Three Truths for Mideast Peace
Published under Introspection, Israel, Leadership, Middle East, Mideast Negotiations, OneVoice Movement, Palestine, United States Jan 26, 2009War and horror tend to shake us out of complacency, to force us all to confront ugly realities and say what needs to be said, poignantly, once and for all, even if it is not pretty and requires nuance in an otherwise partisan puddle.
And so The New York Times writers who have been following the Hamas-Israel war seem to have been at their best this weekend, when they poignantly summarized three core themes that are required understanding for those who truly wish to end the conflict:
- Take-away from Ethan Bronner (full article below): Partisan Absolutism will only protract the conflict; for far too long each side has been speaking past each other and does not even understand the meaning of the words from the other side, let alone what historical sacrifices it will take if they want to resolve this conflict and build a future based on co-existence and respect rather than on denial of the humanity of the other side; if each side continues to believe itself the absolute victim and the other side the absolute perpetrator, we will be condemned to eternal war.
- Take-away from Tom Friedman (full column below): Time is really running out for a two-state solution; all parties must be brought to the table for negotiations that will bring about a solution, lest militants from Hamas and militant settlers permanently destroy the prospects for peace. And we are not far off from getting there.
- Take-away from Scott Atran and Jeremy Ginges (full opinion piece below): it is not just about the substance of what the solution will look like but about the dignity with which the negotiations are approached; the existentialist fears and existentialist rights of the Israelis and the honor and suffering of (and injustice towards) the Palestinians need to be acknowledged by each other if a peaceful solution is ever to be agreed upon.
For OneVoice, too, time is running out. The Movement was born to propel a resolution of the conflict, not to manage it or endure it with niceties. We should be bold about the final efforts to make an impact, and either succeed or fail for trying, but not fail because time ran out and we did not try hard enough for fear that we’d fail.