A pathway to sustainable peace

What Israel and Palestine need are people that care about the things that they care – about the status of Jerusalem that should be equally important to Christians, Muslims and Jews worldwide as it is to locals. They need people who understand the grief of losing a homeland, to understand that the divisions have an equal claim on that land and have had for centuries. Peace is possible when emotional issues are resolved because when peo-ple feel that they are being heard and their values respected they have no incentive to harm

“Is peace in the West Bank and Gaza strip possible?” One must define what peace really means. Is it absolute zero problems? Hatred, disagreements and differences but no physical harm? Civil and political tensions but no outright war? We cannot figure out a solution until we fully understand what it is we want to end. I define peace as hatred, disagreements and differences but no physical harm and that can only be achieved through conflict transformation.

For peace to exist in the West Bank and Gaza strip, we must not seek to create treaties and agree-ments but address the underlying historical injustices, inequalities and religious and territorial sen-timents that exist. I see agreements, especially, those based upon centuries of conflict as coverups and not solutions, maybe temporary solutions but not ones which will guarantee peace and harmo-ny for decades to come. The Israel Palestine conflict is rooted in historical and religious beliefs, feelings and differences. To solve such a complex problem by signing a treaty with a list of condi-tions is to simply put it, foolish.

In the book “From pacification to peacebuilding” by peace activist Diana Francis, the shift from traditional approaches focused on pacifying conflict through military means to peacebuilding strat-egies that address root causes and promote reconciliation is emphasized.

This applies perfectly to the question at hand. As brutal and chaotic this conflict is, the efforts to meet common ground and establish stability cannot be denied. In 1947, the UN proposed a parti-tion plan for Israel and Palestine to become two separate sovereign states, an idea that the world loves today and looks up to it as perfection. But when the plan was proposed many despised it just like they will in the future; in fact, the plan is what started the conflict in the first place. The Jews were delighted at sight of finally returning to their homeland and being free of persecution, but Ar-abs who made up 90% of the population were furious that 55% of most fertile land was declared Israel.

The plan was rejected and fighting went on till May 4 of 1948 when Israel captured more territory and declared itself independent. The war had just begun. Horrifying death tolls from that day on-wards, counting the Suez Canal, Six-day war, Munich Olympics attack, Yon Kippur and first inti-fada. There was a glimmer of hope when the Oslo Accords were introduced. Oslo 1 and 2 were agreements between the PLO and Israel that seemed very practical and agreeable. Although back-lash, many conditions of the accords such as redeployment of Israeli forces from the Gaza strip, right of self-governance in Gaza strip and west bank, the division of area a, b and c in West Bank and the fight against terrorism in Palestine were objectives that seemed perfect at the time. Problem is these were agreed upon by two parties, even more literally two persons, who simply wanted less of their people to die and to please the international community. Many civilians on both sides op-posed it, which proves right after the assassination of Prime minister Yitzhak Rabin by a right-wing extremist.

Why did they oppose it? It seemed like almost everyone got what they wanted. But they didn’t. It was just a sophisticated version of the UN plan. Yes, less people would die and that is appealing but people knowingly or not they prioritize patriotism, pride and religion.

A solution that would possibly bring peace is like Johan Gaultang said, “Sustainable peace cannot be achieved through mere ceasefire agreements; it requires addressing the deep-seated grievances and fostering inclusive development.” What Israel and Palestine need are people that care about the things that they care – about the status of Jerusalem that should be equally important to Christians, Muslims and Jews worldwide as it is to locals. They need people who understand the grief of los-ing a homeland, to understand that the divisions have an equal claim on that land and have had for centuries. Gaultang talks in his book called ‘Sustainable Reconciliation In Divided Societies’ that peace is possible when emotional issues are resolved because when people feel that they are being heard and their values respected they have no incentive to harm. Anger only comes when once feels unimportant or ridiculed for their sentiments.

Yes, peace in the Gaza strip is possible when Gazans revolt against the greed of Hamas and realise that it is their land that Israel does not seek to claim, land that they must socially, economically and politically develop. And yes, peace in the West Bank is possible when Israel realises that their claim over Jerusalem is righteous, and it should focus on developing their hope of 2000 years to claim the holy land where Judaism was the first religion. It is possible when they prioritise collabo-rating on a land that is holy to 3 faiths over expanding settlements to showcase military might.

(Writer is a research scholar at The Gaudium Institute, Hyderabad)