Wallerstein Articles :: Essays Papers

Reaction Paper Wallerstein ArticlesThe later Arafat, Arafat II? article discusses the dilemma that has occurred in the Palestinian Authority without delay that Yasir Arafat has died. Both Bush and Israels Ariel Sharon depict Yasir Arafat as being an unsurmountable obstacle to peace of mind. Some wonder whether Mahmoud Abbass election as the chairwoman of the promised land Authority leave behind claim about positive changes to the Israeli-Palestine peace treatys. Although Sharon and Bush approve of Abbas, some assuage wonder whether or non this new appointment willing raise new possibilities for the stipulation among Palestine and Israel. Both sides have such strong fears. The Israelis are horror-stricken that the Israel state as a Judaic state will be destroyed. The Palestinians fear that Palestine as a viable state will never be take ind. The lack of a solution is not payable to the fact that at that place is an obstacle for one, entirely rather that the re is an absence of one. Arafat failed to achieve a solution, so it is up to Abbas to try and do what Arafat was ineffective to.I check off with the argument presented in Wallersteins article. Arafat did fail to aline a peace arranging amongst Palestine and Israel, but condemn him as an obstacle to peace is extreme. all Palestinian could just as easily argue that Israel and Sharon are obstructive on their peace as a people. The fear that Abbas will sound another Arafat is perfectly legitimise and understandable. At the same time I think it is a poker chip presumptuous to expect Abbas to establish the agreement between Palestine and Israel. In all the years that Arafat was president, he was uneffective to make these necessary changes. The barely way that a peace agreement between the two lot be reached is if both leaders agree with the terms. Currently, nobody wants to agree, and therefore there is no peace agreement. Neither Israel nor Palestine wants to com promise or hold certain things in order for this agreement to happen. I think that worry leaders are in a lose-lose situation. If they are able to create an agreement between Israel and Palestine, somebody will be unhappy. It is nearly unfeasible to please both everybody without a compromise of some sort. More than likely, either leader will have to collapse something, which will then folie their people.Wallerstein Articles Essays PapersReaction Paper Wallerstein ArticlesThe After Arafat, Arafat II? article discusses the dilemma that has occurred in the Palestinian Authority now that Yasir Arafat has died. Both Bush and Israels Ariel Sharon described Yasir Arafat as being an insurmountable obstacle to peace. Some wonder whether Mahmoud Abbass election as the president of the Palestine Authority will bring about positive changes to the Israeli-Palestine peace agreements. Although Sharon and Bush approve of Abbas, some still wonder whether or not this new appointment wi ll provide new possibilities for the agreement between Palestine and Israel. Both sides have such strong fears. The Israelis are afraid that the Israel state as a Jewish state will be destroyed. The Palestinians fear that Palestine as a viable state will never be created. The lack of a solution is not due to the fact that there is an obstacle for one, but rather that there is an absence of one. Arafat failed to achieve a solution, so it is up to Abbas to try and do what Arafat was unable to.I agree with the argument presented in Wallersteins article. Arafat did fail to find a peace agreement between Palestine and Israel, but condemning him as an obstacle to peace is extreme. Any Palestinian could just as easily argue that Israel and Sharon are impeding on their peace as a people. The fear that Abbas will become another Arafat is perfectly legitimate and understandable. At the same time I think it is a bit presumptuous to expect Abbas to establish the agreement between Pales tine and Israel. In all the years that Arafat was president, he was unable to make these necessary changes. The only way that a peace agreement between the two can be reached is if both leaders agree with the terms. Currently, nobody wants to agree, and therefore there is no peace agreement. Neither Israel nor Palestine wants to compromise or sacrifice certain things in order for this agreement to happen. I think that bother leaders are in a lose-lose situation. If they are able to create an agreement between Israel and Palestine, somebody will be unhappy. It is nearly impossible to please both everybody without a compromise of some sort. More than likely, either leader will have to sacrifice something, which will then upset their people.