The Future of Conflict over Historical Palestine.
By Hasan Yahya, Ph.D
This article deals with the Arab-Palestinian-Israeli conflict over Palestine.
I would begin with this statement: “The logic in the face of power is illogical.” (Yahya 2005]. You don’t need to be Palestinian or Israeli to think logically about the more than 100 year long conflict between Arab-Palestinians and Jews (before Israel establishement and Israelis after). This analysis can be provided by any intellectual in various ways, and can also be understood from many angels of logic to understand, to know, to appreciate, and to compromise. These have no connection to values of both parties, where their beliefs cannot be defeated. The connection I am proposing has something to do with mental ability to promote understanding to appreciate each other in any area and to compromise to live in peace for generations to come.
The rule sited in the opening statement of this article, was followed by many cultures and religions worldwide. In other words, the one who have the power Through history over other cultures or nations we observe as a factual evidence after wars and military involvement. Scholars not always stick to validity of facts and relationships, according to their ideological or interest strains, but to bring them to the cause-effect relationships together to help justice to prevail. The powerful forces, opposed such logic and reject it on emotional or ideological grounds. Power makes victory over logic through history. When it comes to the Palestinian people problem in Palestine or outside Palestine. The powerful has victory over scholarship logic in the last century conflict between Arab-Palestinians and Israeli-Jews.
If the Palestinians have the support of Britain and the USA against the establishment of Israel last century, I think the Israelis would be now in the same shoes of Hamas and Hizbullah and Arabs. And the same powerful ideological logic will be the victorious over scholarship logic too.
But historical directions were pushed toward Palestinians as opposed to Israel in the area. Israel existence is not lawful or legal, in spite of the UN resolution. Because UN resolutions are dominated by the powerful nations. Which has the ability to pass its interests over the powerless. It was not the fault of Palestinians who fled by choice or by force their homeland. It is not the fault of Jews either after their collapse in Germany to pursue homeland for themselves. The creation of Israel, I think, was a result of power struggles imbalance between the victorious and the defeaters. Which in logical terms both identities were used to satisfy external forces rather than people’s aspirations to live in peace. Strategically the old powers [USA, Europe, and Britain with the Soviet Union]were having a grave mistake by creating Israel in the area.
Jews in Palestine were Palestinians like Arabs and Christians in the country. They share security inspiration in peaceful life. When the Zionist ideology interfered in the life of Jews, they brought all Jews in the world under scrutiny. And the conflict was colored by faith ever since.
In recent years there are two factors helped the Jews to occupy Palestine, one is when psychology science became available, the Jews took the opportunity to manipulate the minds of supporters on two grounds: the right to have Palestine as a homeland, and the Holocaust incident sympathy. Where both grounds were not logical on their basis.
The second factor is the power. This factor also has no logic, because the victorious implies its conditions over the weak. In that case, the weak has no right to defend his inability, while the powerful has the ability to be right. Each of the Arabic and Jewish culture since the idea of Hartzelle in 1897, became manipulated to hate each other in the form of winning or loosing the lands and the states. Religion was secondary at the beginning but later it became essential. No people across history ever accepted defeat forever. Civilizations come and go, and so Israel according to this fact, will go too. The few who refuse to recognize Israel as a state, are not wrong except in terms of power and weakness. The word of Hamas equals the power of Israel and stands for the logic that people anywhere do not accept defeat forever.
The role of the second World II, was the defeat of many parties, unfortunately, the Palestinians were sided with the defeated camp. As a consequence, Palestine was the price of the two illogical grounds mentioned above to establish Israel as a homeland for the Jews and to defeat any revival of Arabs and Muslims to regain their glorious past.
While some Jewish historians brought through their illogical analysis the blame of Palestinians and Arabs, they discarded the development of injustices in terms of powerful-weak political and physical relationships. Such success of establishing Israel, does not continue to be right. In almost all history, we observe that nations decline through time in terms of physical and political powers. Therefore, it is logical to say the Palestinians-someday-will be the victorious over the Israelis in Palestine, whether in terms of demography or in terms of political aspirations of the powerful camps. The NATO-EU members and the new SCO are finding new grounds for domination, and Israel might be the price for harmony of the two entities. This logic can be defeated easily in these times, Israelis might say this is impossible, but history told us, how many times the Jews were destroyed and defeated times and times again. Taking the fact that nothing remains the same forever, Palestinians on equal grounds with the Jews have the same possibility of victory or defeat.
Saying the above, what would be the solution for the conflict?
The perceptions of both Palestinians and Israelis of themselves and their rights to survive depend on false or true facts which deny all Palestinians the right to live in Palestine whether Jews or Arabs. Such perception should be built up under new laws of relationships. Crescentology is a theory provided to deal with Palestinian-Israeli conflict and solve it. Changing perceptions needs time for people to change. Both have to use the term “WE” to mean Arabs and Jews, instead of using the term for one side against the other as “THEY”. Such perception in fact is already in its way among Palestinians and Jews. For example many Arab and Jewish human rights activists began to follow that approach of crecentology theory to solve the problem. However, Crescentology as a theory assumes four variables to be practiced in mutual understanding to reduce hate and fight between Arabs and Jews on Palestine. These variables are true knowledge leads to true understanding, and the two variables lead to appreciation of the two parties to each other which is necessary to bring compromise and solving the problem.
The time frame to Crescentology to be effective may be relatively long. But to bring two different cultures such as the Jewish and Arabic-Islamic cultures need practical and pragmatic steps to be enforced by choice. Those who believe in crescentology rules have to take into consideration four principles to make the perception change possible. These principles are:
* 1. Institutional dynamics toward reciprocal acceptance in educational systems, history, and belief.
* 2. Exchanged true knowledge between the two groups.
* 3. the common grounds of understanding pave the way for appreciation of each other’s systems, history and beliefs.
* 4. the phase where both parties come to compromise in solving the conflict.
Few difficulties may stand in the practice. Such as:
1. The dogmatic fundamentalists in both parties may stand against any solution, preferring win-lose approach to continue fighting by claiming the all to be taken not given.
2. The short sighted people among the two parties who describe things to happen as impossible to happen.
3. The external power of political, economic and ideological influences may stand against harmony among the two parties for certain interests. For example, the NATO and SCO powers through their membership nations collectively or individually. Where I think the Muslims will find a way to regain their dignity, and if they did march in that direction, Israel will be in the weak position, and easy to defeat on any logical or illogical grounds. History is our professor.
4. Acceptability of compenstaion and repatriation in dealing with the conflict in future talks may stand against the theory to help resolving the conflict.
In conclusion, the above reasoning may not be accepted, which is expected. The struggle of classes for economic gains created conflict all over the world. Which was true for the last one hundred years of recent history as a result of Marx’s theory. That theory have died out, where we observe what seemed to be harmony between socialists and capitalists after 1990, where negotiations began to take place following the win-win approach, which is the essence of theory C. or crescentology which the author proposes.