Free how can alternative dispute resolution methods specifically arbitration help solve the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Dissertation Example

0 / 5. 0

how can alternative dispute resolution methods specifically arbitration help solve the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

Category: Business

Subcategory: Communication

Level: Masters

Pages: 7

Words: 1925

LITERATURE REVIEW

Name
Course
Date

Literature Review
Arbitrating the dispute between Israeli and Palestine territories has been a significant concern for the global community as many consider it to be the best option besides meditation. Trying to solve the dispute between Israel and Palestine have taken more than two decades. Various people have shown intentions of having a constitutive strategy that would work between these two countries. The continuous ineffectiveness of the negotiations taking place between Israeli and Palestinians have shown that either of these countries cannot trust meditation. The Obama administration tried to bring peace to these countries. However, after more than two decades of talks involving American diplomats, it looks like the main functions of mediation or any other conflict resolution methods other than attribution have failed.as a result, many people are suggesting that it is better to try the strategy as it had worked in several other countries that had the same disputes. Arbitration can be used to solve many problems. One reason for the success of attribution is the inclusion of a cause that has to be respected by both countries. There is a contract that can legally be used to force a resolution to help in the dispute.
Historical BackgroundThe history of Israel Palestine conflict started with the establishment of Israel in the year 1948. Israel became a state after members of the Israeli group decided to relocate to the country where people who had been evicted by Adolf Hitler from Germany would settle peacefully. The conflict also came from the violence between communities within the mandatory Palestine that existed between the Israelis and the Arabs. Some people trace these conflicts to the year 1920 as it had its roots on the hostilities that came from the early wars in the region. Currently, the conflict is continuing at various levels. Before the First World War, the Middle East region was under the control of the Ottoman Empire for more than 400 years. This included the Ottoman Syria, which is currently regarded as Palestine. Palestine was separated from Jerusalem, Syria vilayat, and Beirut wilayat. The Arab Muslims mostly inhabited these regions with few Christians and Jews. National movements such as Zionism and Arab nationalism was the major conflict starting point within the 19th century. The aspirations by the Jews people to return to Zion was the main part of the religion for more than one millennium. The other results that most of the Jews people who lived in Europe and others within the Middle East started to discuss how they can immigrate back to the land of Israel and established the Jewish nation. These movements were seen as political especially in the late 1890s. It was that time when many of the conflicts started to arise.
Historical Background of Arbitration and Mediation
When it comes to the historical background of the process of arbitration, it can be traced back to the American mediation process that was essential to the settlement of Arab Israelis movement and was supported by the records in the history. These records involved direct negotiation that took place in the year 1994 between Jordan and Israel. There have also been other negotiations and agreements have been done with the help of the mediators from America. The mediation process helped in establishing peace between Jordan and Israel without the intervention of the American mediators. Within the Middle East, there have been various interventions including the disagreement of Henry Kissinger disengagement agreement that took place between Egypt, Syria, and Israel after the 1973 Yom Kippur conflict and war. Jimmy Carter is another example with the Israeli Egyptian peace treaty that was signed in the year 1991. From the year 1949, there have been agreements signed by Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel. All these treaties were made with the help of the American negotiators. They were all mediation strategies. One of the most famous United Nations mediators is Ralph butcher that played a vital role in this negotiation by offering the state department access to Washington policymakers so that they could get the United States and recognition that was necessary by the time. The Oslo accords that took place between Israel and PLO was also an intervention that was mediated successfully by the third-party. However, the lack of success while implementing their codes in the Norway mediations created doubts about the merits of involving a third party who could not guarantee and implementation of the agreement. A problem usually arises when the mediators do not give the strategies in the agreement. Usually, there is no access to the third party. The third-party mediation has been an important ingredient especially when it comes to places such as Oslo accords. However, the broader context cannot be separated from the main issue which is usually peace. In the first place, there have been several successful mediations that have taken more than 60 years. It is therefore not conclusive that the American negotiations within the Middle East have been successful as most of them have been ongoing despite these interventions.
Additionally, most of the successful cases were preceded by regional events, and there was an association that involved a third party which was more powerful than the two countries involved. The Arab oil embargo had a massive influence on the diplomacy of the America people on the Middle East. After the first gulf war had ended, there were numerous regional opportunities that American administration wanted to develop new visions in the Middle East. Therefore, it was necessary to have a third party intervention because of their limited channels of communication. As can be seen in these processes, the mediation process can no longer be used in the case of Israel and Palestine. It is, therefore, better to use the attribution where the members have something that is binding them.
The Continuous Israeli–Palestinian Stalemate
The ongoing climate of the existing relationship between Israel and Palestinians was quite different from the statement that had been encountered during the intermediaries when this conflict took place. Numerous direct channels of communication existed between this parties, especially those that had been established through security operations between Jerusalem and Ramallah. It is clear that American mediation was not indispensable. However, third-parties may not be engaged with the Americans continuously failing with their mediation. The lack of success with mediation has made others start thinking about presenting cases that can be used with arbitration.
