Based on the development of the Afghan conflict from 1948 to 1998...I put all my points on it.

How to grasp the complicated Middle East peace process

Whenever people talk about the "Middle East", what comes to mind is always "war and bloodshed." Indeed, the situation in the Middle East has been volatile, complex and ever-changing for a long time. Some foreign scholars describe the complex situation in the Middle East as an unpredictable "political quicksand." Even senior scholars and analysts from the Middle East also believe that no one can predict it. What will happen in the Middle East

. For example, at the end of last year, after Syria and Israel resumed negotiations that had been suspended for many years, domestic and foreign media made heavy reports. Some newspapers and periodicals called it "the beginning of the realization of comprehensive peace in the Middle East." p>The curtain of peace", and some even said that "Peace in the Middle East is passing the final hurdle" and "2000 will be the year to achieve comprehensive peace in the Middle East." In the eyes of the media, it has achieved Comprehensive peace seemed

just around the corner. However, Syria and Israel only conducted two rounds of "procedural" negotiations, and the third round of negotiations was postponed indefinitely. The Palestinian-Israeli negotiations on the "final status" that began at the end of January also ended in vain despite the involvement of the United States. In early February, due to attacks on Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon, the Israeli army bombed power plants and civilian facilities in Beirut and other cities in Lebanon. After that, it also bombed Hezbollah in Air strikes were carried out on bases in the Bekaa Valley. The situation in the Middle East has undergone an almost "dramatic change".

Nonetheless, we believe that the Middle East issue, like anything else, has its own

objective development laws. Since the Middle East issue is affected by many factors, it has added irrational elements and variability, but it is not completely irregular. Then, the following aspects

are the main factors for understanding, understanding, and grasping the current development trend of the Middle East peace process

About the staging of the Arab-Israeli conflict

Although the Arab-Israeli conflict is an unfinished conflict process, an overall inspection and phased study of the Arab-Israeli conflict that has lasted for more than half a century will help to grasp

The development trend of the Arab-Israeli conflict makes our analysis of the development trends of the Arab-Israeli conflict more objective

and closer to the facts.

According to the main characteristics of the different historical periods of the Arab-Israeli conflict, its development process can be roughly divided into three stages (periods): namely, the comprehensive confrontation stage, the strategic stalemate stage, and the political stalemate stage.

The treatment and solution stage.

1. The comprehensive confrontation phase of the Arab-Israeli conflict (from the late 1940s to the late 1970s)

. The "Partition Resolution" adopted by the United Nations in 1947, the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, and the subsequent outbreak of the Palestinian War opened the prelude to a comprehensive Arab-Israeli confrontation. This period was characterized by tit-for-tat political and economic struggles between the Arab and Israeli sides: at the Arab League Council convened in 1950, the Arab League adopted the The treaty clearly stipulates the Arab stance on Israel. At the Fourth Arab Summit held in 1967, the "three principles" on Israel were further defined. No policy" (no recognition, no reconciliation, no negotiation

). Fierce military confrontations include the four famous Middle East wars: the Palestine War in 1948, the Suez Canal War in 1956, and the June 5th War in 1967.

war, the "October War" of 1973.

At this stage, Arab countries are the main aspect of the conflict and play a leading role in the development of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

2. The strategic stalemate stage of the Arab-Israeli conflict (from the late 1970s to the early 1990s). Egypt

Former President Sadat's trip to Jerusalem at the end of 1977 broke the long-term pattern of all-out confrontation between the Arab and Israeli sides and started some direct negotiations. Arab countries initially adopted boycotts and sanctions against the "Egypt-Israel peace talks," but after entering the 1980s, they gradually gave up their long-standing "three no's policy" toward Israel. In fact, it was Acknowledges the existence of Israel and the lands it occupied during the 1948 war. The realist historical changes in Arab countries' stance towards Israel have a significant impact on the development process of the conflict. However, Israel still adopted a tough stance and even launched a war of aggression against Lebanon in 1982 (also known as the Fifth Middle East War). The Arab-Israeli conflict has thus entered a stage of strategic stalemate in which conflicts and negotiations are intertwined and struggles have ups and downs. At the beginning of this stage, Arab countries were still the main aspect of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Later, roles changed, and Israel gradually became the main aspect of the conflict, dominating the situation. The development process of the conflict.

3. The stage of political settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict (from the early 1990s to the present).

Marked by the Middle East Peace Conference held in Madrid in October 1991, the Arab-Israeli conflict entered the stage of political settlement. Both Arab and Israeli sides realize that war and confrontation cannot resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. As a result, both sides' positions on the conflict have changed to varying degrees: Arab countries have further expressed their willingness to On the basis of United Nations resolutions and the principle of land for peace, Israel is also willing to negotiate "conditionally". Although small conflicts between Arabs and Israelis continue to this day

, the factors that lead to large-scale wars have been significantly reduced, especially as the main aspect of the Arab-Israeli conflicts

- The change in Israel's strategy towards Afghanistan has made political settlement of the conflict the "main theme" of this stage. The Middle East peace process that began at the Madrid Middle East Peace Conference is not an emergency strategic adjustment by the Arab and Israeli sides, but a logical development after the Arab-Israeli conflict enters the third stage. Therefore, its overall development trend is irreversible.

