Yom Kippur Arab Israeli Essay

This attack not only compromised Israeli security, however the Intangible onscreen was Israel's acknowledgement of their own hubris that formed after the success of the 1 967 Six Day War. As such, this prompted the shift in government, which ushered in a new, more hard-lined political party who promised settlement of the occupied territories and most significantly, maintained hostility and negated peace with the Arabs.Moreover, the Yon Kipper wars contribution Instigated the beginning of a new mindset for both the Arabs and Israelis; the conflict thus become one of strategy and leverage with the West in the attempt of maintaining supremacy. Such leverage saw the Arab world recognize the power they had over the West, most significantly the United States as they were the world's supplier of oil. This as a result fragmented the irresolute alliance the United States upheld with Israel and achieved in the sense where it made the world question the problems running rampant in the Middle Ea st.It was also because of the Yon Kipper War whereby the once disenfranchised PLOP gained International recognition and most significantly, the recognition for the need for peace and negotiations was widespread in order to resolve the evolving Arab-Israeli conflict. The Yon Kipper war can be seen as a trigger that initiated a new, revised attitude in the state of Israel. Upon the conclusion of the 1967 Six Day War, Israel emerged as the victorious underdog who quashed Its Arab foes despite unrealistic, almost impossible odds.It was because of this mindset, this â€Å"adolescent† stage In Israel's development whereby the nation's vulnerability was exposed as they were essentially caught off guard. Nevertheless, despite early setbacks, Israel was victorious in the Yon Kipper War however, Israel now recognized their defensible borders which revered as buffer zones had not been as defensible as they were thought to be thus resulting In the breach by the Egyptian and Syrian forces .In the process of Israel's retaliatory attack, they gained more territory from both Syria and Egypt and In the process of this, 12 000 Arabs and 2000 Israelis were killed. The Yon Kipper can be seen as being an important instrument of contribution to the conflict because it instigated the removal of the moderate Israeli Prime Minister Gold Meir who was discredited along with Mosher Dana the deference minister for their incompetence in retention the state against attack. Pong the removal of Meir and her labor government, the right-wing conservative opposition party the Liked was elected In promised consolidation and settlement of the occupied territories which only further added to the existing hostility amongst the Arabs. Thus, it was through the 1973 Yon Kipper war whereby Israel once against emerged victorious, however now had a firm grasp on the futility of war and their precarious position within it. Ties with the United States strengthened even further as a result of this, and was welcomed by theUS as the nation was now seen as a strategic ally that was capable of defending themselves instead of being a liability as was thought before. It was through US assistance whereby Israel gained arms and doubled its military size over the next three years that resulted in the deterioration of Arab/American relations and most importantly, the growing hostility and antagonism that was being provoked in the Middle East. Seen as the mechanism that changed the course of the war, and the world's involvement within it, Yon Kipper can be seen as the main proponent that ransomed the Arab-Israeli conflict into a war of strategy and leverage.In realizing the dependency the West had in the Middle-East for oil, the Arabs recognized that in order to progress within the war, a new strategy had to be employed; one of â€Å"quid pro quid'. On 17 October 1973, the Organization of Arab Oil Petroleum Exporting Countries OPEC adopted a Saudi-led mania Plan† whereby oil producer s would not sell oil to pro-allies countries, but would continue to sell to â€Å"friends and maybe â€Å"neutrals†. Due to this, the world was plunged into turmoil as global prices increased by 400% from SIS$3. O to SIS$12. 0 per barrel, as well as costing the US 500 000 Jobs and between SIS$10-US$20 billion. Such was the time where the world had such a strong dependency on oil, that it could simply not function without thus prompting the international community- especially the US, USSR and Europe to address the issue of the Oil Embargo. Almost immediately the SEC (European Economic Community) urged Israel to end its occupation of the occupied territory seized in 1967 and stated that the ‘legitimate rights' of Palestinians should be taken into account in any settlement in order to appease the Arabs.Henry Kissing – US Secretary of State also arranged a cease-fire between Egypt and Israel and placed a UN force between them causing Israel to cede western-Sinai in 1975. This was a great victory for the Arabs as they had made more progression through the oil embargo than through their countless attempts of gaining back territory through terrorism and violent attacks. The overwhelming significance of the oil embargo can be accredited with tempering the previously unqualified support for Israel by both the US and Europe.Essentially, without the Yon Kipper war, the Arabs would not have ad that final blow of realization that in order to â€Å"win back† the land which they claim is rightfully theirs, diplomatic measures had to be employed. In crippling the world of oil, the Arabs were able to gain international recognition for their cause and lead the world to question the situation of the Middle East and Israel's involvement within it.This change in psychology ultimately instigated the continual game of leverage between the Arabs and the West and saw the rise of the effectiveness of diplomacy causing more damage than ironically, violence it self. The conflict as such, matured uniqueness of the conflict now involved the world. The oil embargo can be seen as an example that initiated the concept of â€Å"maturing beyond fighting† which as a result, saw the employment of diplomatic warfare which auspiciously entangled prominently the US and Europe in direct economic and diplomatic relations and consequences- often detrimental.While Israel could claim to be the military victor, Egypt, Syria and the Arab cause in general were clearly the political victors. Ultimately the