The buffer state and the Zionist entity

Translated from Arabic by : Teeba Haitham Abdulhousain

Introduction:

A buffer state is a weak force that exists between two warring forces. Fighting between these forces leads to the outbreak of war, so the buffer state exists to prevent this war. The buffer state is characterized by being weaker than the two warring states and follows a policy of neutrality in its foreign policy, which is what makes it continue to exist. Saying that there is a state that prevents war means the possibility of saying that there is a state whose function is to cause war between states. The best example of this is the Zionist entity, as we will explain later in the research.

Research methodology: The research was divided into two sections. In the first, we discussed the concept of the buffer state, its characteristics, and models of it, in addition to distinguishing it from similar concepts. In the second, we discussed the buffer state in the concept of opposition, the best example of which is the Zionist entity.

Section One: The Buffer State

In this section we will try to define the buffer state, the origin of this term, what are the characteristics and features of the buffer state, why there is a buffer states in the first place, and why it is important in international law.

Definition of the buffer state:

The term buffer state is actually very old as it appeared with the beginning of the emergence of man. After the emergence of primitive tribes and the increase in their expansion and control over the lands, this led to an increase in conflict between the tribes. This led to the leaving of a group of lands working as a buffer area or buffer zone that prevents conflicts between these tribes. Despite the antiquity of the term, it was not used, so these buffer lands were left without a name, meaning that the name had not yet been formed, but now we call it a buffer state. The first buffer state in history was the state of Al-Hirah in Iraq, which was established by the Sassanids * and the Ghassanid state, which was established by the Greeks. However, the term buffer state was used for the first time in 1883 in Afghanistan, where it worked as a buffer state between the British Empire and Russia Caesarea to prevent potential conflicts between them.

The buffer state has been defined in more than 29 definitions, including:

It is a small, weak state that does not have its own foreign policy, and is positioned between two or more strong states. Its function is to prevent conflicts or aggression between these states.

It is a weak power between two or more stronger powers. Its function is to reduce conflicts between these powers.

It is also known as a small, independent state located between two larger and stronger states. It represents a barrier between these two states to prevent conflicts between them.

Buffer states are known as states that are established to prevent conflict and friction between great powers.

John Shay says that a buffer state is a small power that must be neutral and independent in order to be able to be a buffer between these powers.

It is a small, independent state positioned between two competing states.

After reviewing these definitions, it can be said that the buffer state is a ( weak force weaker than the force of the neighboring countries. This state is established for the purpose of preventing conflict and friction between these strong countries and preserving international security and peace).

Also through the previous definitions, the features and characteristics of the buffer state can be determined:

_Weak power, i.e. it must be weaker than the neighboring states.

_To separate two or more powers.

_To follow a policy of neutrality in its foreign policy.

_Its function and the reason for its establishment is to reduce international conflicts between these great powers.

_It has it’s own independence.

These are the characteristics that the buffer state has , so in order for us to use the term buffer state, these characteristics must be available in it.

After reviewing the previous definitions and characteristics of the buffer state, a question may be asked: How does a buffer state arise? A buffer state either arises as a result of a decision by powerful states, or this situation is imposed on a state that exists between two or more warring and conflicting states.

Examples of the buffer state:

We mentioned that the first buffer state established by the Greeks was the city of the Ghassanids and Sassanids, which is the city of Al-Hirah. The Ghassanid state was established after the Ghassanids settled in the Levant, so they established a buffer state between Syria and the Sassanids, but in reality they cooperated with the Romans and killed the Sassanids.

As for the city of Al-Hirah in the Sassanid era, the Sassanids allied with the rulers of Al-Hirah at that time to ward off the attacks carried out by the Romans on the Sassanid state, and thus these two city-states are considered the first buffer state in history.

Afghanistan, as we mentioned, is the first country to be called a buffer state in 1883, as it worked to isolate the British Empire and Tsarist Russia from each other. Britain had controlled both Pakistan and India, thus drawing closer to Russia, so they made Afghanistan a buffer state that isolated the two empires so that there would be no conflict between them.

Another example of a buffer state is Siam, which acted as a buffer state between the British colonial empire in South Asia and French Indochina.

