The Great Divide - Part 2
And the hard and fast questions that now need to be asked about any possible future accord.
******
Part 1 dealt mainly with the historic divisions between Israel and Palestine and what had caused them. Part 2 now looks more to possible future solutions.
******
While in West Germany elections were allowed in 1949, only four years after the end of the war, allied forces had meanwhile taken strict control. Armaments were tightly controlled, Germany was not allowed its own militia or army, there were US army bases scattered throughout the country to control the situation, but most importantly the allies had embarked on a strict programme of 'de-nazification', as follows: The Nazi Party was banned and advocating National Socialist ideas was punishable by death; the Swastika symbol and other Nazi emblems were banned in public; Germans were made to complete questionnaires about the extent of their involvement in Nazism; ex-Nazis were taken on tours of concentration camps or made to watch video clips of Jewish prisoners. The end result was that the political parties competing in the 1949 election were all moderates, with not a hint of past National Socialism.
Compare that to the Palestinian situation and we find that even the more moderate party, Fatah, currently in control of the PA, has school lessons demonizing Jews and also an active 'pay for slay' programme which rewards terrorists and their families for killing Jews. The more extreme party, Hamas, has an all-out agenda of killing Israelis and Jews, with the aim of expelling or killing all Jews in the area, thus the 'River to Sea' chant. So, unlike in 1949 German, there are no moderate alternatives.
Imagine if the German situation had rolled forward without any strict de-nazification programme or armament control and the US army bases to control the situation were dubbed an 'occupation force' and found themselves regularly under attack from terrorist bombings and rocket-fire. The 'Marshall Plan' to re-build Germany would have collapsed and today Germany would find itself a backwater, impoverished terrorist enclave rather than the industrial and socio-economic powerhouse it is.
From the German example, we see that a detachment from past flawed ideologies that led to hostilities is necessary before laying the foundations for peace. That hasn't happened in the Palestinian situation. In fact, jihadism and an embracing of martyrdom has taken deeper root over the years. The other major difference with the German situation is that, apart from allowing elections in 1949 in West Germany, everything else was imposed on them: The stripping of armaments, the banning of Nazism, US forces monitoring, and final land borders, with indeed Berlin split in two and elections not allowed in the East, Communism being the only choice.
Given that the German example worked so well, it might be that only a similar 'imposition' would work with the Palestinians. After all, it's difficult to imagine the Palestinians putting a ban on jihadism, demonization of Jews and martyrdom on themselves; and forty years of failure to agree land borders with many also clinging to the unrealistic demand that all the land should be theirs, including Israel, demonstrates that final borders might also have to be decided by others.
However, 'imposition' is probably too strong a term given the current situation, though it becomes clear that peace would be impossible while jew-hatred and calls for terrorism and martyrdom are still endemic in Palestinian society; so perhaps a strict set of rules attached to any peace package. And on the other side, curtailment of harsh Israeli military and security actions; this role to be taken over by a combined peacekeeping force - as detailed in my earlier peace proposal - of Israeli, PA, Saudi and American soldiers.
Indeed, at the end of the current Gaza war, massive investment will be needed to rebuild it, and the Saudis and Americans would likely be at the forefront of that. So being part of a joint peacekeeping force would in effect be keeping an eye on their investment, and would also in part mirror the Marshall Plan.
A more integrated society would also be preferable, because, as seen, separation festers suspicion and animosity. Following the ethos that hate indoctrination of children should cease, a completely new school curriculum, with teachers also recruited from a broader spectrum: Saudi, USA, Canada, France, Egypt, to add to a mix of Palestinian and Israeli teachers following the 'Hand-in-Hand' model. 'Pay for slay' and encouragement of terrorism to cease. Aggression of extreme Israeli settlers to cease along with generalizing that Palestinians are all or mostly terrorists. More accord between the two, particularly with access to holy sites. Cessation of death penalty laws for selling land to Jews or 'normalization/collaboration'. Cessation of military detention without trial, particularly for juveniles. Strict laws to restrict hate messages in the Arab or Israeli press and online media.
