🔗 Share this article

So, which time period are we in? A US president, after months of tacit encouragement, has at last become involved to stop an military campaign from Israel that has transformed extensive sections of a city in the Middle East to ruins, resulting in numerous individuals killed and sparking international condemnation.

This military action has followed a sequence of strikes on the Israeli nation. Currently, under pressure from the White House, the Israeli prime minister, a conservative politician with a talent for appealing language and a deep conviction of Zionist historical purpose, has consented to a ceasefire.

Historical Parallels

The era is not the current year, but four decades ago. The urban center is not present-day Gaza, but the Lebanese capital. The US leader is President Reagan, not today's leadership.

There are numerous variations between the events in the Lebanese nation over four decades ago and recent developments in the Gaza Strip in the past two years. The Hamas raid of last year, which killed 1,200 and saw numerous captured, bears little comparison with the relatively paltry activities of the PLO in the period preceding the Israeli incursion of Lebanon.

Remarkable Resemblances

Several similarities are remarkable. Reagan finally made the call the counterpart, telling him that what was happening in the city was "a catastrophe" and indicating the relations between their states could be gravely damaged if the conflict carried on.

At that time, similar to current times, the conflict developed in live on millions of screens. Hundreds reporters flew into Beirut to report on for the initial instance an regional battle without censorship by either side.

Subsequent Developments

The events after the call from the US president and the truce in Lebanon is instructive. The Palestinian organization, its divisions and representatives were scattered across vast distances and a dozen countries.

American leadership then pulled out multinational troops – a violation of the agreement with Arafat. The Lebanese president, the nation's newly elected head of state and Israel's chosen ally, was assassinated by Syrian intelligence.

Area-wide Shifts

Similar patterns emerged across the wider Middle East. By the late seventies, the predominantly worldly and forward-thinking concepts that had seemed to offer the hope of a different tomorrow in the Middle Eastern nations years before were discredited.

The outcomes of this became very clear, very quickly

Across the region, Israel and the US now confronted enemies who were considerably more unyielding, deadly and efficient than the secular movements and independence advocates of the past.

Western Response

In the west, the consequences of this were counterintuitive. Throughout the seventies, international experts and government representatives had sought to understand what generated violent extremism.

Then, in the start of the eighties, this ceased. National figures in the United States, the United Kingdom and elsewhere were ceased being concerned in "root causes" of conflict.

Contemporary Echoes

In recent days, accounts show that current leadership communicated to government representatives that Israel could not confront global opinion and admitted national hopes for a state.

This also was an parallel of historical precedent. In the wake of the military incursion of Lebanon, previous leadership told Israel that the power of its military alone could not "establish just and lasting peace" and recognized "proper claims of the Arab residents."

Yet a internationally-backed regional peace plan supposed to address those grievances went nowhere. From exile, Palestinian leadership watched powerlessly.

International interest in the Middle East decreased. The state opposed compromises. Later, there was the initial uprising, and the establishment of further armed organizations.

• The patterns of previous events offer sobering insights for present-day diplomatic initiatives
• Permanent settlements require confronting fundamental problems rather than brief halts
• Regional dynamics continue to change in multifaceted and often unpredictable ways