Israeli Politics

Politics in Israeli and Palestinian Peace Talks

Professor Hazan posed two schools of thought for the audience: the Israeli/Palestinian conflict rendered peace unfixable or established a crisis, which will allow resolution. The first is popular in Washington and Israel but the later is popular everywhere--including Washington and Israel.

She clearly states at the beginning of the meeting there are only two options: continue to fight or begin legitimate peace talks. If the wars continue, we will have much of the same fighting that has been going on for the past 50 years or it could very well lead to something bigger. Her emphasis was not on the war because it was to unpredictable. She had a very strategic and thought out plan for settlement.

Israel and Palestine--the true population of both--want peace. 60-70% of Israelis and Palestinians agree to a viable two state settlement. Most argue over details, not concept. They are tired of losing immediate and extended family members. The holy lands are important but to what extent. This is a rationale; they simply want peace.

If peace were attempted there could be two ideologies: a two state settlement or a one state settlement. The latter would make no sense because this is essentially what is in place. The one state would consist of a single Muslim state or a greater Israel. The two state would allow access to both religions. However, the governments and general populations would have to regulate factions because neither can do it on their own. These fundamentalists--on both sides--could cause the countries to retract to the same "me vs. you" mentality.

I had no argument with concepts; however, this is a very critical time and place to risk such a move. The details would obviously cause turmoil and dispute. Both sides must trust each other and be willing to sacrifice much for the greater good of humanity.

Israel,