If one would make an effort to compare news sources on the various clashes between Jews and Arabs on their mutually claimed home soil, we would quickly come to the understanding that the developments between those two parties are merely recurring routine events. First, there is an information shortage on the first strikes. Then mutual accusations are voiced. In popular discourse, the same age-old topics are rolled out carrying catchphrases such as “a simple guide”, “an overview”, “what is behind all this”, and many other news phrases to lure the drama-loving reader – almost as if the multi-layered war between Palestinian Arabs and Jews is a freshly occurring event. Popular media campaigns of solidarity flare up briefly and for a couple of days, the civil society picks its sides. Diplomatic heads ensure that they will do anything to secure peace, democracy and freedom. But with every new prominent occasion of violent clashes between the two sides, one side gradually gains more power and this policy problem is moving towards an end. However, at this point, the superficial and mechanical treatment of such a persistent element on the global policy agenda does make clear that nobody is truly interested in the development of Israel or Palestine, depending on whom you side with. And that is one of the main reasons why Palestine will not become an outright state on Israeli soil.
The frequent recurrence of the Arab-Israeli conflict, thus, functions as a mirror for the societies we live in. On various levels, we can analyse and expose the poorly working human mind that is already so overwhelmed in understanding its own being that it outright refuses to reflect on its irrationality. As the world talks about the Jews and Arabs and their conflict, we can identify a multitude of irrational and destructive patterns of behaviour. First and foremost, we need to acknowledge that the reactions of the global population are paralysing. Although it seems that most of the civil population in the Arab and European nations of the world seem to side with the Palestinians, grounded in its glaring power disadvantage towards Israel, the outrage has not translated into tangible policy actions in the respective nations. In relation to how strongly the opinions on this war are voiced, one would expect the populations to try to exert some degree of pressure on the political cadres. But with this missing, one needs to ask whether this event is not simply a topic unconsciously perceived as negative entertainment. Over the last decades, numerous atrocities happened within this ongoing conflict and civil response not only became weaker but little to no effects of popular outrage can be recorded.
Second and closely related to the first point, this conflict is highly exploitative of the emotionality of the general public. The Arab-Jew conflict is probably the number one conflict where atrocities on women and children are most referred to. News always portrays the opposing camp as immoral by emphasising how they kill children, women and parts of the population that is generally considered innocent – for example, attacks on hospitals and schools. All those news are deliberately placed on the agenda to trigger the emotionality of viewers and listeners. This conflict relates to more than 2 billion Muslims and more than one billion white people in the world. The interest in this conflict is triggered and kept up with emotional attachment that makes this conflict even more relatable. Paired with the little real action, that we have talked about above, the conflict in Israel/Palestine is treated as a giant circus that paralyses the citizens, who cannot but drown in catchphrases and anxiety about the future of this planet.
If you do not believe this cynical approach, then it would be interesting to know whether you have reflected on the protests in Israel against its own government earlier this year. A rare occasion in a homogenous right-wing society which all of a sudden turned against their own far-right government. A man like Netanyahu, whose sole purpose is to serve the vision of the Torah, made concessions and reversals as a response to his own people’s discontent. There is little that could convince me that a man of his nature has the humbleness to accept the will of a mass over its own. The current intensification of the war with Arabs is a convenient coincidence merely 6 months after the biggest internal crises of Israel in its recent history, though only treated casually for a couple of days by the biggest news outlets in the world. Politically, it was also quite convenient that during this ongoing conflict, hundreds of young people were atrociously killed during a festival. It might be that the moderately thinking protestors back in early 2023 can emotionally relate to those people killed at the festival and might now look more favourable to the harsh response by Netanyahu towards the Palestinians. It might also be that this incident brings Jews yet closer together. From whatever perspective this conflict is looked at, it brings so many advantages to Israel – all while its international reputation remains rather intact.
Finally, people still have the illusion that ethnic conflicts over territories can be sustainably resolved. A regular power-politically or economically motivated aggression can be rectified and again be turned into lasting development. But whenever two societies struggle over one land, the premise is that one people needs to give up or will be destroyed. There cannot be a two-state solution. Not because it is not desirable – who does not want this bloodshed to end? However, if both sides’ norms and values are solely centred around inhabiting this land and both sides do not have anywhere else to live, then both sides’ future survival is tied to winning this struggle. Ethnic conflicts, sadly, are “either-or” conflicts. And with the stark power discrepancy between Palestine and Israel, we must admit that the Palestinian people will likely vanish within the next century. Israel wants to win in the long run. It is moving step by step and utilising all the political side effects to its advantage. This current conflict will end soon and in one to three years, the next offensive will be launched – probably when there is once again civil turmoil in the USA or Europe. Then you will again share sad and emotional videos, change your profile picture, ask the question of why this world is so rude, use hashtags and condemn Israel. The European media will again balance their news coverage to avoid clashes with Israel but also remain sympathetic towards the Muslim world. Other states will keep their weak stances towards the situation and voice how they wish this all ended. Palestinians will stick to their ineffective warfare and blame the world for not helping them. And Israel will gain a little bit more of their holy land. The circus continues.
