Imagine, if you will, that the British government recently submitted a formal proposal to the UN Security Council, with the intent that it will go before the larger General Assembly. The proposal states the following:

Given the challenges facing the international community due to greater instability and conflict with regard to the Palestinian-Israeli dispute and the Middle East in general, Her Majesty's government, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, calls for a reconsideration of the historical borders in the region, which have proven to be incongruous with the realities of the lives of its people.

The British, in their proposal, do not explicitly refer to the Sykes-Picot agreement or the creation of the Palestine mandate, but the implication of both is unmistakeable.

They are, in effect, acknowledging that the problem is systemic and, if not addressed comprehensively, will result in a continuous serious of conflicts and insurgencies for decades to come, with no end in sight.

It is as close to an admission of responsibility as anyone has ever heard from any of the great colonial powers of the early 20th century.

Your assignment: In 500 to 1000 words, tell me why the British proposal to "reevaluate" the current borders is an effective or ineffective response to current conditions, including the Arab-Israeli conflict.