Georgia also acted as a buffer state between Spain and Britain, separating the Spanish-controlled city of Florida from the British colonies in America. These examples we mentioned were in the colonial era. However, this does not mean that the buffer state does not exist at the present time, but on the contrary, its importance has increased. The reason is that the development we are witnessing has made many countries possess very large capabilities and capacities at all levels, which has led to the emergence of great powers neighboring each other. Therefore, we will now mention examples of the buffer state at the present time, including Nepal and Bhutan, which act as a buffer state between China and India because the Indian-Chinese tension is still emerging. Poland and some countries in Eastern Europe are also treated as a buffer states between Russia and the countries of Western Europe. There are also many high-level discussions and negotiations that suggest making Ukraine a buffer state between Russia and the countries of the NATO, but Ukraine refuses to be treated as a buffer state.

Distinguishing the buffer state from other concepts:

First: Distinguishing between a buffer state and a dependent state It is also called a servant state or a puppet state. It is a very weak state that is unable to protect itself or manage its affairs, so it agrees with a stronger state to protect it and manage its affairs, provided that the servant state undertakes to enable the followed state to have its capabilities and resources, in addition to other privileges such as military passage, establishing military bases, or economic privileges... An example of a servant state is Cuba, which played an important role during the Cold War, as it was a servant state to the Soviet Union in the face of the United States of America. Thus, we note that the servant state does not prevent wars, unlike the buffer state, where the latter’s function in the field of international relations is to prevent wars and conflicts between neighboring powers.

Second: Distinguishing the buffer state from the balancing state the term balance of power was used from the end of the Napoleonic Wars to the beginning of World War I to denote power relations in European countries. Britain is considered the best example of the balance of power, as it is called the balancing state or the state holding the balance. When there is any imbalance in the global balance of power, Britain throws its weight on one of the parties balancing the situation , thus maintaining international security and peace. Britain’s location far from countries (as it is an buffer island) and its naval power enabled it to play this role.

Third: Distinguishing between a buffer state and an adventurous state

Most small countries with limited capabilities work to keep up with the big countries with high power and capabilities, and the reason for that is to protect their interests, of course, and to ensure their security and independence. However, there are small countries that may go the opposite way and work to confront the great powers and stand in their way. An example of these countries is North Korea, which stood in the face of the United States of America and actually succeeded in doing so, especially with regard to its nuclear file. However, the question that arises is: Does the risk-taking policy succeed? The answer is no, the risk-taking policy does not always succeed. The adventurous or risk-taking state must study international relations and what they will lead to in the future. In addition, it must form alliances with the active powers in international law, as well as develop its military capabilities and secure its economic position. An example of countries that adopted the risk-taking or adventure system is Iraq, which stood in the face of the United States of America and could not withstand, which led to the end of its ruling regime.

Section Two: The Zionist Entity.

After we talked about the buffer state, its definition, features, importance, characteristics, and how we distinguished it from other similar concepts, a question may be asked: Is it possible for the buffer state to perform a function different from what is known? That is, is it possible for the state to create crises between states instead of reducing them? Is it possible for the buffer state to lead to an increase in conflict between states instead of reducing it? The answer to all these questions is yes, of course, and the best example of this is the occupying Zionist entity.

Buffer state in the concept of opposition:

We have previously defined the buffer state as a force that mediates between two or more competing forces. The buffer state reduces the tension and conflict between them. In the concept of opposition, when there are states whose function is to reduce the conflict between the warring states, it is possible that there are states whose function is to separate these allied states, or if they are not allied, then at least there is no conflict, war or hostility between them. This state comes to create conflicts between states and disperse security and peace between two or more states.

Zionist entity:

With the end of World War I, the Ottoman Empire ended and the lands of the Ottoman Empire were divided between Britain, France and Tsarist Russia according to the Sykes-Picot Agreement (where Britain obtained southern Iraq and part of Palestine) Haifa, Acre and the area extending to the Dead Sea including the Negev (as well as eastern Jordan, while the remaining part of Palestine was subject to international administration) and France obtained northern Iraq, Syria and Lebanon، This agreement was concluded in 1916, but it was not announced until 1917.

