according to the people's wishes.

From the Paper
"Following a UN Resolution calling for a partition of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, Israel declared its independence On May 14, 1948. Several wars have been fought between the Arabs and Israelis since then. The first was fought immediately after the formation of Israel which the Jewish state surprisingly won. The war also resulted in the displacement of a large number of Palestinian refugees who settled mostly in refugee camps in the neighboring Arab countries. Most Palestinians still live in those camps. The second Arab- Israeli war followed the nationalization of the Suez Canal by Egypt in June 1956, and the third was the pre-emptive strike in 1967 by Israel on Egypt, Syria and Jordan. In all of these wars, the Arabs were thoroughly humiliated. The six-day 1967 war resulted in the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights and all of Jerusalem. It also resulted in a second wave of Palestinian refugees."

Tags:u.s., oil, palestine, jewish, state

Abstract
This paper examines the U.S. role as a superpower in the Arab-Israeli conflict and the position that the U.S. has taken throughout. American policy is analyzed in light of its respective relationships to the Arab world and to Israel and the Jews.

From the Paper
"As World War II drew to a close, and the planet was forced into a recalibration of unprecedented proportions, the United States began its long emergence as the most expansive super-power that had yet been known. Its influence, that would compete virulently with the post-war Soviet influence for half a century, has since disseminated into every facet of the geopolitical theater. As such, American support can operate as the determining factor in the success of a national agenda. Likewise, American dissent can be the stifling roadblock that sets nations adrift in failure and, consequently, resentment. So it's important to acknowledge that a nation's complaint of American neglect is more than just the bitter rhetoric of the disenfranchised. The emphasis placed on American approval and volition is fairly justified when one considers the weight and implication of the US stance on any given topic. And it's certainly fair to say that American intervention has been as significant a factor in the Arab-Israeli conflict as have been the opposing belief structures characterizing the two sides. As such, it's also reasonable to suggest that, as present evidence would purport, Israel's ascension to power and success in spite of violent opposition from all of its borders, could only be an indication of America's intense support."

Tags:superpower, mideast, Balfour, UN, WWII, zionism, Suez, Egypt, Jordan

Abstract
This paper states that, although there are significant political, cultural, historical and geographical aspects of the dispute over the "Holy Land", the Israeli-Arab conflict is based on deeply rooted religious beliefs and attitudes held on all sides. The author stresses it is essential to understanding of the basic beliefs of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, their similarities and differences, conditions for the permissibility of war and killing and the significance of the Holy Land. The paper concludes that when religion is involved a peaceful reconciliation can come from the differing faiths only when their interests are combined.

Table of Contents
Introduction
Judaism
Christianity
Islam
Conclusions: Is Peace Possible?

From the Paper
"Islam shares some key beliefs with the other two faiths. For example, Muslims believe in the total "unity" of God much like in the Jewish faith. Further, Muslims also share the same Prophets with Judaism and Christianity. These include Adam, Noah, Moses, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus (whom they regard as a prophet, and not divine). Further, they also believe that Jesus was born of a virgin birth just as in Christianity. Even in areas of practice, Islam shares some striking similarities with the other faiths. For example, Muslims do not eat pork (like observant Jews), and they also share many of the same moral rules (no sex outside of marriage, the prohibition of killing and stealing, etc.). However, Islam differs radically from Judaism and Christianity in that it does not allow the drinking of alcohol, does not observe the Sabbath on the same day, and considers Jewish and Christian believers to be in grave error due to their rejection of Jesus and Muhammad as legitimate prophets."

Tags:resolution, terrorists, arab-christian, muslim, judaism

Abstract
In this paper it is shows that the origins of the Israeli/Arab conflict reflect the Jewish Nation, and how American funding helped to build their army. In this manner, the creation of a military helped to oust the Palestinian who now had to leave due to the Jewish presence in the region. The paper argues that by creating a military complex through U.S. support, Israel used their military to validate land acquisitions, which they could not defend. Also, through American military support and training, the Jewish state was encouraged and fostered in its earliest stages through American intervention.

From the Paper
"This political study will examine the origins of the military intervention by the United States in Israel, as well as the economic aid that began the conflict with the Palestinians in the region. By understanding how the United States funds the military complex of the Israeli military, one can realize how the `conflict' between Arab and Jew was created and propitiated through violence and political struggle between the two societies. The early aspects of the Israeli-Arab conflict in Palestine can be defined from the past financial international military aid America has given to Israel since the 1960s. The growing rate of military aid up until 1982 was of paramount importance to stability in a region with strong ties to American Jewish lobbyists and others interested in formulating a Jewish state since the end of World War II."

Tags:israel, conflict, palestine