When reading the Pressman article an important question arose…why in May, 1967 did the UN willing leave the Sinai Peninsula where they had been since late 1956 when it was requested of by Egypt? Immediately after the UN peacekeeping unit left the area, Nasser announced that Egypt course of action was to liberate Palestine and enter in battle with Israel. It seems irresponsible of the international community to comply with Egypt’s request in light of the continual conflict in the region. I am wondering if there were any bilateral agreements between UN countries during the time of the decision or some other explanation for this move.
Another interesting comment that was made by Dumper in his article was why Jerusalem has been disputed over throughout the years. He says that geographically and economically, the growth and importance of Jerusalem just does not make sense. He claims Jerusalem’s uniqueness is essentially political and religious. I completely agree with this statement and feel that this is why the Arab-Israeli conflict is all the more complicated. When a conflict is entrenched with religious, political, and ideological confrontation; irrationality and passion will override reasonable solutions.
I agree with your statement that it was irresponsible of the international community to give in to Egypt. I also really enjoy your final word "..irrationality and passion will override reasonable solutions." Very profound and well thought out.
ReplyDeleteYour first paragraph raises an interesting point. I find it very interesting that the UN gave in to Egypt. I feel they had to know the consequences that would arise from doing so. It just doesn't make sense. But then again, a lot of things in this situation don't.
ReplyDelete