To return to the new Peace Now website click here.

Israeli-Palestinian Peace: Between the Political and the Psychological

The following essay was written by APN intern Sarah Oakes: 

As events in Egypt, Syria, and Iran capture media headlines, the Arab-Israeli peace process is at risk of being forgotten by many.
 
While addressing Iran's nuclear quest or Syria's humanitarian crisis is of utmost importance, it is also crucial that we not give up the fight for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. At such times, it is imperative to remember that not only political differences separate Israelis from Palestinians but also deep-rooted fears and mutual distrust. 

Periods of diplomatic lull, such as the current one, typically further deepen the emotional schism between the two societies, with potential dire consequences. 

At a February 28th Policy Forum talk at George Washington University in Washington, DC, Ambassador Dennis Ross of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy discussed the importance of continually engaging Israelis and Palestinians in peace developments. As former National Security Council senior director for the Central Region and special advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Ambassador Ross has helped shape the role of the U.S. in the Middle East peace process, including working directly with the negotiating parties.

"The [Israeli-Palestinian] peace process is like a bicycle," Ross remarked. "As soon as you stop riding, you will fall off." Therefore, in order to keep up hope for peace, both Israelis and Palestinians must witness constant efforts to achieve peace - a common-sense message that peace activists have been preaching for decades. When asked by a reporter how he kept his optimism, Ross responded with a dry laugh, "I never said I was optimistic... But if you accept that nothing can be done, everything will get worse." 

Ross posits that in order to progress forward, it is crucial for both sides to believe in two principles: 1) that the other side is truly willing to work towards a negotiated border solution and political compromise; and 2) that negotiations toward a two-state solution are in their best self-interest.

According to Ross, (drawn from a 2010 Truman Institute Poll), around 70 percent of both Palestinians and Israelis support the idea of a two-state solution. However, the overwhelming majorities on both sides feel that the other will not support or take action toward achieving a two-state solution. 

As both Israelis and Palestinians increasingly suspect the others' intentions regarding peace, both leaderships become more extremist and less likely to take risks for peace. Distrust and fear of the other have now become ingrained in the Israeli and Palestinian psyches, and they are reflected in political, religious, and societal attitudes. As long as both sides accept that the other will never take tangible steps to achieve peace, there is little hope of progress toward peace.

While traveling in Israel last year, I met a young Israeli woman, Amit, who grew up in a settlement in the heart of the West Bank. By her parents, friends, and teachers at school, Amit was taught to hate and fear Palestinians. She told me that she had truly believed all Palestinians were terrorists, despite the fact she had never met a Palestinian. As a teenager, Amit's uncle convinced her to travel to the US to attend Seeds of Peace, a summer camp located in Maine, which brings Israeli and Palestinian youth together for 3-week sessions of dialogue and team building programs. After her time at Seeds of Peace, Amit returned to Israel with an entirely new perspective of Palestinians and the prospects for Middle East peace. After being disowned by her family for her new views, Amit moved to Jerusalem where she maintains her Seeds of Peace friendships with Palestinians, and continues working for Israeli-Palestinian peace. 

As Amit's story demonstrates, constructive personal contacts between Israelis and Palestinians can go a long way toward removing walls of fear and resentment. In order to address the divides in the region, it is crucial that people on either side of the conflict begin breaking down the psychological barriers and building up pro-peace attitudes from the ground up. These grassroots efforts could provide the necessary push for leaders to negotiate peace and would provide the necessary public backing for a future peace deal, once it is reached. 

The most important component of a pro-peace attitude, though, is the need for both Palestinians and Israelis to believe that peace is in their best interest. 

While lofty ideals of respect, compassion, or peace may not compel change in the region, national security and self-interests should. The recent upheavals in the Arab world, as well as Palestinian unrest, have exacerbated Israel's national security concerns. 

According to a study released this week by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University, Israel's national security is more vulnerable today than it has been since the end of the Cold War. In this study, Professor Efraim Inbar of Bar-Ilan University discusses Israel's isolation in the region, arguing that Israel must respond to this security crisis by "increasing defense outlays and the size of the standing army," and by maintaining a close relationship with the US. In an interview with the Jerusalem Post discussing the study, Inbar was asked what can Israel do. "Not much," he replied. "We have little influence over developments in the Middle East, and few ambitions to engage in political engineering there. All we can do is defend ourselves better."

I disagree. There are important diplomatic measures that Israel can take to reduce threats to its national security and help regional stability. It can actively improve relations with the Palestinians and its moderate neighbors, such as Jordan and Turkey. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long been the focal point of tensions and security concerns for Israel. Most in the Arab world - and worldwide - believe that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the precursor to regional peace and stability. 

The Middle East peace process clearly does not revolve solely around land swaps, political negotiations or the future of Jerusalem. The conflict is nourished by fears and mistrust. 

As APN explains, the challenging compromises that peace require are only possible with if the U.S. assumes leadership. It is crucial that not only members of Congress and the President play a role in this process, but that Americans across the country support Middle East peace by supporting and demanding balanced US policy and action. Each one of us has an important role to play in building a future of peace in the Middle East. 
So let's keep pedaling the bicycle and working for peace for Israelis and Palestinians.