Something relatively political here...
Earlier this week, elections were held in Israel. The Kadima party, founded by now-comatose Ariel Sharon and led by current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, won the most seats and will form a government. But by only capturing 28 of the 120 seats in the Israeli parliament (the Knesset), they are hardly in a position majoritarian enough to form a government.
I have long said that for peace to become a reality in the Middle East, that the old guard on both sides had to move on--either through old age or elections. The old guard carried too much baggage to be trusted by their opposite numbers, and none of them would be able to bring about peace.
But now, Netanyahu, Perez, and others are gone. Yassar Arafat has died. New leaders and parties are in place in government. So, assuming my theory is true, now is an opportunity for peace--one that could be lasting--to be created in this tumultuous region.
Is this a reality?
At this point, it is hard to say. Kadima is an advocate of resuming negotations, but they still have stipulated that they are more than willing to draw borders unilaterally should Palestine be less than cooperative. They have also driven home that no negotiations can begin until Palestine recognizes Israel's presence. Similarly, Hamas, the ruling party in the Palestinian territories, which is the process of forming a government as well, requires acknowledgement as being the legitimate successors to Fatah, despite their terrorist past.
I feel confident in stating that Hamas, now that they are legitimately in power, will tone down their hard-line approach and their advocation of terrorism. Now that they are in power, they must be more diplomatic if they are to carry any weight in the international community. Countries around the world are watching them with a critical eye, and any devolution towards terrorism and violence could crush the fragile recognition that they currently have.
In the Israeli state, a three-, four- or even five-party coalition seems likely for the new government. Can that many parties set their differences aside and formulate a policy that not only they can abide by, but also the Palestinians will be satisfied with? I don't know if a strong enough colaition can be done to achieve this.
I firmly believe that Israel has to make the first move towards peace. They are in the position of power, and hold the best hand. They have to show some sign of reconciliation and concession before the next steps can take place. With that show of faith, perhaps Hamas will lower its guard somewhat.
But there are still a lot of unanswered questions that place doubt on whether peace can EVER be possible.
1. Where will the lines of demarcation be? Will they follow the Balfour Agreement, which essentially would re-establish the 1967 borders? This means that the entire West Bank and Gaza would be Palestinian held. Perhaps the Oslo Accords are more likely, which would place pockets of Palestinian territory throughout Israel.
2. What about Jerusalem? This is so important it probably should be considered an issue in and of itself. Palestine is demanding that East Jerusalem be their capital, while Israel, in so many words, has declared that Jerusalem is firmy Israeli and not negotiable. Jerusalem is holy to all three of the world's primary monotheistic religions--Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Ideally, Jerusalem would be proclaimed "God's city," to be shared by all three. The odds of this happening are remote, however. The city is too important, and religion too unwavering, for this to happen. Devout Jews and Muslims alike would be compromising their religions to say that others should possess parts of Jerusalem.
3. Assuming 1 and 2 are accomplished, which is a big stretch in and of itself, can we also assume that the fighting and conflict will end as a result? Or will the inhavitants of this tiny stretch of land continue to disagree and wage war on one another about other issues? Does the hatred and mistrust run so deep that no amount or negotiaiton or reconciliation will change their minds? I am inclined to say yes, but I try to be optimistic nonetheless.
This is certainly a critical point in the history of Israel. Both sides have new parties in power, and more than likely new visions of the future. Whether they can come to a mutual agreement about the lands that they share, however, remains to be seen.
Earlier this week, elections were held in Israel. The Kadima party, founded by now-comatose Ariel Sharon and led by current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, won the most seats and will form a government. But by only capturing 28 of the 120 seats in the Israeli parliament (the Knesset), they are hardly in a position majoritarian enough to form a government.
I have long said that for peace to become a reality in the Middle East, that the old guard on both sides had to move on--either through old age or elections. The old guard carried too much baggage to be trusted by their opposite numbers, and none of them would be able to bring about peace.
But now, Netanyahu, Perez, and others are gone. Yassar Arafat has died. New leaders and parties are in place in government. So, assuming my theory is true, now is an opportunity for peace--one that could be lasting--to be created in this tumultuous region.
Is this a reality?
At this point, it is hard to say. Kadima is an advocate of resuming negotations, but they still have stipulated that they are more than willing to draw borders unilaterally should Palestine be less than cooperative. They have also driven home that no negotiations can begin until Palestine recognizes Israel's presence. Similarly, Hamas, the ruling party in the Palestinian territories, which is the process of forming a government as well, requires acknowledgement as being the legitimate successors to Fatah, despite their terrorist past.
I feel confident in stating that Hamas, now that they are legitimately in power, will tone down their hard-line approach and their advocation of terrorism. Now that they are in power, they must be more diplomatic if they are to carry any weight in the international community. Countries around the world are watching them with a critical eye, and any devolution towards terrorism and violence could crush the fragile recognition that they currently have.
In the Israeli state, a three-, four- or even five-party coalition seems likely for the new government. Can that many parties set their differences aside and formulate a policy that not only they can abide by, but also the Palestinians will be satisfied with? I don't know if a strong enough colaition can be done to achieve this.
I firmly believe that Israel has to make the first move towards peace. They are in the position of power, and hold the best hand. They have to show some sign of reconciliation and concession before the next steps can take place. With that show of faith, perhaps Hamas will lower its guard somewhat.
But there are still a lot of unanswered questions that place doubt on whether peace can EVER be possible.
1. Where will the lines of demarcation be? Will they follow the Balfour Agreement, which essentially would re-establish the 1967 borders? This means that the entire West Bank and Gaza would be Palestinian held. Perhaps the Oslo Accords are more likely, which would place pockets of Palestinian territory throughout Israel.
2. What about Jerusalem? This is so important it probably should be considered an issue in and of itself. Palestine is demanding that East Jerusalem be their capital, while Israel, in so many words, has declared that Jerusalem is firmy Israeli and not negotiable. Jerusalem is holy to all three of the world's primary monotheistic religions--Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Ideally, Jerusalem would be proclaimed "God's city," to be shared by all three. The odds of this happening are remote, however. The city is too important, and religion too unwavering, for this to happen. Devout Jews and Muslims alike would be compromising their religions to say that others should possess parts of Jerusalem.
3. Assuming 1 and 2 are accomplished, which is a big stretch in and of itself, can we also assume that the fighting and conflict will end as a result? Or will the inhavitants of this tiny stretch of land continue to disagree and wage war on one another about other issues? Does the hatred and mistrust run so deep that no amount or negotiaiton or reconciliation will change their minds? I am inclined to say yes, but I try to be optimistic nonetheless.
This is certainly a critical point in the history of Israel. Both sides have new parties in power, and more than likely new visions of the future. Whether they can come to a mutual agreement about the lands that they share, however, remains to be seen.
VIEW 3 of 3 COMMENTS
And that is why I refuse religion, among other reasons.