A Reaction: The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

President Truman, 1945,
“I have hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism: I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents”(US History,1)

U.S. involvement in the Arab-Israeli conflict seems to be primarily motivated by U.S. trade and oil interests in the Middle East rather than for humanitarian reasons. The U.S. appears to be primarily motivated to resolve conflict in Israel and Palestine simply as a means to control the perception and feeling towards the U.S. in the Middle East. The U.S.’s involvement in Israel-Palestine is a function of foreign policy rather than a sincere humanitarian effort to end violence. The U.S. wields considerable control over the UN and sway in the world. U.S. foreign policy in regards to other ‘humanitarian crisis’ like Rwanda and Darfur suggest that the U.S.’s foreign policy is motivated first and foremost by U.S. trade interests rather than by a desire to provide humanitarian aid. The creation of Israel as a state for the Jews in 1948 was a post WWII decision made by Britain and the U.S. This makes the U.S. and Britain directly responsible for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and leaves the U.S. not as an impartial third party in U.S. backed peace negotiations ,but rather as one that is bias and has vested interests in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If the U.S. found new sources of energy perhaps a discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be less prevalent in U.S. politics