During this period, correspondence took place between Sharif Hussein, Sharif of Mecca, and Sir Henry McMahon, the British High Commissioner in Egypt,( which was known as the Hussein-McMahon Correspondence) The content of this correspondence was to support the Arabs in their independence from the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of an Arab state. As a result, the Arabs declared a revolution in 1916 under the leadership of Sharif Hussein.

In other but secret correspondence, Lord Arthur James Balfour promised Sir Lionel Rothschild, head of the Jewish community in Britain, Britain’s support for the Jews to establish a homeland for them in Palestine. This is known as the Balfour Declaration in 1917. Here, the clear contradiction between Britain’s promise to the Arabs and their promise to Rothschild appears. Britain occupied Palestine, and this act laid the first foundations for building a homeland for the Jews on the land of Palestine. After the San Remo Conference in 1920, which made Britain a mandate state over all of Transjordan, all of Palestine, and all of Iraq, the League of Nations officially approved the mandate in 1922, which contained a preamble and 28 articles that included the following:

The preamble affirmed Britain’s commitment to establish a national homeland for the Jews in Palestine, justifying this by the historical connection between the Jews and Palestine. As for the rest of the population, the majority of whom were Arab Muslims and Christians, the preamble mentioned the phrase “non-Jewish communities” and the principle of non-derogation from religious and civil rights, and the preamble neglected to mention the political and national rights of the Arabs.

Article Two of the Mandate made Britain responsible for the conditions of Palestine under conditions and circumstances that would facilitate the establishment of a national homeland for the Jews.

Article 6 included Britain’s encouragement of Jewish immigration and settlement.

Article 22 granted the Hebrew language a status similar to that of the Arabic language.

The British Mandate officially came into effect in 1923, and the Arab population expressed its strong opposition from the beginning. Many Arab movements took place to stop the British project, such as the Jaffa Revolution, the Buraq Revolution, and the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Movement. As a result, Britain promised to establish an Arab state for the Palestinians, but it reneged on its promises once and continued to implement its project to establish a national homeland for the Jews. The influx of Jewish immigrants to Palestine led to the establishment of structures that enabled the expulsion of the Palestinians from their homeland by 1948.

In 1947, the United Nations General Assembly issued its decision to partition Palestine into an Arab state with a percentage of 45%, a Jewish state with a percentage of 54%, and an international zone represented by Jerusalem. 1 With this decision, the General Assembly violated the principle of the right of self-determination for peoples, which was approved in the United Nations Charter, as it announced this decision without returning to the Palestinian people to know their opinion through a referendum. By 1948, the Jews had established about 292 colonies and formed military forces that included about 70 thousand fighters who declared their readiness to build a Jewish state.

In fact, Israel did not abide by the aforementioned General Assembly resolution, as it seized 77% of the Palestinian lands, displaced the population, and committed many massacres in Palestinian villages.

The Arabs did not remain silent about the General Assembly’s decision to partition Palestine and establish a homeland for the Jews, so the Arab League formed the National Salvation Army, which is an armed force with soldiers from five countries (Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan). These forces achieved overwhelming victories over the Zionist entity until Iraq took control of the heart of Palestine and the city of Tel Aviv. Because of these victories, which if they had continued would have ended the Zionists plans to establish a homeland for them in Israel, the Security Council declared a truce between the two parties (Arabs and Jews). This truce prevented either party from moving or providing supplies to the armies or arming or developing them. The Arabs committed to the truce, but however, the entity did not abide by it, as it armed and developed its army throughout the truce period, which lasted 4 weeks. It was not satisfied with that, but they obtained new weapons and modern aircraft, which constituted a violation of the truce. In return, Britain and the United States of America imposed a ban on the Arab countries sending weapons.

The Zionist entity forces began their attacks and seized 3 Palestinian villages and tried to control the old city of Jerusalem, but they failed, which caused them heavy losses, which forced the Security Council to declare a second truce. Once again, the Arabs committed to the truce, but Israel did not and continued to violate the truce and complete its plans, so it occupied lands in Palestine that were under Egyptian control and bombed Al-Arish Airport in Egypt to get Egypt out of the battle. The Iraqi forces were very close to controlling the city of Haifa, had it not been for orders from the leadership to withdraw.

