|
The war between the Jews and the Arabs in former British Palestine
has been going on for eighty-one years. In 1921, the first Arab explosion
against the Zionist pioneers announced the beginning of the fray. Hatred
and suspicion have undermined any successful resolution of the conflict.
After the Jewish War of Independence in 1948, the conflict became
a war between the Jewish state and external Arab enemies. In that conflict,
the Israelis were generally victorious. The Israeli triumph in 1967
crushed Gamal Abdel Nasser, the hero of Arab nationalism. But in 1987
the Palestinian Arabs chose a new kind of battle-internal rebellion.
The infitada was born. And it has grown in fury ever since.
The foundation of the war is the power of nationalism. Jewish nationalism
was born out of the defiance of the oppressed masses in czarist Russia.
It was fed by racial anti-Semitism. Diaspora nationalism sought to liberate
the Jews of eastern Europe and give them cultural autonomy. It was destroyed
by native resistance and the Holocaust.
Zionist nationalism also saw itself as a national liberation movement.
It naively proposed to solve anti-Semitism by returning the Jews to
their ancient homeland. Reinforced by socialist idealism and the revival
of Hebrew as a popular language, it led to the establishment of a Jewish
settlement in Palestine. The closing of the doors to immigration in
the United States, the support of the British government, and the rise
of Adolf Hitler gave this nationalism the impetus that the slaughter
of six million Jews was to make irresistible. Zionism became the most
powerful movement to mobilize the Jewish masses in the twentieth century.
Arab nationalism was an import from the West and was cultivated initially
by Christian Arabs as a way of countering their exclusion by Muslims.
Propelled by Turkish oppression and by the humiliation of European conquest,
the Arab nationalist movement was led by Westernized intellectuals who
embraced secular values and placed nationhood above religion. Since
the Arab world never fully experienced the secular revolution which
had transformed European life, the Arab nationalism of the street had
difficulty distinguishing between Arab loyalty and Muslim loyalty. Religion
is inevitably part of the nationalist package in the Muslim world.
Since the Arab world is vast, divided by regional differences, cultural
diversity, and the internal boundaries of twenty-two states created
by colonial masters, the unification of the Arab nation hasn't been
easy. Nasser tried and failed. He was defeated by both the Israelis
and by the hostility of his political enemies and rivals within the
Arab world.
The one issue that has the power to transcend the internal state boundaries
of the Arab world and to mobilize the Arab masses is Zionism. Whether
or not it deserves such designation, the Jewish state has become the
symbol of Arab humiliation. Perceived as the last and most outrageous
example of European colonialism, Israel is the object of almost universal
Arab hate. The defeat of Israel has become the ultimate perceived means
of restoring Arab honor. The hatred of Zionism is so intense that it
is difficult for most Arabs to distinguish between their hostility to
Israel and their hatred for Jews.
In fact, the suspicion and hatred between Arabs and Jews is so fierce
that dialogue is condemned to failure. Most public and private encounters
between conventional Arab and Jewish leaders degenerates into shouting
matches. Each side insists on its rights. And, of course, both sides
are "right." The Palestinian Arabs have been invaded, abused,
and oppressed. The Israeli Jews are by now mainly native-born residents
of the land they defend and the creators of a dynamic, modern, high-tech
state; they have no place else to go.
From the Jewish point of view, the Arab hostility cannot easily be
distinguished from anti-Semitism. The memories of the Holocaust hover
over every response. Of course, the popular media in the Arab world
reinforce this perception by aping the propaganda of European Jew hatred.
From the perspective of the Arabs, Jewish voices are confused with the
voices of Jewish extremists who advocate expulsion and deportation.
There is an abundance of extremists on both sides. The Arab and Palestinian
nationalist and fundamentalist worlds feature many militant groups that
advocate terrorism and call for the destruction of the Jewish state.
The Jewish and Israeli extremists are equally militant in their refusal
to recognize the right of a Palestinian state to exist (beyond suggesting
that Jordan is already a Palestinian state). To the credit of the Israelis,
Israel features a peace movement that has no counterpart in the Arab
world.
Both sides see themselves as victims. Jews see Israel as a small beleaguered
state in a vast and petroleum-rich Arab world that does nothing to rescue
its Palestinian brothers and sisters from poverty. Arabs see Israel
as the agent of American imperialism, supported by the wealth and military
technology of the world's only superpower-a nation that is beholden
to Jewish political power.<> The failure of the Oslo peace process is
as much the result of intense hatred and suspicion as it is the incompatibility
of vested interests. The issues of boundaries, Jerusalem, and refugees
are shrouded by such levels of distrust that the normal compromises
that negotiations bring can never emerge. No arrangements can provide
the security that most Israelis want. And no "deal" can yield
the sense of honor and vindication that most Palestinians and Arabs
seek.
In searching for alternatives to endless war, certain realities need
to be confronted. This war is not only bad for the Israelis and the
Palestinians but also for Jews and Arabs. For the Jews, the war has
already spread to Europe, where Muslim militants assault synagogues
and vulnerable Jews. For the Arabs, the war prevents any real confrontation
with the political, economic, and social issues that affect their world.
War continues to justify government by military dictators.<> This war
is bad for the United States and the rest of the world. The Palestinian
issue has provided the fuel whereby Muslim militants have won the allegiance
of millions of Arabs and Muslims in their desire to wage war against
the United States and Western culture. A war between the West and Islam
is a world war. It is different from a war against Muslim fundamentalist
terrorism; such a conflict would enjoy the support of most Muslim governments.
