Anarchy two ways but anarchy nonetheless, the two ongoing conflicts that are being witnessed by the world namely Israel-Palestine and Russia-Ukraine raise the question; is a Russia-Israel analogy justifiable? The two states seem to have taken a similar route to fulfill their national interests, both using their military assets to their core strengths which then again questions all existing theories that talk about liberalism and social constructivism whereas the contemporary phenomenon again proves realism to always be the dominating approach.
Israel located in the Middle Eastern region has been in continuous conflict with Palestine for the past 73 years. The Jewish state was established by dividing Palestine in 1948 after the decolonization of British Palestine, which then led to a ten-fold increase in the Arab-Israel tensions. The two states share a complicated past, Tragically, Palestine has always been at the suffering end, the Israel-Palestine tensions that are usually termed, as a conflict could be better labeled as a genocide because the latter lacks any military or economic means to defend themselves. On the other hand, when we talk about the Russia-Ukraine conflict it can also be categorized as a war, considering it was Ukraine that initiated the war by deploying NATO-aided missiles near the Russian border despite several warnings. Backed by the West and Europe, Ukraine enjoys popular support and has been fighting back against the Russians. No such case is witnessed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since the former has been armed with some of the latest weapons and the latter continues to resist the occupation with sticks and stones.
Essentially, if we are trying to figure out the root cause of such force-driven anarchic ways we have to consider looking at the internal state matters, their leadership, their cognitive psychologies, and, what could be a national interest so pertinent that it required such actions. When talking about Israel there is a definite reason as to why they have always been offensive, i.e. the World War II holocaust, this period of four years brought about the mass killings of around 6 million Jews due to anti-sematic movements and derivatives. Now since the Jews have attained the upper hand they are willing to go to any extent required to maintain that status, portraying it all as self-defense. Similar to this Russia also uses the offensive approach that is a result of their hatred and mistrust towards the West, the disintegration of the USSR in the 1990s, and the loss of potential power to be a world hegemon. It leads to a number of insecurities and rage towards the west that is seemingly shown from time to time. Both these states justify their actions claiming them to be a form of preservation. However, the reality seems to be far from it, as both Netanyahu and Putin have their set of intelligence officials who have been doing all the “wet-work” in foreign states including assassinations, staged incitements and destructive propaganda. This can be proved by multiple events that have taken place in the past such as the 2010 assassination of Hamas operative in Dubai that was done by The Mossad, the national intelligence agency of Israel, or the 2006 assassination of Alexander Litvinenko by FSB, formerly known as the KGB before the disintegration of USSR. Usually the media would portray both these leaders to be humane or working for humanitarian causes by occasionally showing them engaging in humane activities making these anarchists reverent. Both regimes consider any sort of criticism as an act of hate and violence stating that the critics are simply anti-sematic or Russo-phobic, while forgetting the fact that both the states have been continuously involved in traditional warfare and conflicts.
Now the main difference between two such anarchies can be concluded as to how the world perceives the two states and their relations with the west and European nations. In the case of Israel, it continues to relish its springing relations with the US, as it is one of the major components of US control in the Middle East. Backed by the West and its tendency to overlook any humanitarian crisis caused by Israel, it enjoys the consequence-free authority and power that it has over Palestine and Jerusalem. However, for Russia the West has a completely different stance, considering the fact that Russia has had a trembling history of hot and cold behaviors with the West, they tend to face more restricting decrees as it has always been in America’s greatest interest to use isolating strategies to confine communist ideologies and agenda. However, in the contemporary world, this can never be practically possible so the only authoritative way the US would have is through the UN. Though, regardless of all the sanctions, Russia continues to forcefully occupy Ukraine knowing very well how the European nations could never fully oppose the cause, as they would still need to import hydrocarbon energy from Russia.
In conclusion, war and genocides are never the ideal means to attain national interests and should have been a concept of the past, considering how the 21st century claims to be all about human rights and non-violence movements. However, the claims made by analysts are seldom wrong and at the end human rights in most cases are just a means of interference as seen in the Russia- Ukraine conflict. With that being stated, it would not be wrong to predict multiple such escalating situations throughout the world as states have already seen how war-ridden countries are often forgotten and the hegemons move on leaving behind anarchy.
Srabeel Farooqi is pursuing her Bachelors in International Relations from the National University of Modern languages (NUML). She leans towards the idea of peace-building through her writing pieces and criticizes the ongoing international political disorder through multiple lenses. She can be reached at email@example.com
The views expressed by the writers do not necessarily represent Global Defense Insight’s editorial policy.