The Security Council issued a ceasefire resolution at the end of 1948, and as a result of the resolution, the battle between the Arabs and the Zionist entity ended, ending with the latter’s victory.

After the Nakba of 1948:

After the Arab Nakba in 1948, the Arab League demanded the implementation of the 1947 partition resolution in order to preserve the borders and area of the Arab state in Palestine, in addition to the fact that Jerusalem is an international zone. The reason for the demand was to gain the sympathy and support of the international community for the Palestinian cause, in addition to the support of the Christian community. The Arab League was counting on the fact that Jerusalem is an international zone, as it gives the opportunity for many Palestinian immigrants to return to Palestine. However, these demands failed, and the international community remained silent about the actions of the Zionist entity in Judaizing the city of Jerusalem, as the entity declared Jerusalem its capital and prevented the Palestinians from returning to their lands and applied the law of absentees, which stipulates the seizure of the money of absent Palestinians. The position of the Arab League was to denounce these decisions and actions. From the position of the Arab League, we note that the great powers such as Britain and America have succeeded in making the Zionist entity a buffer state that has isolated the Arab countries from each other and prevented their unity.

1967 war:

In 1965, the Fatah movement (one of the first Palestinian liberation movements) began its first operations with support from Syria, sending armed groups to Israel. Israel objected to this and threatened on several occasions. In 1967, tensions between the two parties increased, which led Israel to launch attacks on Syria until it destroyed six of its aircraft and attacked the Syrian border areas. Due to the mutual defense treaty, the Egyptian government declared a state of alert and decided to close the Strait of Tiran to Israeli navigation. The State of Jordan joined this treaty because of the proximity of war. The US tried to ease the situation in the Arab region and urged Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser to avoid fighting, but in reality it was supplying the entity with weapons and equipment.

In June 1967, the entity launched a surprise attack on the Egyptian Air Force and succeeded in destroying all the aircraft and disabling the runways. The Egyptian defeat led to the occupation of the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and most of the Golan Heights. President Abdel Nasser submitted his resignation, but he retracted it due to the demonstrations that erupted and demanded that he remain in office. Abdel Nasser then tried to unify Arab efforts, so the Arab Summit was held in Khartoum in the same year. The Arab Summit witnessed Saudi financial support for Egypt and Jordan in exchange for the withdrawal of Egyptian forces from Yemen, and Abdel Nasser agreed to that. Kuwait and Libya also agreed to provide financial aid to Egypt and Jordan.

The summit ended with the announcement of a statement that confirmed the determination of the Arab countries to move collectively to secure the withdrawal of the entity’s forces from the Arab regions that it occupied after June 1867, in accordance with the principles recognized by the Arab countries, which are: no peace with the entity, no recognition of it, no negotiations with it, and guaranteeing the rights of the Palestinian people.

Thus, the Arabs failed once again to stand up to the Zionist entity, and the reason is the weakness of Arab unity, as Egypt, Jordan, and Syria cannot stand up to the entity supported by major powers such as( Britain and America) alone, as the Arab powers must ally with each other in various fields, economically, militarily, and politically. The major powers succeeded in making the entity a buffer state among the Arabs.

73 war:

We can say that one of the results of the 1967 war was the 1973 war. The Egyptian and Syrian sides did not stand idly by as a result of the entity’s occupation of their lands. In the period between 1967 and 1973, both Egypt and Syria mobilized their forces to regain the lands. Indeed, on October 6, 1973, the Egyptian forces launched a war on the Zionist entity occupying the Sinai desert, and Syria attacked the entity’s forces in the Golan Heights. Both sides succeeded in inflicting heavy losses on the entity, which forced it to request support from the United States of America. The latter responded to the call and provided the entity with various types of weapons and military support, restoring the entity’s balance and turning the tide of war in its favor, as it was able to stop the Egyptian tide on the one hand and reach the outskirts of Damascus on the other. Had it not been for the intervention of the Iraqi military forces, the city of Damascus would have been occupied and Syria would have fallen into the hands of the entity. Because Egypt and Syria were unable to complete the war, they signed a disengagement agreement and the war officially ended. The United States of America and the Soviet Union participated in the war indirectly, as America helped the entity in its war against Egypt and Syria, and the Soviet Union helped Egypt and Syria in its war against the entity. The results of this war were:

_Restored Egyptian sovereignty over the Sinai Desert and the Suez Canal.