Israel’s overall strategy towards Afghanistan

In the long-term conflicts and struggles, Israel has developed from a small country in a corner of West Asia to a powerful country in the Middle East, especially in the Middle East. The diplomatic strategy of allying with the United States has "expanded" its comprehensive national strength, changing the past situation of being passively beaten and becoming the main aspect of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In the Middle East peace play a leading role in the process. Therefore, analyzing Israel's overall Arab strategy is of great significance for grasping the trend of the Middle East peace process.

From the perspective of the balance of power between Arab and Israeli sides, the Arab countries (as a whole) are far ahead of Israel, which means that Israel is at a disadvantage. But if every Arab country is compared with Israel, Israel is in an advantageous position. Israel is well aware of this subtle relationship in the balance of power, especially the "differences" in Arab countries' own national interests. Therefore, in its overall strategy against Afghanistan, Whether in a war environment of all-out confrontation or in complex peace negotiations, we always adhere to the strategy of "defeating Arab countries one by one". Once upon a time, Israel's strategy of "defeating them one by one" was tried and tested on the battlefield of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and it has also tasted the sweetness many times in peace negotiations.

At the beginning of the Madrid Middle East Peace Conference (that is, the stage to determine the procedures for Arab-Israeli peace talks

) Israel has always insisted on conducting "group bilateral negotiations" with relevant Arab countries and opposed the proposals put forward by Arab countries. A "package" solution is used to eliminate the Arab countries' overall advantages and turn their disadvantages in the "overall" balance of power into bilateral negotiations in separate groups. The "advantage" in. Since then, in specific negotiations with Arab countries, Israel has always maintained a tough stance for its own national interests. When negotiations with a certain opponent were blocked or reached a deadlock, it Seeking to achieve some kind of progress or breakthrough in negotiations with another opponent, thereby exerting influence and pressure on other opponents. The resumption of negotiations between Syria and Israel at the end of last year was a "repetition of the old tactics", and the negotiations on the final status of Palestine and Israel that were launched at the end of January this year also happened to be the first time that Syria and Israel It started against the backdrop of three rounds of negotiations being postponed indefinitely.

Although Arab countries clearly see the stakes involved, in the end, because the Arab world is composed of more than 20 independent and sovereign countries, their policies and positions towards Israel are also determined by their own

They vary depending on the differences in national interests. If the Arab countries were able to maintain a relatively consistent "unified camp" during the period of comprehensive Arab-Israeli confrontation, the "Camp David Accords" signed between Egypt and Israel in 1978 caused serious divisions in the Arab world. After the Arab-Israeli conflict entered the stage of political settlement in the 1990s, although Arab countries often coordinated with each other, they could no longer form a "united front" and the overall advantage was Nature will disappear.

The Arab-Israeli peace talks have been going on for 9 years since the Madrid Middle East Peace Conference. After Jordan and Israel signed a peace agreement and normalized relations, there are still 3 years left in the Arab-Israeli peace talks. Group

bilateral negotiations (i.e. Palestine and Israel, Syria and Israel, and Lebanon and Israel). Among the three groups of negotiations, Israel is in an advantageous position against any negotiating opponent; on the Arab side, Syria is the strongest, and Lebanon maintains a "special relationship" with Syria. Relations", its policy towards Israel depends to a large extent on Syria, while Palestine is relatively weak. In this sense, any progress in other grouped bilateral talks will objectively affect the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations and put the Palestinian side under greater pressure.

The main issues currently affecting the peace process

The following aspects affect the progress of the Arab-Israeli peace talks from different angles and are indispensable for analyzing the development trend of the peace process in the Middle East

important factors ignored.

——Troublesome issues facing the Arab-Israeli peace talks.

Since the Madrid Middle East Peace Conference, the Arab-Israeli peace talks have achieved a series of breakthroughs and achieved many major results, including the mutual recognition between Palestine and Israel and the signing of the "Principles of Provisional Palestinian Autonomy" "Declaration" (1993)

, "Cairo Agreement" (1994), "Oslo Declaration" (1994), "Taliban Agreement" (1995), " Hebron Redeployment Agreement (1997), Wye Memorandum (1998), Sharm el-Sheikh Agreement (1999), etc.