The success of the United States' response to the attacks of September
11, 2001, lies in the ability to make such a distinction.
Jews and Arabs, Israelis and Palestinians by themselves cannot achieve
peace-or even an effective truce-by relying on negotiations alone; the
cycle of vengeance has its own logic. Every terrorist action incites
retaliation; every retaliation incites counter-retaliation. No antagonist
can allow itself to be seen as weak. Revenge is a necessary tactic in
maintaining credibility. The cycle cannot stop itself without outside
intervention.
The proposed Palestinian state is no more than 3,000 square miles
in size-hardly a formula for viability. It is presently a series of
urban "doughnut holes" within Israeli-occupied territory.
The presence of the Israeli army is justified not only by the argument
for security but also by the necessity to defend small Jewish settlements
which have been established in the West Bank and Gaza by religious Jewish
settlers laying claim to the land. These settlements prevent peace,
add nothing to the security of Israel, and provide more provocation
to Arabs to kill more Jews.
Jerusalem is already divided. Jewish Jerusalem (about two-thirds of
the expanded city) has no Arabs, while Arab Jerusalem (the eastern sector)
has no Jews. While some Arabs work in Jewish Jerusalem, almost no Jews
even penetrate Arab Jerusalem unless they are on military duty. A unified
city is more desirable than a divided city, but the division already
exists.
A binational Israeli-Palestinian state-a dream of many peaceniks-is
not politically viable even though it would be economically desirable.
Jewish and Arab nationalism are realities; they cannot be wished away.
Mutual hatred and suspicion are realities; they cannot be dismissed.
Arguing against nationalism may work a hundred years from now but it
doesn't fly today. A Jewish state-in which Jewish national culture is
the dominant culture and most people speak Hebrew-is no more racist
than would be an Arab state whose dominant culture and language reflected
its people. Three million Palestinian refugees cannot return to the
Jewish state without destroying the Jewish national character of the
Jewish state.
Because outside intervention is required, the only superpower capable
of orchestrating it successfully is the United States. Since September
11, George W. Bush has mobilized an effective coalition of world powers,
including Europe, Russia, China, and India-as well as many allies in
the Muslim world. The war between the Israelis and the Palestinians
has begun to undermine the coalition, especially with Bush's perceived
support of the Ariel Sharon government in Israel. Joint intervention
with the approval of the United Nations and with the support of moderate
Muslim powers could restore the coalition. This intervention is no different
from the intervention that the United States initiated in Bosnia and
Kosovo.
What would be the elements of such an intervention? The United States
controls the process. The Israelis don't trust the United Nations and
won't cooperate with an effort managed by the hostile nations of the
developing world.
The United States acts as a neutral "parent." It doesn't
always praise one side and condemn the other; it creates a setting for
negotiations, with the presence of major members of the coalition. The
format of such negotiations is only a pretense. In the "back room"
the United States dictates the settlement and everybody knows that the
United States has imposed the settlement. Both antagonists protest,
but they yield because they have no choice. The imposition gives the
leaders of both sides an excuse, a way to save face, and a scapegoat.
They can justify their "surrender" to their constituencies
by pleading helplessness. They may even shake hands reluctantly. Whether
Arafat will still be representing the Palestinians is the question.
All that can realistically be achieved at this time is an effective
truce. Peace will have to await a reduction in the fury of hatred and
suspicion. For now, an imposed settlement should include the following:
· the removal of all Jewish settlements from the West Bank
and
Gaza, except those settlements which function as contiguous
communities for Tel Aviv and Jerusalem
· the digging of a ditch and construction of a fence between
the Jews and Arabs along the adjusted 1967 boundaries
· the policing of this fence by the United States and its
European allies
· the granting of Arab East Jerusalem to the Palestinians as
their national capital
· the demilitarization of the new Palestinian state, with periodic
inspections by the United States and its coalition partners
· compensation for Palestinian refugees who cannot return.
Such compensation may cost over $30 billion and would be covered by
the United States, Japan, and European allies. If the compensation helps
to bring about an effective truce, it would be worth the investment.
Rescuing the global economy for peace justifies the expense.
Israel needs to be compensated for its "willingness" to
shrink and to confront the wrath of its right-wing extremists. Since
it won't in the foreseeable future be accepted by the Arab and Muslim
worlds, it needs to be regarded as the European power it is. Israel's
high-tech economy needs the European market, just as its European culture
needs a European support system. The price that Europe pays for this
necessary peace is that it accepts Israel as a member of the European
Union. Such acceptance is no different than acceptance of Cyprus or
Turkey, and Israelis will be better off trading in euros than shekels.
After this settlement is imposed, terrorist violence will likely continue.
The war against Muslim fundamentalist terrorists will also continue.
For the extremists in the Arab and Muslim world-and even in the Jewish
world-hatred is a way of life. For moderates, an effective truce will
enable them to join the forces of peace.
The ball is in Bush's court if he would only lead the way. The leaders
of the Defense Department and the religious right will likely oppose
this kind of proposal, but only such action can provide any light at
the end of the tunnel that is the Middle East.
Rabbi Sherwin Wine is the founder of the Humanist Institute,
the Society for Humanistic Judaism, and the International Association
of Humanist Educators, Counselors, and Leaders. He currently cochairs
the International Institute for Secular Humanistic Judaism and has authored
several books and numerous articles.
| 