_Regaining Syrian control over part of the Golan Heights.

This war paved the way for the Camp David Accords between Egypt and the entity.

Camp David

The 1973 war paved the way for the announcement of the Camp David Accords between Egypt and the Zionist entity in 1978, which was sponsored by the United States of America. This agreement is considered the first peace agreement between the entity and an Arab country, and it contained many provisions that emphasized the normalization of relations with the entity in addition to recognizing it as a state. Egypt’s signing of this agreement sparked anger among the Arab countries, so the 1978 Arab Summit was held in Baghdad five days after the announcement of the signing of the agreement. This summit was held without Egypt, and a decision was made to expel Egypt from the Arab League and change the center of the League from Cairo to Tunis.

Egypt’s signing of this ominous agreement means that the entity has succeeded in being a buffer state among the Arabs. It is not possible for the Arab countries to call for the liberation of Palestine from the entity and then at the same time sign peace agreements, normalization, and recognition that the entity is a state. In addition, the control of the United States of America – a superpower – over the balance of power and its support for Israel weakens the position of the Arab countries due to their limited capabilities, which makes them submit to the power of the entity, which is originally derived from the United States of America, because we have noticed through the wars that took place between the two parties that the power of the Arabs is much greater than the power of the entity, and it is incomparable. However, the reason for the Arabs’ defeat every time is the intervention of the United States, the largest superpower, and the Security Council issuing decisions that are always in favor of the entity.

Results:

_ A buffer state can be defined as a weak force that is weaker than the force of neighboring countries. This state is established for the purpose of preventing conflict and friction between strong countries and maintaining international peace and security.

_The existence of a buffer state is necessary to maintain international security and peace, as the existence of two strong, warring neighboring states is dangerous because it threatens the security and peace of all states, whether they surround them or not, because if war breaks out, it affects all states, near or far.

_The possibility of the existence of a buffer state that prevents war means the possibility of saying that there is a state whose function is to cause wars between states, which is the concept of opposition.

_The Zionist entity is the best example of a buffer state in the sense of opposition. Throughout history, since the beginning of the entity’s establishment in the Balfour Declaration until the announcement of its founding in 1948, it has continued to cause conflicts in the Arab region.

The establishment of the Zionist entity with the help of Britain and then America was to prevent the Arabs from becoming a superpower and to divide the wings of the Islamic world in Africa and Asia. Consequently, the Arabs cannot form a superpower to replace the Ottoman Empire. This is according to what Professor Mohsen Saleh, a professor specializing in Palestinian studies at the Al-Zaytouna Center for Studies and Consultations in Beirut, says. This is what we confirm in this research and what history has actually confirmed because when the Arabs allied in the wars of 67 and 73, they inflicted heavy losses on the entity, but in the end the balance turned against them due to the intervention of America, the superpower.

The entity itself is a weak force that is unable to confront the Arabs, and the reason for its strength is American support.

References and sources:

-a research titled (شرح خصائص هيكلية ووظيفة الفراغات العازلة) محمد رضا و سيروس احمد و برنارد هوكارد.

-an article titled (تعريف الدولة العازلة).

-an article titled (توازن القوى).

-a research titled (الدولة العازلة من منظور جيوسياسي المفهوم الخصائص الوظيفة).

-an article titled (وعد بلفور 2 تشرين الثاني/نوفمبر 1917 وعد فلسطين للغير).

-an article titled (نكبة فلسطين القصة الكاملة).

-an article titled (نكبة فلسطين كيف تحول النصر العربي إلى هزيمة مرة).

- an article titled (حرب حزيران/يونيو 1967 نقطة تحول في الصراع العربي-الإسرائيلي).