United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 remains to this day, almost 36 years after it was adopted unanimously, the only internationally-agreed framework for a peaceful settlement of the Middle East conflict. The principle of exchanging land for peace, as expressed in resolution 242, has been the foundation of US, Western and Arab peacemaking efforts.
Yet it has also been the subject of a heated debate. Notably the centrepiece of resolution 242, calling for “Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”, has been interpreted in significantly different ways by the parties concerned. While to the Arabs this means the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces to the positions they held before the outbreak of hostilities – a return to the status quo ante - the proponents of the Israeli position assert that the omission of the definite article before the word “territories” is aimed at enabling territorial revisions or aggrandizement, particularly in connection with the resolution’s second operating paragraph and the mentioning of “secure and recognized boundaries” therein.
The aim of the following essay is to analyse the meaning of UN Security Council Resolution 242. It will start by describing the historical context it is embedded in, namely the events surrounding the June War of 1967. In chapter three, the circumstances preceding the adoption of resolution 242, notably the diplomatic efforts prior to the voting, will be depicted. The next section deals with the differing interpretations of the withdrawal clause. In subchapter 4 c) it will be argued that the adoption of resolution 242 was only made possible due to a number of assurances, given to the Arabs in general and to King Hussein of Jordan in particular, about the intended meaning of the withdrawal clause. Finally, in the conclusions, results shall be summarised and future prospects of a successful implementation of resolution 242 outlined.
Table of Contents
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Historical Context: The June War of 1967
- 3. The Making of Resolution 242
- a) Draft Resolutions
- b) Weeks of Intensive Diplomacy
- 4. The Withdrawal Clause
- a) “The” of not “The” – About the Absence of the Definite Article
- b) The Withdrawal Clause in other UN Languages
- c) The Intended Meaning of the Withdrawal Clause
- 5. Conclusion
Objectives and Key Themes
This essay analyzes the meaning and varying interpretations of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, focusing on the "withdrawal clause." It aims to understand the historical context of the resolution, the diplomatic processes leading to its adoption, and the differing interpretations of its key provisions, particularly regarding the withdrawal of Israeli forces.
- The historical context of the June 1967 War and its impact on the resolution.
- The diplomatic negotiations and drafting process of Resolution 242.
- The different interpretations of the "withdrawal clause," particularly the significance of the definite article.
- The role of assurances given to Arab leaders regarding the intended meaning of the resolution.
- The lasting impact and implications of Resolution 242 on the Middle East peace process.
Chapter Summaries
1. Introduction: This introductory chapter sets the stage by highlighting the significance of UN Security Council Resolution 242 as the foundational framework for Middle East peace, despite its controversial "withdrawal clause." It introduces the central debate surrounding the interpretation of this clause, emphasizing the contrasting views of Arab and Israeli perspectives on the meaning of withdrawal and the implications for territorial adjustments. The chapter previews the essay's structure and objectives, promising an analysis of the historical context, the resolution's drafting process, and the differing interpretations of the central clause.
2. Historical Context: The June War of 1967: This chapter provides crucial background on the Six-Day War of 1967, detailing the escalating tensions between Israel and its Arab neighbors, culminating in a decisive Israeli victory and significant territorial gains. It meticulously chronicles the events leading up to the war, including the Syrian-Israeli clashes, Nasser's actions regarding the Straits of Tiran, and the formation of military alliances. The chapter also delves into the ongoing scholarly debate regarding who initiated the hostilities, examining the Egyptian closure of the Straits of Tiran and the Israeli preemptive strike, shedding light on the complexities and contested narratives surrounding the war's origins.
3. The Making of Resolution 242: This section explores the complex diplomatic maneuvers and the drafting process of Resolution 242 in the aftermath of the Six-Day War. It examines multiple draft resolutions, highlighting the differing perspectives and priorities of the involved parties. The chapter analyzes the political pressures and compromises that shaped the final text and implicitly acknowledges the difficulties in achieving consensus on a resolution dealing with such a deeply contentious issue. It lays the groundwork for understanding the nuances of the final resolution and the potential for differing interpretations stemming from the drafting process itself.