If the exchange suggested in the earlier outlined peace plan whereby x-number of Palestinians gained right of return against a similar number of settlers remaining in Judea-Samaria-West Bank (thereby allowing the border to be drawn quickly and more integration between the two), was not acceptable, then something similar; or a compromise between this and the earlier suggested 'Saudi' and 'Trump' plans.
Strangely, my ‘exchange of populations’ suggestion, with both parties remaining residents in the other’s nation, is not vastly different to the earlier suggested ‘Federal proposal’, which was the favoured model of Israeli writer, Nachum Kaplan, in his earlier article on the various possible peace solutions.
A new aid organization to be formed to replace UNRWA – which in fact we see has already taken place with the formation of the American-backed GHF, Gaza Humanitarian Fund - with again staff chosen from a broad spectrum to avoid partisan activity and corruption. Since the Palestinian refugee problem will have mostly been settled - through right of return and absorption as citizens in other Arab nations - then a time limit should be set on refugee status, as is the case with all other nations.
The proposed 'peace corridor' linking Gaza to the West Bank to also have integrated Palestinian-Israeli communities with a focus on light, hi-tech industry, following the model of Jordan's 'Valley of Peace' initiative. BDS to be dropped, but new rules brought in whereby Israeli companies operating in the West Bank must have a minimum number of Palestinian workers on their books (40-45% plus), to include management and at least one Palestinian senior board director. This 'peace corridor' could also lend itself to leisure tourism, such as golf and tennis, which of course both President Trump and the Saudis would have strong interest in. Staff there, again, to be integrated Palestinians and Israelis.
Finally, more investment for Palestinian start-up companies and for extra housing. Increased investment on existing trade and peace initiatives. Incentives to abide by the new strict rules laid down in this peace plan to be largely through land - as land for peace has worked so well before with other peace accords, such as Egypt. The 'peace corridor' in particular would be a large extra strip of land not included in past 'green-line' plans. This could be on a 50%-50% lease between Israel and Palestine, with that percentage changed either way due to infractions of the plan on either side.
While some might question rounding off the respective plights of Israelis and Palestinians with the outline of a proposed peace plan - after all, writers and journalists are meant to be simply observers and commentators, not instigators of action - I felt it was important to at least end on a hopeful note. As the old Pandora's Box fable proclaims, 'When all the evils of the world were let loose, all that was left was hope.' I felt that to do otherwise would be like building up two characters, then simply leaving them drifting. If even a small part of this proposed outline plan ends up in any final peace plan, then I would feel its inclusion has been justified. Shalom and Inshallah.
******
John Matthews - Notes from the Edge. If you like my articles and wish to receive them regularly - 2-3 a week on Israel, Middle East and World Affairs, plus now a comedy spoof and two thrillers in serial form - then I look forward to getting your subscription.
*** SPECIAL OFFER***
I will be continue offering a FREE book to all new subscribers: Past Imperfect, an intense groundbreaking crime thriller set between England, France and the USA, exploring the link between two young boys thirty years apart. This will be in Word for Windows form, which you can either read on your computer or transfer to your Kindle. For all those who have already subscribed to me, I make the same offer of this free book if you add Notes from the Edge to your ‘Recommend’ list.
But for those choosing a paid option to compensate me for my regular weekly articles, I will be offering THREE extra FREE books: ‘Letters from a Murderer’, a classic murder mystery exploring whether Jack the Ripper has found fresh killing ground in 1890s New York; ‘The Crescent Wars’, focusing on the Lebanese Civil War and a British journalist investigating a large scale banking plot behind the war; and ‘The Vienna Writers Circle’, following two Jewish cousins, part of Sigmund Freud’s circle of writers and intellectuals, as they strive in 1938 Vienna to save themselves and their families from Nazi death camps.
