It is hardly an exaggeration, even to staunch advocates of Zionism, to assert that the still-absent universal legitimacy of the state of Israel rests almost solely on full Palestinian recognition and acceptance of the Jewish state. After all, Israel was created at the expense of the indigenous Palestinians, on Palestinian land.

Indeed, Israel has enjoyed recognition by the majority of international society since May 1948, including some Arab regimes (most notably Egypt and Jordan), albeit with some “reservations.” However, ultimately, without a sincere Palestinian effort to adapt their socio-political culture and philosophy to the reality of Israel, the larger Middle East conflict will continue to be fuelled, and even amplified. Therefore, at what expense is Israel willing to sustain its illegal colonisation of what remained of Palestine (the West Bank and the Gaza Strip), continue its brutal oppression of the Palestinians, and most importantly, uphold its ostensible policy of pursuing a military solution to the Palestinian-Zionist conflict?

If Israel’s political and military establishment continues to foolishly undermine a key prerequisite of Israel’s legitimacy (Palestinian acceptance), then it will jeopardise the very principles it seeks to preserve and uphold, including Israel’s right to exist.

This is not a threat; this is a fact. This seemingly-outdated analogy has been repeatedly voiced by Palestinians throughout the past 58 years, however, in light of the post-9/11 doctrine governing international society and order, hence a declared vision (or lack of) to re-arrange the dynamics of the Middle East to conveniently suit US hegemonic interests in the region, a word to the wise must be said, not least to remind Israel of its short-sighted interpretation of reality and caution its allies against the paradox of enforcing a one-sided solution of the conflict that excludes the Palestinians and fails to take into primary consideration their rights, their needs, and their narrative.

The major sources of instability in today’s Middle East, Iraq, Iran, and the Syria-Lebanon (HizbAllah) equation, are all bound, at some level, by one principle: hostility towards Israel. While Iraq has come to epitomise the failures of US foreign policy in the Middle East, Iran is increasingly posing a strategic (nuclear) threat to both Israel and the US. To even contemplate that the US would provoke a third military front (after Afghanistan and Iraq) is nothing short of political and strategic naivety. An already restless and fatigued public back home can never accept any justification for going to war with Iran, especially if this is done under the rationale of protecting Israel (particularly as there is an increasing awareness in mainstream political thinking in the US of the fact that the root causes of anti-American sentiments in the Arab and Islamic worlds are founded on the US’ blind support to the Jewish state, at the expense of the Arabs).

The Syria-HizbAllah equation is equally destructive. HizbAllah takes strength from its declared antagonism against Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine, and despite its authentic Lebanese foundations, its loyalty towards both Syria and Iran may well overwhelm the US in any contemplated offensive against any of them, in particular following the guerrilla group’s unprecedented demonstration of its ability to strike the heart of Israel in the recent Israeli war of aggression against Lebanon.

Therefore, on the basis of rationality and political pragmatism, a just solution to the Palestinian-Zionist conflict is the best possible scenario, even for Israel. The ramifications of opting for war would ultimately lead to the intensification of hostility towards Israel, and a continued rejection to its existence.

After one painful attack on US soil (9/11), a reckless US invasion of two countries (Afghanistan and Iraq), a tragic war of destruction on Lebanese soil (the HizbAllah-Israeli war), and an escalating nuclear threat reminiscent only of the Cold War itself (Iran’s inevitable capability as a nuclear power), the imperatives of peace in the Middle East are back to basics: the beginning of the end of the Arab-Israeli conflict can never see the light without the end of Israel’s illegal occupation of all the territory captured in the June 1967 War, a just solution to the Palestinian refugees’ issue (on the basis of UN Resolution 194), and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

Rami Bathish is director of the Media and Information Programme at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH). He can be contacted at mip@miftah.org