Arab states emerged as an economic and political power thus reinforcing the nutrition of Yon Kipper into shaping the Arab-Israeli Conflict. The 1973 conflict provided the initiative and realization of the need for a peaceful resolution. By contrast, success in the Yon Kipper war was seen as restoring Arab honor, resulting in far more public support for peace.Subsequent peace negotiations foresaw the Arab nations- even the more â€Å"extremist† and Israel to the negotiating table for the first time. Never before had negotiation between the opposing forces been achieved, however, despite the call for unity in resolving the moon problem, the act of negotiating drew a schism amongst the Arabs- especially Egypt and Syria as Syria was not interested in anything but the annihilation of Israel and as such, maintaining the conflict.One of the most prominent peace negotiations was the 1978 Camp David Accords, whereby Egyptian president Sad surprised the world by speaking at the Israeli Knees about his desire for permanent peace and so, he demanded the withdrawal of Israel from all occupied territories and in the process, recognize Palestinians right to self-determination. Sad himself realized hat in order for Egypt to regain the Sinai, diplomatic relations with the US had to improve to a great degree in order to for Israel to be persuaded to compromise.Such was the legacy of Yon Kipper whereby the realization of the necessity for political settlements was the key in preventing future war. The First Accord signed at Camp David was the â€Å"Framework for peace in the Middle East† and as such called for negotiations among Egypt, Jordan and Israel and representatives of the Palestinians people to settle in the West Bank and Gaza. The Second Accords â€Å"A Framework for the inclusion of a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel† however was the draft proposal peace agreement that stated the withdrawal of Israel from the Sinai over three years and the full restoration of area to Egypt.Yet again was leverage used in this case as in return for this, Egypt would allow Israeli ships free passage through the Suez Canal which was again in use after significant US funding. This form of negotiation between Egypt and Israel signaled the departure from the Egyptian mantra of â€Å"no peace, no recognition, no negotiations† to the full recognition of Israeli tattooed and with that, Israel's right to a pe aceful existence.This act of recognition was inherent as it further alienated Syria from Egypt as both accords while superficially promoting peace and gaining back territory, the future of Jerusalem and the Goals Heights were not discussed despite Egypt previous assertions to Syria who grew increasingly violent and hostile. As a result of the Camp David Accords which were a product of the Yon Kipper War, Sad was labeled a traitor in the Arab world and the accords in general were rejected.Pan-Arab nationalism was destroyed s there was a deep divide between the hard-lined and more moderate Arab nations, Jordan and Saudi Arabia still rejected peace with Israel as they had still not conceded rightfully owned Arab land. Due to the events sparked by the 1973 war, a deep schism was felt in the Arab world as Sad, the champion of the Arabs was deemed a traitor as he reached a superficial resolution with Israel in the pursuit of fiscal rewards and economic gain through the US- the main ally o f Israel.This divide within the Arab world ultimately prolonged the complexity of the conflict and subsequently rated a conflict within a conflict, that being Arab nations growing increasingly violent and hostile towards one another; thus contributing greatly to the total Arab- Israeli Conflict. In some ways the â€Å"winners† of the war the PLOP achieved in becoming the sole, recognized representatives of the Palestinian people and as such were successful in gaining recognition from the international community.This form of recognition, resulted in a shift in thinking away from ‘armed struggle' toward a view that diplomacy was the path to Palestinian statehood. Through the emergence of the PLOP ND their legitimacy, the balance of power shifted as Palestine was becoming its own independent fighting entity, thus damaging the image of King Hussein who regarded himself as the spokesperson of the Palestinians. This then forced Israel to come face to face with the PLOP and no t Hussein whom they preferred for negotiation.It was thought that as long as Hussein was the spokesperson for the Palestinians, Israel could claim that â€Å"Jordan IS Palestine† thus denouncing the Palestinian claim to the occupied territories and as such vetoing their claim to a statehood within Palestine. Under the leadership of Arafat, the PLOP engaged in various acts of terrorism throughout 1973 conducting numerous assassinations, hijackings and kidnappings shepherded by fanatics imitating Black September.This form of opposition to Israel was very unsuccessful as it outraged the world and as such alienated the West from sympathizing with the Palestinians. It was through this that the PLOP had to adopt more moderate practices and adopt the acceptance of a â€Å"Two-State Solution†. On 13 Novo 1974, Arafat spoke before the General Assembly of UN speaking on behalf of the PLOP and calling for a democratic, secular state in Palestine which did not include recognition and acceptance of Israel.Arafat famously concluded by saying â€Å"l have come bearing an olive branch and a freedom fighter's gun. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand† thus foreshadowing the precarious future due to the instability of power and reason. It was through the catalytic realization of Yon Kipper, whereby Arafat did indeed note that in order to gain international sympathy and convince the rest of the world in aiding the Palestinian cause, peace through the form of policy had to be achieved, instead of the continual violent acts of war and terrorism.It was through the 1973 Holy War, whereby the balance of power began to shift as well as the psychology of the conflict which as a result ironically added further complexity as protest in the form of diplomacy embroiled the rest of the world thus continuing the conflict and its resolution to 1996. In conclusion, the Yon Kipper War is of great contribution to the Arab-Israeli conflict as it caused the paradigm s hift in the psychology and methods of warfare. This was hope of achieving peace that would satiate all belligerents.