A Permanent Peace Involving Israel and the Palestinian Territories? We have Witnessed Similar Promises – The Result Was Further Bloodshed

So, what time period is this? A US president, after months of quiet support, has at last become involved to end an Israeli military offensive that has turned extensive sections of a Middle Eastern city to rubble, causing numerous individuals killed and prompting international condemnation.

This military action has come after a series of strikes on Israel. Presently, under pressure from American leadership, the Israeli prime minister, a right-leaning figure with an aptitude for popular speech and a deep conviction of historical Jewish national duty, has agreed to a truce.

Historical Parallels

The era is not the current year, but 1982. The city is not present-day Gaza, but Beirut. The US leader is Ronald Reagan, not the current administration.

We find many differences between the situation in the Lebanese nation over four decades ago and what has happened in Gaza in the last 24 months. The Hamas raid of last year, which caused twelve hundred and involved numerous seized, shows limited similarity with the relatively paltry activities of the Palestinian leadership in the period prior to Israel's invasion of Lebanon.

Remarkable Resemblances

Several similarities are remarkable. Reagan finally contacted the Israeli leader, telling him that events in the city was "a holocaust" and saying the relations between their countries could be gravely damaged if the violence carried on.

At that time, much as today, the conflict unfolded in real time on millions of screens. Many journalists flew into Beirut to cover for the first time an Middle Eastern conflict without information control by the combatants.

Subsequent Developments

The situation subsequent to the communication from American leadership and the halt in fighting in Lebanon is revealing. The liberation movement, its groups and leaders were spread across thousands of miles and a various states.

American leadership then pulled out US-led peacekeepers – a breach of the understanding with Arafat. The elected leader, Lebanon's newly elected leader and Israel's preferred proxy, was assassinated by Syrian intelligence.

Middle Eastern Changes

Similar patterns emerged across the rest of the region. By the end of the 1970s, the more secular and forward-thinking concepts that had looked to deliver the promise of a new future in the Middle Eastern nations a decade or so earlier were weakened.

The outcomes of this emerged rapidly, very quickly

Throughout the area, the Israeli state and the America now confronted adversaries who were significantly more intractable, deadly and capable than the secular movements and independence advocates of previous times.

Global Approach

Internationally, the outcomes of this were counterintuitive. During the that decade, western analysts and government representatives had tried to analyze what generated armed fundamentalism.

Afterward, in the early 1980s, this stopped. Government officials in the America, the Britain and elsewhere were lost interest in "fundamental sources" of violence.

Contemporary Echoes

In recent days, sources suggest that today's officials communicated to Israeli counterparts that the state could not oppose international consensus and acknowledged national hopes for a state.

This also was an echo of 1982. In the aftermath of the Israeli invasion of the neighboring country, previous leadership told the Israeli government that the capability of its armed forces alone could not "bring permanent resolution" and accepted "proper claims of the Arab residents."

However a American-sponsored comprehensive agreement meant to resolve those grievances failed to progress. Abroad, Palestinian leadership observed helplessly.

Worldwide concern in the Middle East diminished. The nation rejected accommodations. Later, there was the initial uprising, and the founding of new resistance movements.

• The patterns of the past provide serious insights for contemporary diplomatic initiatives
• Permanent settlements require addressing fundamental problems rather than temporary ceasefires
• Area politics continue to change in complicated and frequently surprising ways