OPINION | Culturally charged Israel and Palestine conflict

Casey Wade and Rachel Kelly

(Emma Clark Luster)

The conflict between Israel and Palestine is one of the most complex and long-standing issues in modern history. The conflict involves deeply entrenched cultural, religious, and political identities, making it difficult to find a mutually acceptable solution.

Both sides have legitimate grievances and aspirations, which have often been overshadowed by the violent acts and propaganda campaigns of extremist groups. The Israeli government has a responsibility to protect its citizens from terrorism, but its policies of expanding settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have inflamed tensions with the Palestinian population. The Palestinian leadership, meanwhile, has failed to effectively govern and provide for its people, and some have resorted to violent means to resist Israeli occupation.

Israelis view the conflict as a struggle for survival, in which they have the right to defend themselves against Palestinian terrorism and aggression. They argue that the creation of a Jewish state was a necessary response to centuries of anti-Semitism and persecution in Europe and the Middle East, and that Israel is a democratic and multicultural society that seeks peace with its neighbors.

Palestinians, on the other hand, see the conflict as a struggle for national liberation, in which they are fighting against Israeli occupation and oppression. They argue that Israel’s establishment came at the expense of their own homeland, and that they have been subjected to decades of discrimination, displacement, and violence. They seek the creation of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

A lasting solution to the conflict will require compromise and goodwill from both sides. It will also require an acknowledgment of the other’s history and aspirations. The international community has a role to play in facilitating dialogue and negotiations between Israel and Palestine, and in supporting the development of viable and democratic Palestinian institutions.

Ultimately, the solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict must be based on mutual recognition, respect, and a commitment to peaceful coexistence.


ChatGPT — not a Tulane Hullabaloo staff member — wrote the previous blurb. Upon closer inspection, readers should be able to tell some obvious shortcomings in the essay. ChatGPT cannot create an argument and fails to fulfill the purpose of an op-ed. When asked to write an opinion piece on Israel and Palestine, ChatGPT said “As an AI language model, I do not have personal opinions or beliefs. However, I can provide a neutral analysis of the Israel-Palestine conflict based on historical and factual information.” ChatGPT can provide useful fact based information, but computers lack the human emotion and nuance to develop an op-ed. 

ChatGPT lacks the use of accessible sources in the work it creates. Some of the statements made in the article above cannot be fact checked and provide examples that are too generalized. ChatGPT stated that the Israeli government is democratic and multicultural; characterizations like these vary based on who is making them. While a government may perceive itself to be democratic, others may not share the same view. These nuanced opinions should not be stated so simply.

Many people have been concerned over ChatGPT and AI’s new role in the professional and academic world, but ChatGPT cannot simply replace argumentative work. It is a useful tool that can and should be used for professional and academic work by assisting in brainstorming or research, much like how Google is used. Professionals do not need to fear ChatGPT but rather use it for their advantage because ultimately, ChatGPT does not have the human experience and emotion to produce full-fledged arguments. 

Leave a Comment