Peace will be painful for Israel and Palestine

It is regrettable that Israeli and Palestinian negotiators have failed to come to a workable solution to their long-standing conflict, and that a US-led talks initiative led by Secretary of State John Kerry has come to a complete standstill. 

Can Palestine finally gain its independence and Israel its security?  When will Israelis and Palestinians realise that they are neighbours forever and that the sooner they arrive at peace, the better their future will be?

Reflecting on current and past negotiations, it is apparent that any blueprint for peace has to take into account the following:  

First, without a shared understanding of peace as an end to all claims and as the start of reconciliation and justice, the disagreement between over specific issues - borders, security, Israeli settlements, Palestinian refugees, Jerusalem, water rights - will remain too sizeable to bridge. Unfulfilled expectations, disappointment, and pessimism have set in, further deepening the despair and alienation in the two national communities.

Second, top-down peacemaking by politicians without complementary bottom-up peace building by civil society organisations will not work.  Only when both merge in terms of time frames and strategies will peace become more probable.  

Third, opponents of compromise and peace have a tendency to disrupt negotiations when their narrow interests are not served. Palestinians and Israelis must fight distraction and political noise and negotiate seriously and in good faith, regardless of the statements and events around them - locally, regionally, and internationally. 

Those who believe in peace and reconciliation should not allow those who attempt to derail the process to win this battle. Moderates should reassert themselves and not let extremism take over the political agenda.

Fourth, the two societies remain stuck in outdated policies and positions, hardened by decades of pain and insecurity, which are complicated by ideological division and political polarization. The result has been a sense of distrust and a wide gap between declared policy and practical politics.  

This is epitomised by the Israeli ultra-nationalist religious groups and the YESHA Council of Settlements, a political pressure group, which advocates for settler interests and totally opposes land concessions, and by Hamas (the Islamic Resistance Movement), anchored in the Gaza Strip, which favours armed struggle and calls for the liberation of all of Palestine.  It is also expressed by anti-normalisation efforts in Palestine, strengthened recently by the increased effort of the BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) movement. 

Palestinian and Israeli leaders must prepare for compromise and tradeoffs. Without socialisation for peace, a peace agreement will have little public support.  At best, it will result in a cold peace, as appears in the current ties between Israel, Egypt and Jordan.

Education for peace and peace for education complement and complete each other.  Imbuing curricula, media, and citizens’ relationships with positive images and values will generate good will, mutual respect, and the willingness for cooperation. 

Fifth, Palestinian and Israeli leaders must prioritise long-term interests on immediate domestic political gains, while carefully managing expectations.  A peace agreement requires painful concessions on both sides, and all concerned must do their best but expect less than they hope for. The best that can be done might well fall short of the commitment needed to solve all issues.  Ultimately, endurance, socially responsible leadership, and nonviolence are essential for realising goals and keeping the vision of peace and justice alive.

Sixth, the language of conflict is given free rein to politicise the dialogue.  Little attention is being put on the public peace process and the pursuit of peace, a noble expression of positive human engagement.  This is happening at a time when it is becoming increasingly clear that people-to-people, cross-boundary, and multi-cultural civic interactions are the new power on the road to life beyond parochial affiliations, national fervour, and perennial conflict. 

Encouragement and financial support must be directed to joint projects trying to build aspects of a shared society.  Examples include Hand-in-Hand schools, Israel Palestine Creative Regional Initiatives, Neve Shalom or Wahat al-Salam (Oasis of Peace), Givat Haviva, and Interfaith Encounter Association.

Seventh, even when peace negotiations were underway, Israel continued to build settlements and violence flared from both sides of the Gaza border, resulting in casualties and property damage.  If peace negotiations are not just a façade, then both sides must cease activities that would aggravate conditions on the ground.  Care must be taken to start healing the rifts and wounds from ideological rigidities, societal divisions, and religious dogmas.

Peacemaking between Palestinians and Israelis does not end with the signing of a peace agreement.  The agreement, when reached, will only be the beginning of a long generational road toward reconciliation, normalization, and peace building.  The future will be the witness.

- Dr Saliba Sarsar is Professor of Political Science and the Associate Vice President for Global Initiatives at Monmouth University.

- Professor Yossi Mekelberg is an Associate Fellow of the Middle East and North Africa Program at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House and also the Director of the International Relations and Social Sciences Program at Regent’s University in London

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Photo credit: PA President Mahmoud Abbas meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (AFP)