The Case for Arbitration
Arbitration can be used while settling disputes which are mostly terrorists in nature. A successful arbitration case was in1968 when there were the agreements between India and Pakistan in Rann of Kutch settlements. The other is the Beagle Channel which was the success in settling the conflict between Chile and Argentina in the year of 1999. All these cases that involved countries had a conflict over a boundary. Through the use of arbitration, there was peace in countries such as Bosnia, as well as the recent case of Sudan and Abyei cases that had started in the year 2008. Mediation refers to judicial methodologies that are used while settling conflicts. It is just like jurisdictions that advocate for a commitment on behalf of the two parties so that they accept a settlement based on the international conventions. The settlements are also based on the past findings and agreements between the two parties that have been having problems. However, adjudication of the parties is usually established within the international courts such as the international criminal court. Arbitration is also flexible and gives a provision for both parties to have the freedom of choosing an arbitrator and the person who is going to be in charge of the arbitration panel. In arbitration, there are well-specified methods of defining boundaries within the judicial proceedings. This method is successful because it is different from the meditation process which is the open end and the parties do not have any power. Arbitration is also legally binding. Hence, the case for Israel and Pakistan can massively benefit from the arbitration because of the legal for both parties.
Several advantages are associated with arbitration when solving a conflict. One of them is that arbitration preserves the confidentiality of the people that are involved as long as the message is kept secretive. It also saves on the fees and other meetings that are necessary especially if it is a legal matter. Arbitration has more limited discovery and therefore does not require any intervention from any legal authorities. Numerous states are experiencing misunderstandings between themselves. Both of these parties, especially those from the Israeli and Pakistanis, will be able to support their stands that there is an agreement. It cannot be achieved in mediation. Arbitration has been successful in many countries because of some advantages.
The main advantage is that both parties get to decide on what agreement they want to have and they also decide on the arbitrator. It is different from the former conflict resolution method enforced the United States – mediation. It also has legalities that have to be accepted by both parties. The main weakness of this method is that it can also not be respected because the binding laws can easily be broken. Apart from this, many countries lack the resources to solve their disputes. Throughout history, the need for fresh water has caused different states to get into war and have allowed confrontations to jeopardize their understandings. Competitions sometimes result in differences in the development and status of the environment. Both of them will have a say in the issues affecting them. There was an Israeli Palestinian agreement that was signed to allow the two countries to operate together. However, these have not been successful as thee are no legal commitments to the agreements. Hence, there are still substantial gaps that have remained key to the issues. With the increasing commitments that have been signed by both parties, it is better to consider whether a diplomatic void can be filled through other approaches to conflict. Through the arbitration process, various success has been realized that could not be achieved through the use of the mediation process. This can be a massive step for the Israeli Arab conflict resolution.
As most scholars recommend, the continuous failure of the mediation process calls for a different approach to help solve the conflict between Israel and Afghanistan. These two countries have had little success with the mediation processes. Some coutries have also lost the full meaning of examining their mediation processes between Israeli and Palestine. The demise and effectiveness of the American mediation of Israeli and Palestine conflict presents the best case of the arbitrator on a territorial dispute especially when it takes place over the western bank. Arbitration can be considered as an advantageous process of mediation because it has the ultimate aim of attractions on the grounds to achieve a binding and a lasting solution to the conflict. Besides, noting the good faith of both parties is an important condition especially if they want to realize a successful attribution process. Successful historical proceedings in 1988 between Egypt and Israeli is an example of an arbitration process that can be given. It also had a similar conflict to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. All in all, even though arbitration has not acted as a panacea when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it is important to have potential merit and research into the possibility of using it instead of mediation to improve on the conflict between the two countries.
Bibliography
Honeyman, Chris, Sanda Kaufman, and Andrea Kupfer Schneider. “Should They Listen to Us? Seeking a Negotiation/Conflict Resolution Contribution to Practice in Intractable Conflicts.” Journal of Dispute Resolution 2017, no. 1 (2017): 9.
Kaufman, Sandra, Chris Honeyman, and Andrea Kupfer Schneider. “Should They Listen to Us: Seeking a Negotiation/Conflict Resolution Contribution to Practice in Intractable Conflicts?” J. Disp. Resol. (2017): 73.
Mattes, Michaela. “Chipping Away at the Issues” Piecemeal Dispute Resolution and Territorial Conflict.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 62, no. 1 (2018): 94-118.
Menkel-Meadow, Carrie. “The Case for Mediation: The Things that Mediators Should Be Learning and Doing.” (2016).
Merrills, John Graham. International dispute settlement. Cambridge university press, 2017.
Miall, Hugh. The peacemakers: Peaceful settlement of disputes since 1945. Springer, 2016.
Pely, Doron. Muslim/Arab Mediation and Conflict Resolution: Understanding Sulha. Rutledge, 2016.
Rubenstein, Richard E. Resolving structural conflicts: how powerful systems can be transformed. Rutledge, 2017.
Salem, Walid. “Beyond Exacerbating Asymmetry and Sustaining Occupation: An Alternative Approach for United States Intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.” (2018). Singer, Linda. Settling disputes: Conflict resolution in business, families, and the legal system. Rutledge, 2018.
Wallensteen, Peter. Understanding conflict resolution. SAGE Publications Limited, 2018.

All Examples

Do you need an original paper?

Approach our writing company and get top-quality work written from scratch strictly on time!

Get an original paper