🔗 Share this article

So, which year are we in? An American leader, subsequent to lengthy of quiet support, has at last become involved to halt an Israeli military offensive that has reduced swaths of a Middle Eastern city to debris, causing thousands deceased and generating worldwide anger.

This military action has been preceded by a series of assaults on Israel. Presently, responding to pressure from the White House, the prime minister of Israel, a rightwinger with a gift for popular speech and an intense sense of Zionist historical purpose, has consented to a ceasefire.

Past Echoes

The time period is not present day, but four decades ago. The urban center is not Gaza City, but Beirut, Lebanon. The American president is Ronald Reagan, not the current administration.

There are numerous variations between what happened in the Lebanese nation more than four decades ago and what has happened in the Gaza Strip in the last 24 months. The militant assault of last year, which resulted in over a thousand and involved two hundred fifty taken hostage, differs significantly with the relatively paltry activities of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the time prior to the Israeli incursion of the Lebanese nation.

Uncanny Similarities

Some are uncanny. Reagan finally picked up the phone the Israeli leader, informing him that events in Beirut was "a catastrophe" and saying the relationship between their countries could be significantly impaired if the violence persisted.

In 1982, much as today, the fighting played out in immediate coverage on televisions worldwide. Many correspondents traveled to the city to report on for the premier occasion an regional battle without censorship by any party.

Subsequent Developments

What happened following the communication from Reagan and the ceasefire in Beirut is instructive. The liberation movement, its factions and leaders were dispersed across vast distances and a various states.

American leadership then pulled out multinational troops – a violation of the arrangement with Arafat. Bashir Gemayel, Lebanon's recently chosen head of state and Israeli-supported figure, was assassinated by Damascus operatives.

Area-wide Shifts

Comparable developments occurred across the wider Middle East. By the late seventies, the predominantly worldly and progressive ideas that had appeared to provide the potential of a different tomorrow in the Arab and Islamic worlds a decade or so earlier were undermined.

The consequences of this were quickly apparent, in short order

Throughout the area, Israel and the United States now encountered opponents who were significantly more stubborn, lethal and capable than the progressive groups and patriotic organizations of previous times.

Western Response

Among Western nations, the consequences of this were perverse. Throughout the 1970s, western analysts and policymakers had tried to analyze what generated violent extremism.

Subsequently, in the start of the eighties, this stopped. Government officials in the US, the UK and additional countries were no longer interested in "fundamental sources" of conflict.

Current Similarities

In recent days, reports indicate that today's officials informed government representatives that the country could not confront global opinion and acknowledged Palestinian aspirations for a state.

This also was an repetition of historical precedent. In the aftermath of the Israeli invasion of the neighboring country, past government told the Israeli government that the capability of its military alone could not "establish just and lasting peace" and recognized "justified demands of the Arab residents."

But a American-sponsored regional peace plan supposed to resolve those concerns failed to progress. From exile, political figures watched powerlessly.

Worldwide concern in the area waned. The nation rejected accommodations. Afterward, there was the first intifada, and the founding of additional militant groups.

• The repetitions of the past provide sobering perspectives for contemporary peace efforts
• Lasting solutions require addressing underlying issues rather than short-term truces
• Regional dynamics continue to change in complex and sometimes unexpected ways