The solution only lies in the hands of the U.S. and Israel when you apply your fictitious belief that its a creation of foreign policy exclusively.
All policy is foreign when you are dealing with strategy or tactics which are outside of your national boundaries. Therefore, involvement of any nation states outside of Israel and Palestine are administering "foreign policy" in an attempt to resolve the conflict.
Keeping Palestine "down" works in favour of Arab culture and a prevalence of religion in everyday life which you cannot begin to understand (unless of course you are an ex-pat of an Arab country?). Arab/Jew relations have been stressed over the last 1500 years, yet your answer is simply foreign policy which neglects the long standing historical issues, most based on culture and religious reasoning.
Quite frankly, this is a paragraph that utilizes a great any words but says absolutely nothing.
Wealthy Arab nations have been using the state of Palestine as a litigation tool almost since the conception of Israel as a state as mandated by British authorities. They want Palestinians to constantly struggle as a strategic measure to use against Israel.
What is the leverage, and what benefit have these nations truly gained against Israel? The constant of war and agitation amongst their citizens? It seems to me an agitated citizenry is not good for stable governance. Egypt signs a peace agreement with Israel and spends the next thirty years seeing one president assassinated and another the target of assassination attempts by the Egyptian Brotherhood that eventually becomes part of Al Qaeda.
Arab nations undertook measures to make it impossible for Palestinian refuges to integrate into their states from the 1948 Arab war against Israel. Even Palestinian descendants born from Palestinian refugees are not able to gain a passport. Marriage also doesn't entitle you to a passport; you could never have set foot in Palestine and you are deemed Palestinian.
Why should other Arab nations accept Palestinian refugees? They shouldn't be refugees...they are entitled to live on the land of their forefathers. Asking countries to accept refugees is easy when you don't have to do it yourself. Heck, the U.S. didn't exactly open its borders to the millions of Iraqi refugees it created by illegally invading Iraq.
Read this: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25212480-17062,00.html
This isn't a theory, it's a fact - tangible EVIDENCE shows this to be the case.
Ok, this article brings up points I am aware of and understand. Thank you. Arab nations have certainly used the issue of Palestinian refugees in ways that are unfair and in some ways counterproductive to their interests. However, to suggest that if the Arabs states simply accepted the refugees, then the matter would be settled is bogus and disingenuous. It entirely removes the culpability of Israel and their big brother enforcer, the U.S., from the peace process. Gaza would not be a permanent "refugee prison camp" if Israel stopped enforcing brutal apartheid policies, as well as expecting treatment unique in all the world by demanding a Jewish majority state no matter what.
Sure... foreign policy at times hasn't helped but don't be myopic.
This comment still makes no sense to me, sorry. The term foreign policy can be interchanged with the term diplomacy, and there is no acceptable solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict other than a diplomatic one. Certainly, there is exploitation taking place on both sides. But the stronger side is the side that must concede the most for there to be progress, and the stronger side is obviously th Israel/U.S one.