4. The Withdrawal Clause: This chapter dives into the heart of the controversy, analyzing the various interpretations of the "withdrawal clause" within Resolution 242. It meticulously examines the significance (or lack thereof) of the definite article preceding the word "territories" and considers the implications of this ambiguity. The chapter explores the interpretations of the clause in different UN languages, offering further insight into the complexities of translation and potential sources of misinterpretations. A significant part of the chapter is devoted to the argument that the resolution's adoption relied on assurances given to Arab leaders about the intended meaning of the clause, highlighting the political maneuvering and behind-the-scenes agreements that influenced the resolution’s final form.
Keywords
UN Security Council Resolution 242, Middle East conflict, Six-Day War, withdrawal clause, territorial disputes, land for peace, diplomatic negotiations, interpretation, Arab-Israeli conflict, peace process.
FAQ: Analysis of UN Security Council Resolution 242
What is the main topic of this document?
This document provides a comprehensive analysis of UN Security Council Resolution 242, focusing on the meaning and varying interpretations of its "withdrawal clause." It examines the historical context of the resolution, the diplomatic processes leading to its adoption, and the differing interpretations of its key provisions, particularly regarding the withdrawal of Israeli forces.
What are the key themes explored in the analysis?
The analysis explores the historical context of the 1967 Six-Day War, the diplomatic negotiations and drafting process of Resolution 242, the different interpretations of the "withdrawal clause" (especially the significance of the definite article), the role of assurances given to Arab leaders, and the lasting impact of Resolution 242 on the Middle East peace process.
What is the structure of the analysis?
The analysis is structured into five chapters: an introduction, a chapter on the historical context of the 1967 war, a chapter on the drafting of Resolution 242, a chapter dedicated to a detailed analysis of the "withdrawal clause," and a concluding chapter. It also includes a table of contents, objectives and key themes, chapter summaries, and keywords.
What is the significance of the "withdrawal clause" in Resolution 242?
The "withdrawal clause" is the central point of contention in the analysis. The document examines the varying interpretations of this clause, particularly the debate surrounding the presence or absence of the definite article before the word "territories," and how this ambiguity led to differing understandings of the intended meaning of the withdrawal.
What role did assurances play in the adoption of Resolution 242?
The analysis highlights the role of assurances given to Arab leaders regarding the intended meaning of the "withdrawal clause." These assurances, and the political maneuvering surrounding them, are presented as key factors influencing the resolution's final form and subsequent interpretations.
What is the historical context provided in the analysis?
The analysis provides a detailed historical context by focusing on the events leading up to the Six-Day War of 1967, including the escalating tensions between Israel and its Arab neighbors, the military actions taken, and the resulting territorial changes. It also examines the scholarly debate regarding who initiated the hostilities.
How does the analysis approach the differing interpretations of Resolution 242?
The analysis meticulously examines the different interpretations of the resolution, considering the text in its original language and other UN languages. It acknowledges the political pressures and compromises that shaped the final text, and explores how these factors contributed to the potential for diverse interpretations.
What are the key takeaways from the analysis of Resolution 242?
The analysis reveals the complexities of interpreting international resolutions, particularly in the context of highly sensitive and contentious geopolitical issues. It underscores the significance of historical context, diplomatic processes, and the potential for ambiguity in the drafting and interpretation of such documents to shape the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.
What are the keywords associated with this analysis?
Keywords include: UN Security Council Resolution 242, Middle East conflict, Six-Day War, withdrawal clause, territorial disputes, land for peace, diplomatic negotiations, interpretation, Arab-Israeli conflict, peace process.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Belabbes Benkredda (Autor:in), 2003, United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 and the Controversy Over Varying Interpretations of the Withdrawal Clause, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/14097
