|
There are a number of points worth making here:
The UN handling of the new Israeli state only happened after the British left due to escalating Jewish terrorism (bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946 among others) and related escalating Arab violence.
The mandate declaring Israel was not agreed on by any of the directly affected parties i.e. The people who's land was being aquisitioned.
A huge population of displaced Europeans rapidly moved into a culturally sensitive location with the backing of the Allies/UN. Considering the issues people are making today over normal, controlled immigration, you can imagine how this might have appeared to the locals. Again, if this had happened in your home-town, how would you have felt?
It is of course, bound to cause conflict. Imagine the fuss if 1 million Arabs all decided to move into Las Vegas, with the support of all the US states except Nevada. How do you think the Nevadians would swallow that? Might there be some conflict?
The invasion of Israel after its inception was a logical thing to do, it would have been much easier (from the points of view of the surrounding nations) to nip Israel in the bud at the outset, rather than allow it to establish itself. That abortive attempt failed, and Israel remained.
Now conflict is conflict. Conflict against a vastly stronger (read better equipped by its allies) foe normally expresses itself as so-called terrorism. That's what terrorism is, you attack the weak parts of your enemy because the strong parts are too strong for you to do any damage.
The truth is that today, Israel is far too strong to seriously fear a millitary attack. Instead, it's neighbours fear Israel's further expansion.
We either make efforts to calm those tensions, or we consider the alternative which is for one side to win completely.
|