Norway had actually been proposed as a mediator in the Arab-Israeli conflict as early as 1979, but had also been mentioned several times prior – former UN ambassador Hans Engen had played a mediating role in the aftermath of the 1956 Suez Crisis. After the war, it was a devoted champion of the UN and attempted amicable relations with both its eastern and western neighbors. Individuals like Fridtjof Nansen championed the cause of refugees and prisoners after WWI, earning a Nobel Peace Prize in 1922, and the country attempted neutrality in both world wars. Norway as a ‘peace nation’ was different, and that peaceful profile was maintained throughout the 20th century. The ‘Great Powers’ of the world, such as the US, UK, France, and Russia, have long been involved, due to their extensive foreign interests. Lastly, a unique feature of Norwegian involvement in the Arab-Israeli conflict was the extent of that involvement considering the size of the country.
Its history of contact with and understanding for both sides made Norway a good third party to host and lead negotiations. This has been an important contributor to Norway’s role in the Middle East. Interest in the Palestinian cause grew further in the 1970s and 80s, with increased contact between Norway and the PLO – particularly with its leader, Yasser Arafat. The situation started changing in the wake of the Six Day War of 1967, and This is likely to have provided Norway with more reason to support Israel, both in the late 40s and beyond. There exists a great pride in the resistance to the occupation during the War, and the deportations are often viewed as a blight on the war effort. This is a sound argument – Norwegian police helped deport 773 Norwegian Jews, and only 38 survived.
Waag (2000) proposes general guilt for the Holocaust, felt all across Europe, as an important factor. At first, skepticism reigned in the Norwegian Labor government, but these doubts were soon replaced. Norwegian-Israeli relations go back to Israel’s proclamation and war for independence – the two countries developed friendly relations almost immediately. The relations that allowed a small country like Norway to facilitate and negotiate an agreement that no great power had previously managed are important to the way the Accords were shaped. To understand the composition, we must also understand the role Norway played in the Arab-Israeli peace process. Understanding the Oslo Accords’ composition is key to understanding why they failed. Norway, the Middle East, and the Arab-Israeli Conflict Nevertheless, the Accords would soon crash.Ĭonsidering what a great achievement the Accords were, and what they were assumed to achieve, how could the feelings of good-will and hope die so quickly? This article explores some of the causes of why the Oslo Accords failed so horribly. Internationally, the Accords were also celebrated, as talks had stagnated for a long time. It was a case of national pride – we were important. For Norway, they represented the victory of a small third party, as opposed to a great power like the US. When they were signed, the Oslo Accords were a milestone. They were held in secret, in an atmosphere radically different from anything that had been attempted before.
#Ozzle accords series
It was established by a series of individuals, as opposed to a government or an international organization. The secret nature of the back-channel that was established in Oslo in 1992-93 is entangled in a number of myths and legends regarding its establishment and conduct.
0 kommentar(er)
