Pakistan Lens: the Israel-Palestine Conflict

In Blog, Human Security
June 3, 2021
Hamna Sajjad
31 Views
0 comments

During the last days of the Holy Islamic month of Ramadan, violence unfolded at Masjid Al-Aqsa between Palestinian worshippers who were praying their evening prayers and the Israeli forces. Since then, violence has followed and countries around the world have condemned the disproportionate use of force by Israel, calling for an end to this conflict.

During the last days of the Holy Islamic month of Ramadan, violence unfolded at Masjid Al-Aqsa between Palestinian worshippers who were praying their evening prayers and the Israeli forces. Since then, violence has followed and countries around the world have condemned the disproportionate use of force by Israel, calling for an end to this conflict. Pakistan, along with other leading Muslim nations, has demanded for immediate cessation. However, it may be possible for Pakistan to take military action to defend Palestine through the 34-state Islamic military alliance and to also become a voice of reason if the two-state solution is again considered, due to the country’s own history of independence.

Pakistan does not recognize Israel as a state, the way Egypt does since 1979, Jordan since 1994 and, recently the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain have done. Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan has expressed, “Whatever any country does…our position was made clear by Qaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah…that we cannot…accept Israel as long as Palestinians are not given their rights and there is no just settlement.” If Pakistan is to recognize Israel and ignore the “tyranny faced by the Palestinians,” he said that Pakistan will then have to give up the cause of Kashmir. However, last year the PM expressed that he has been under “pressure” to recognize Israel, mostly from the United States (US). Unfortunately, the Federal Minister for Human Rights, Shireen Mazari has expressed that the pressure is still prevalent.

By refusing to accept, it is thought that Pakistan is missing out on major economic support as a developing nation which is economically dependent on external aid, and on the improvement of relations with the US. Although this is understandable, as accepting Israel means that the US will become less suspicious of Pakistan; that it will be able to obtain advanced weaponry; and, that India will no longer be able to use its warm relations with Israel as an advantage. Nevertheless, the Federal Minister explained that the condition for Israel to have a just settlement with Palestine will stand. Furthermore, the Pakistan army’s spokesperson, Major General Babar Iftikhar expressed that the Pakistani Army agrees with the decision.

The Palestinian Embassy has also expressed gratitude, saying that “Palestinians consider Pakistan as our second homeland and Pakistanis as out dearest brothers.” This shows that Palestine is overlooking the dark past between them, specifically the time of “Black September”, when the Jordanian military launched an operation to expel the Palestine Liberation Organization from the country. Then, Pakistan had training the newly equipped army of Jordan.

Additionally, there is a sentiment in Pakistan, to send the Pakistani army to Palestine. But this is an unworkable solution, not least because of the amount of investment needed. However, a method that is far more feasible is one which has been used whenever such destructive conflicts erupt between nations, i.e., the taking to international platforms to raise their voices on an international level.

So, early this week, Pakistan Foreign Minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, spoke at the United Nations General Assembly, highlighting how that one third of the civilians which have been killed by Israel are women and children and that more than fifty thousand Palestinians have fled from Gaza. He pointed out how Israeli airstrikes take down entire buildings, the recent building to fall being a news tower, and how there is limited access to food, water, and health services. He expressed that the Security Council should call for the ceasing of Israeli attacks “even at this eleventh hour” and if it fails to do so, the General Assembly must make this demand on the behalf of the entire international community.

However, nations have also stood with Israel in this conflict. The Deputy Chief of Mission in India, Rony Yedidia Clein, expressed that “countries in Europe flew Israeli flag over their government buildings…they know that our actions were necessary and just.” She also expressed that although the Indian government did not voice their support, there is an understanding between them, whereas the public has voice “great amount” of support. But the support of India for Israel is also clearly seen in the implementation of the Israeli model in Kashmir, whereby individuals who have lost their right to buy and own land and the freedom to work in the government, by the scrapping of Article 370 and 35A of the Indian Constitution. With the removal of the status of Jammu Kashmir as a state, evictions of Kashmiri Muslim nomads have also taken place, forcing them to leave their homes which they have, suddenly, been living in ‘illegally’.

Nevertheless, the possibility of Pakistan acting to defend Palestine should not be overlooked, although it will need to be collectively taken by most, if not all, Muslim nations. The statement concerning the 34-state Islamic military alliance expresses the aim of the alliance as the protection of the Islamic nation “from evils of all terrorist groups and organizations…which wreak death and corruption…and aim to terrorize the innocent.” Taking into consideration the current situation of Palestine, Israel is wreaking death, if not corruption, upon the Palestinian people, as there is a clear disproportionality between the military strength of Israel and Palestine. But because the deaths are argued as being Israel’s right to self-defense, Palestine too has that right.

The Islamic alliance has the means and the aim to take military action but the interpretation of “terrorist groups” is vital, whether it will be interpreted in a broader sense, considering how Israel has violated twenty-eight international resolutions which are legally binding and innocent Palestinians are indeed being terrorized. But where action is being taken by Israel to protect its civilians, there is no action being taken to protect the civilians of Palestine. If Israel has the right to self-defense, Palestine too has that right.

Also, Pakistan may be able to further the two-state solution which was reached in 1993, as it is a nation which came into being after the minorities, Muslims, fought for their right to practice their religion freely, without oppression. Where Pakistan can place itself in both Israel’s and Palestine’s shoes for both, among other things, are demanding the right to self-determination. Although, as a Muslim nation, Pakistan does hold a greater duty of care towards Palestine. Therefore, although the two-state solution, if considered, will need to be revisited and remodeled to reflect a clear benefit for both nations to co-exist, Pakistan can indeed become a voice of reason for both parties.