All Jewish prayers end with a
prayer for peace. The rabbis thus kept God’s chief blessing—peace—before us at
all times. It is one thing to pray for peace, another to talk of it, and still
another to achieve it. The Jewish world is adept at the first two, but the
actual goal, achieving peace, eludes us. Israel and its Palestinian neighbors
continue to be in conflict and there seems to be no end in sight. But if we
hope to transform words into reality, it would be good to reflect on just how
peace materializes in situations of prolonged and intractable conflict.
The most recent skirmish on the
Israeli-Gaza border has left some 62 Palestinians dead. The tragedy unfolded on
May 14, 2018, a day that should otherwise have been one of celebration, the
moving of the United States Embassy to Jerusalem. But the move was no joy fest
for Palestinians, who understood the move as the United States eliminating
Jerusalem from the agenda of any future negotiations. And so an otherwise happy
day turned tragic as Palestinian rage clashed with Israeli military resolve.
In truth, there had been relatively
quiet demonstrations at the Gaza-Israeli border for weeks. This demonstration
turned deadly when demonstrators attempted to cross the border and support the
border violations with throwing of rocks, makeshift bombs, and sending kites
loaded with explosives over to the Israeli soldiers. This was not a peaceful
protest. There were sufficient militants present intent on deliberately provoking
the military, and the military responded. Among the dead, 52 were Hamas
operatives and three were jihadits—none friends of Israel or the USA.
Was the Israeli response
proportional to the apparent threat? That is a question worth pursuing, but as
anyone reading much of the media will know, even before the smoke had cleared
and any dispassionate investigation begun, Israel was already condemned in the
court of world opinion. And that is because the narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict has been cast as an oppressive regime versus an underdog, and the
underdog, in all such stories, is always an innocent victim. The preordained
narrative insists that Israel opened fire for no justifiable reason; that the
force used must have been disproportionate; and without any examination, it was
clear who must be condemned and who championed. The narrative requires no
further inquiry, which makes the narrative, and all such narratives, the very
opposite of justice.
Much of the western world is sick
of this conflict. Why can’t it be brought to a close? Why can’t people of good
faith sit down, work out borders, and finally resolve this chronic pathology? I
actually believe that the Palestinians hold the answer to these questions. The
answer is that in order for resolution to take place, one party to the conflict
must fold. It will only be the loser who is prepared to make the concessions
necessary in order for peace to be achieved. That is how peace was achieved
with the South after the Civil War, and with Germany and Japan after World War
II. War ends only with winners and losers. The only problem with this theory is
that the Palestinians believe that Israel must come to the table as the loser.
And that, at least in the near future, is unlikely.
Given its neighbors’ stated goals,
Israel’s response to Gaza is almost always restrained. Its periodic
infiltrations into Gaza are characterized by limited strategic goals—taking out
rocket launchers, Hamas offices, collapsing caves used for armament transfers,
etc.—which result in far fewer deaths than an actual all-out war. After each
such operation, Israel walks away satisfied at having achieved its limited goals,
and the Palestinians walk away without having been crushed, which in their
estimation constitutes a victory. And perhaps it is. But as long as there is no
defeat, there is no reason to show up at a negotiating table. Ironically, Israeli
military strategy may be the most effective generator of hope for a Palestine
free of Jews. Were Israel to fight the Palestinians the way, for example,
Churchill battled another hostile regime, the Third Reich, the entire Israeli
Knesset would be sanctioned for war crimes. And yet, we know how World War II
ended. Most importantly, it ended. And then there was peace. And then America invested
billions of dollars into Europe and rebuilt it under the Marshall Plan.
But here’s the good news: World
War II blood-shed would not be necessary in the case of Israel versus Palestine.
The international community, out of its compassion, pours Euros and dollars
into the West Bank and Gaza which support some humanitarian projects but also
allows for the acquisition of munitions and the exercise of military-type of
activities. In addition, though much has been written about how Israel limits
access to electricity and water in Gaza, it is never so much as to force Palestinians
to the negotiating table. No one allows the Palestinians to taste failure, not
even the Israelis. Western compassion serves as life support for a Palestinian
dictatorship that lost militarily, financially and morally, long ago. Western and
Israeli compassion keep this pointless conflict hot and unending.
I garner no joy in forcing anyone
to do anything. Coercion is not how God meant us to live on this beautiful
earth. Nor did God want us to live in a constant state of war. But praying for
peace and talking about peace is not going to achieve peace. This is an
intransigent war and wars like this don’t end until one side loses. We should
never stop praying for peace, but we may just start hoping more for defeat. It
may be the only path to peace in realpolitik.
No comments:
Post a Comment