BENSALEM, Pennsylvania: Reports that the Obama Administration will propose a peace initiative clearly hints at the level of frustration Washington is feeling. It is also clear that a real peace requires an honest and active broker with the power to make it happen.
In 2010 Hamas controls the Gaza Strip, Hezbollah, whom many see as a problematic actor, is part of the Lebanese government and many governments believe that Iran is well on its way to reaching nuclear capability. The starkness of those realities is matched by the Israeli government’s espousal of Jerusalem as its undivided capital and its continuing expansion of settlements in the West Bank. Thus an American president who came into office promising to turn over a new leaf in favor of rapprochement with the Islamic world has found great difficulty in getting the two sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict to even sit together at the same table.
The basic terms of a peace agreement were worked out ten years ago in the final year of the Clinton presidency at Camp David and Taba and have been reiterated recently in the NY Times and numerous other sources. Briefly, these terms are: share Jerusalem; accept the pre-1967 borders with minor adjustments; accept the end of the Palestinian right of return cushioned with significant international compensation; and secure the two states of Israel and Palestine with NATO troops on the ground.
The problem is that these terms are not enough to overcome the politics of the conflict, the fear each people has of the other, or the additional issues that may arise should external governments or non-state actors resort to violence even if the US government actually presents such a proposal.
Palestinians and Israelis continue to die and the viability of a two-state solution continues to disappear as a result of demographics, settlement growth and the increasing sophistication of weaponry available to all the state and non-state actors in the region.
A solution is only available if the political meets the personal. It is a nightmare to consider the variety and number of groups that will oppose a US-brokered plan unless what is put on the table moves public sentiment by involving all parties (or at least those residing in the territory itself) in a positive, collaborative educational process. While negotiations have broken down repeatedly over policy considerations, no government has undertaken the work necessary to actually prepare its people to live harmoniously under the auspices of a two-state solution. Thus neither Israelis nor Palestinians are ready to accept the reality of a peace agreement. It is thus incumbent upon the United States and its allies to promote and finance a tangible education program for the Palestinian and Israeli publics to prepare them for peace.
There are many programs currently operated by local and international NGOs such as Neve Shalom Wahat al-Salam, One Voice, Seeds of Peace and other university and community based projects throughout the area. These programs offer the governments the opportunity to refine and utilize the best experience of multiple institutions to craft a program that will truly reach and involve the entire public-from child to adult-in a positive developmental process. Pressure on both governments to simultaneously implement curriculums highlighting the existence of an alternative government should also be an integral part of the framework of a peace deal.
Such initiatives will help to reshape the capacity of the two governments to accept the terms of an agreement that has been shared with its people in such a way that they become participants in the daily actualization of the peace process. It is necessary for the United States government to develop a process with Israelis and Palestinians that challenges each to reach out and realize a better future together. It must come from and reach synergistically into both governments and the people in the streets of Jerusalem, Ramallah, Nablus, Tel Aviv, Hebron, Ma’ale Adumin and Rafah in order for it to work. It must be incorporated into school curricula and discussed by pupils from Safed to Eilat and from Jenin to Gaza. The United States must work to enfranchise an active process of education and reconciliation that involves all the residents of the Holy Land.
Peacemaking must include not only brave steps by the leaders of each people. It must also include a grassroots initiative that bridges boundaries and builds new relationships. It is only through this public peacemaking process that the political peacemaking process can be realized.
Larry Snider is the coordinator of the Interfaith Community for Middle East Peace and has been an advocate for a viable two-state solution for many years. In 2008 he organized the Delaware Valley Interfaith Delegation to Israel/Palestine. He can be reached at [email protected]. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).