A series of important agreements, as well as the signing of a peace treaty in 1995 and the normalization of relations

etc. But overall, the problems that have been solved are basically relatively minor "peripheral" problems, while the remaining problems are more difficult core problems. For example, Palestine’s establishment of a state and its territorial delimitation, the Jerusalem issue, the Golan Heights issue, water resource issues, Palestinian refugees and Jewish immigrant settlements are all very important. Sensitive issues involve the national interests of the Arab and Israeli parties, so every penny has to be weighed, which in itself increases the difficulty of negotiations. Some issues (such as the Jerusalem issue, which is not only a spiritual symbol of the Jewish nation, but also an Islamic holy site, involve emotional issues for Muslims around the world), and Arab countries have also established special Jerusalem Committee) is probably not entirely

can be resolved through bilateral negotiations.

——The difficulties caused by the disparity in strength between the two sides. The weak do not have bargaining chips in negotiations and do not have much room for maneuver; it is also difficult for the strong to willingly hand back what they have taken by force or even at the cost of blood and lives. land and other vested interests

. Although the liberation cause of the Palestinian people has received widespread support from all countries in the world,

after the declaration of the founding of the state in Algiers in 1988, it has been officially recognized by more than 100 countries.

But it suffers from the lack of Strength: So far, it has not clearly defined its territory, has no formal capital, and does not have a regular army. It is not even an "independent and sovereign country" in the true sense.

Because of this, Arafat has repeatedly announced that he will establish a state in Palestine itself. The Palestinian issue is precisely the core issue of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations will involve many sensitive and thorny issues. This "deviation between reason and force" has kept Palestine in a "relatively passive" position in this protracted negotiation.

——Obstacles in legal procedures. In 1980, the Israeli Knesset passed legislation declaring Jerusalem the eternal and undivided capital of Israel. A year later, it passed a bill to implement Israeli law in the Golan Heights. The "annexation" of the two places was completed

. In January 1999, the Israeli Knesset passed the "Golan Heights Act" on the third reading. The bill stipulates that any Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights must be approved by the parliament and passed in a referendum before it can be implemented. Israel is a country that implements a parliamentary democracy. It is also a country in the Middle East with a relatively complete legal system and a relatively high degree of democracy. Then the Jerusalem issue and the Golan Heights issue involved in the Arab-Israeli peace talks must face Israel's existing legislation and bills. This means that no Israeli government can resolve the issues of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights without passing new legislation (at least legislative amendments) or a referendum. . As the right-wing forces in Israel are still very strong, it may be difficult to successfully clear the obstacles in the legal process.

——Israel’s ruling coalition faces trouble with judicial investigations. On January 27 this year, Israel's Attorney General announced the launch of a judicial investigation into the Israeli ruling coalition "One Israel" for allegedly illegally collecting huge donations during last year's election. . Naturally, it also reminds people of the time when the right-wing forces investigated the issue of his wife's foreign savings (which was said to be only more than

$20,000) in order to contain Rabin. Previously, the Israeli State Auditor General submitted an investigation report to the Knesset, believing that Barak and his aides used certain "non-profit organizations" to raise campaign funds, which was a serious crime. Violation of relevant Israeli laws. Accordingly, it requested that the "Only One Israel" alliance be slapped with a heavy fine of 13.7 million Israeli sheikhs (approximately 3.5 million U.S. dollars). There are reports that in fact, all political parties in Israel have the problem of "illegal raising of campaign funds" to varying degrees. However, when the Middle East peace process is at a "very critical" moment, it will be difficult to rule out the "color of partisan struggle" in the judicial investigation of the Israeli ruling coalition.

The negative impact of the peace process, of course, also reflects that the right-wing still has considerable power in the country.

In addition, it should also be noted that although the United States is the main external force in promoting the peace process, it can neither "cover everything" nor proceed from its own interests. Nor is it intended to be so.

What's more, Clinton's presidential term is coming to an end. In the United States, such presidents are often called "lame ducks", which not only means that their political journey will not go very far, but also their political influence. To "discount".

************

To sum up, last year the Syrian-Israeli negotiations resumed again after many years of interruption, and this year the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations

It is certainly a good thing that the negotiations on the final status have been restarted, so that the deadlocked peace talks can get out of the "dead end" and the "peace train" can continue to move forward. However, as the current problems

are all very difficult, the negotiations between Syria and Israel were interrupted due to serious differences in security arrangements and commitments to withdraw troops from the Golan Heights. Palestine and Israel have conducted about 20 public or secret negotiations on the final status, but have failed to achieve any substantive progress. Objectively speaking

there is still a long way to go to achieve comprehensive peace in the Middle East. Whether it is Syria-Israel negotiations or

Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, there are many very thorny issues for both sides. It can be solved through negotiation, bargaining

and compromise. During this period, hardships, twists and turns, and even repetitions are inevitable. However, it may be difficult to solve all the thorny issues mentioned in the article within the current timetable. If

some kind of framework or principled agreement can be reached, it would be very impressive. It worked.