Paper 3 Draft: Rebuttal

The conflict between Israel and Palestine has remained active for over two-hundred years.  Prior to the late 19th Century, a predominately Muslim population, along with a smaller Christian population, and an even smaller Jewish population co-existed peacefully.  The current situation between Israel and Palestine has intensified as Israel persistently tries to reclaim territory by force.  On March 14th, 2013, a Penn State student claimed in an article titled, “‘Apartheid’ is an appropriate word to describe Israel” that the treatment of Palestinians and other minority groups in Israel can be described as apartheid.  The student goes on to cite Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International to describe the human rights violations that Israel’s government committed during the course of Israel’s reign.  Although the student’s sources validate aspects of his claim of mistreatment, the definition and usage of the term “apartheid” is utilized wrongly and the term cannot stand in his argument.  In order to rectify the student’s claim, the student must re-label the situation in Israel as increasingly hostile towards Palestinians with actual examples of mistreatment and offer an alternative solution to peace between the two sides rather than to just criticize Israel’s inaction on the situation.

To begin with, before applying a word to a specific event or group of people, a writer must fully understand the definition of the word.  In this scenario, the student incorrectly labels Israel’s human rights violations under the term, “apartheid”.  This word is directly associated with the racial segregation of Africans in South Africa from the white minority.  The term literally means the state of being apart or “apart-hood”, which is not nearly the case in Israel.  Black South Africans were gruesomely beat, harassed, and oppressed by their puppet government controlled by the white elitists.  Palestinians in the territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip are represented by their elected leaders of the Palestinian Authority as well as the Hamas, which was not the case for black South Africans.  An example of the mistreatment and a response against it is shown in an article that states an ex-Israeli soldier, Andre Pshenichnikov, now vows to apply for Palestinian citizenship after he had enough of the human rights violations against Palestinians (New Internationalist).  The extent to which Israel has tormented and humiliated Israeli-Arabs has caused global outrage on the international stage.  Even the U.S. has been warned of the Israeli attacks on Palestinians living in their territories as declared in a 1989 report, “The annual human rights report, released yesterday by the State Department, accuses Israel of a ‘substantial increase in human rights violations’, mainly in relation to the 14-month old Palestinian uprising on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, producing ‘many avoidable deaths and injuries,’” (Financial Times).  The number of examples of mistreatment and abuse against Palestinians are endless due to the Israeli government’s abilities to cover up events or to ignore the human rights violations committed altogether.

Furthermore, a way and means to create peace and stability in the Palestinian-controlled territories of the Gaza Strip and West Bank must be agreed upon.  Presenting reports of human rights violations will not provoke action in the Israeli government; deliberation amongst the powers of Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and the United States will stir up efforts towards achieving peace as well as non-aggression.  This is highlighted in an excerpt of a commentary that reinforces, “On April 24, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told the House Appropriations Committee that U.S. and Arab support for preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is contingent on the Netanyahu government’s willingness to accept the two-state solution and make the rapid establishment of a Palestinian state a principal goal,” (Glick 1).  Without talks between all respective parties, there is no opportunity for advancements on the Israeli or Palestinian side.  The Obama Administration has voiced its support for a Palestinian state and Israeli officials have agreed that it is ultimately the only plan that Palestinians would agree upon.  The territory of the Golan Heights would be given back to Syria as a part of this plan.  Regardless of what plan is finally agreed chosen, one must be agreed upon by all parties involved in the talks.

In a final analysis, the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine cannot be described as “apartheid” contrary to popular belief.  The word’s definition and use in context is not proper to describe the wrongful conditions that Palestinians are put under.  Previous co-existence of Muslims, Christians, and Jews proves that present-day peace is attainable. In order to rectify the student’s claim, the student must re-label the situation in Israel as increasingly hostile towards Palestinians with actual examples of mistreatment and offer an alternative solution to peace between the two sides rather than to just criticize Israel’s inaction on the situation.

 

Works Cited

“Ex-Israeli soldier seeks Palestinian citizenship.” New Internationalist July 2012: 9. Gale Power Search. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.

Glick, Caroline B. “The stabilization plan.” Commentary 127.6 (2009): 34+. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 24 Mar. 2014

Riddell, Peter. “US Attacks Israel on Human Rights.” Financial Times, 8 Feb. 1989. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.

3 responses to “Paper 3 Draft: Rebuttal

  1. D'mon Reynolds

    In your thesis expand or go more into detail about the human rights and American international citation idea. Maybe use it in another paragraph.

  2. 1. Where does the writer introduce and summarize the arguments he or she will rebut? Share ideas on arrangement and effectiveness.
    – The first paragraph is where the argument is summarized and introduced. I think the arrangement and effectiveness was really good, he said what in the paper he didn’t agree with and what he thought was right
    2 . What is the common ground or concession(s) this writer offers? Offer suggestions for improvement.
    – The main rebuttal is that he believes the first paper used the title incorrectly, I think that he is okay with most of the information but the title is wrong
    3. Comment on the effectiveness of the line(s) of argument. Offer at least two suggestions to strengthen the argument.
    – You did a really good job arguing your piece but since i have to say something i would say try to relate to what the author was trying to get to by putting that as the title so that you can describe it more, and secondly you could offer a better title for the paper and say why yours is better than his
    4. How does the writer’s outside sources enhance his or her position? Make some suggestions for additional resources.
    – Your outside source helps because it makes you another person to help look into the exact framer and find out what the words really mean and if they are used correctly or not
    5. Comment on what is successful about the paper and make three overall suggestions for improvement.
    – You paper is really good you say exactly what you this is wrong and why it is wrong. one of the only things i can think about for your paper is that giving more background information of the conflict might help your readers relate more

  3. D'mon Reynolds

    Draft Workshop for Paper 3

    1. Where does the writer introduce and summarize the arguments he or she will rebut? Share ideas on arrangement and effectiveness.

    2 . What is the common ground or concession(s) this writer offers? Offer suggestions for improvement.

    3. Comment on the effectiveness of the line(s) of argument. Offer at least two suggestions to strengthen the argument.

    4. How does the writer’s outside sources enhance his or her position? Make some suggestions for additional resources.

    5. Comment on what is successful about the paper and make three overall suggestions for improvement.

    I think you have all the facts and information in the paper. You seem to fully understand the situation between Israel and Palestine. Some suggestions would be to make your argument a little stronger. Use stronger diction or words that signify how wrong the student was when he/she wrote the article. Write more in a lively style.

Leave a Reply