‘History in conflict: Israeli–Palestinian speeches at the United Nations, 1998–2016’

ABSTRACT

A close textual study of Israeli and Palestinian speeches at the annual UN General Debate from 1998 to 2016 demonstrates how conflict is embedded in historical presentations. At the same time, the exclusionary, zero-sum history in these UN speeches becomes one of several obstacles for moving from conflict to conflict resolution. Conflict and history’s public manifestations are mutually reinforcing. From a thematic perspective, Israeli leaders talk about victimization, existential insecurity, and ancient Jewish roots. Palestinian leaders covered a similar range: the Nakba (catastrophe) of 1948, existential insecurity, and right and justice. While neither party directly delegitimizes the other’s nationalism at the United Nations, both sides trumpet their own commitment to peace and the other’s peace failings. From a symbolic perspective, the article addresses the numerical base of Palestinian speeches, UN Resolutions 181 and 194, and Arab–Israeli Wars in 1948 and 1967, and how they relate to land and demographic disputes. In conclusion, the article suggests how a conciliatory history that opens the door to conflict resolution, or itself is a sign that the door has been opened, might read.

KEYWORDS:

• Israel
• Palestine
• United Nations
• conflict resolution
• history
• nationalism

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Carl D’Oleo-Lundgren and Matthew Parent for research assistance. For helpful comments, I thank the editors of this journal, the anonymous reviewers, Robert Blecher, Jonathan Cristol, Richard D. Brown, Scott Lasensky, Robert Wishart, and the participants in presentations at the University of Connecticut Humanities Institute and the University of Jordan. The viewpoints and any remaining errors are mine alone.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. One also could study the history–conflict nexus in other texts such as newspapers, official statements, textbooks, and even historical fiction (novels).

2. Note also that Israel sees threats originating from multiple adversaries, not just the Palestinians, so Israeli speeches also comment on Hizballah, Iran, and Syria. Iran is often the primary focus of Israel’s rhetoric, and I do address that to some degree. However, these other relationships are not my main focus in this article.

3. In 2005, there are four additional, positive references to the removal of settlements as part of Israel’s disengagement.

4. Pre-1967 West Jerusalem was 38.1 km². After the 1967 war, Israel imposed Israeli law and administration – what most people see as tantamount to annexation – on the 6.5 km² of Jordanian East Jerusalem as well as on an additional 64.4 km² that had been part of the West Bank but Israel incorporated into municipal Jerusalem.