******
John Matthews is an experienced writer and journalist. The author of 24 books, including two centred around WW2 and the holocaust in the name of J.C. Maetis (his father’s original Jewish name) his first experience of writing about the Middle East came as a war correspondent covering the last years of the Lebanese Civil War, which led to his second book, ‘The Crescents of the Moon’. He has since written on the subject for a number of journals, including The Times, Sunday Times, Newsweek, The Independent and The Spectator. He was also in the run-up to the millennium editor of European Brief, the main magazine for the European Parliament, editing the likes of Tony Blair, Al Gore and Henry Kissinger on subjects ranging from the fall of the Berlin Wall and European unity, climate change and nuclear fusion to, once again, the Middle East. He lives in London with his wife and family.
******
While in West Germany elections were allowed in 1949, only four years after the end of the war, allied forces had meanwhile taken strict control. Armaments were tightly controlled, Germany was not allowed its own militia or army, there were US army bases scattered throughout the country to control the situation, but most importantly the allies had embarked on a strict programme of 'de-nazification', as follows: The Nazi Party was banned and advocating National Socialist ideas was punishable by death; the Swastika symbol and other Nazi emblems were banned in public; Germans were made to complete questionnaires about the extent of their involvement in Nazism; ex-Nazis were taken on tours of concentration camps or made to watch video clips of Jewish prisoners. The end result was that the political parties competing in the 1949 election were all moderates, with not a hint of past National Socialism.
Compare that to the Palestinian situation and we find that even the more moderate party, Fatah, currently in control of the PA, has school lessons demonizing Jews and also an active 'pay for slay' programme which rewards terrorists and their families for killing Jews. The more extreme party, Hamas, has an all-out agenda of killing Israelis and Jews, with the aim of expelling or killing all Jews in the area, thus the 'River to Sea' chant. So, unlike in 1949 German, there are no moderate alternatives.
Imagine if the German situation had rolled forward without any strict de-nazification programme or armament control and the US army bases to control the situation were dubbed an 'occupation force' and found themselves regularly under attack from terrorist bombings and rocket-fire. The 'Marshall Plan' to re-build Germany would have collapsed and today Germany would find itself a backwater, impoverished terrorist enclave rather than the industrial and socio-economic powerhouse it is.
From the German example, we see that a detachment from past flawed ideologies that led to hostilities is necessary before laying the foundations for peace. That hasn't happened in the Palestinian situation. In fact, jihadism and an embracing of martyrdom has taken deeper root over the years. The other major difference with the German situation is that, apart from allowing elections in 1949 in West Germany, everything else was imposed on them: The stripping of armaments, the banning of Nazism, US forces monitoring, and final land borders, with indeed Berlin split in two and elections not allowed in the East, Communism being the only choice.
Given that the German example worked so well, it might be that only a similar 'imposition' would work with the Palestinians. After all, it's difficult to imagine the Palestinians putting a ban on jihadism, demonization of Jews and martyrdom on themselves; and forty years of failure to agree land borders with many also clinging to the unrealistic demand that all the land should be theirs, including Israel, demonstrates that final borders might also have to be decided by others.
However, 'imposition' is probably too strong a term given the current situation, though it becomes clear that peace would be impossible while jew-hatred and calls for terrorism and martyrdom are still endemic in Palestinian society; so perhaps a strict set of rules attached to any peace package. And on the other side, curtailment of harsh Israeli military and security actions; this role to be taken over by a combined peacekeeping force - as detailed in my earlier peace proposal - of Israeli, PA, Saudi and American soldiers.
Indeed, at the end of the current Gaza war, massive investment will be needed to rebuild it, and the Saudis and Americans would likely be at the forefront of that. So being part of a joint peacekeeping force would in effect be keeping an eye on their investment, and would also in part mirror the Marshall Plan.
A more integrated society would also be preferable, because, as seen, separation festers suspicion and animosity. Following the ethos that hate indoctrination of children should cease, a completely new school curriculum, with teachers also recruited from a broader spectrum: Saudi, USA, Canada, France, Egypt, to add to a mix of Palestinian and Israeli teachers following the 'Hand-in-Hand' model. 'Pay for slay' and encouragement of terrorism to cease. Aggression of extreme Israeli settlers to cease along with generalizing that Palestinians are all or mostly terrorists. More accord between the two, particularly with access to holy sites. Cessation of death penalty laws for selling land to Jews or 'normalization/collaboration'. Cessation of military detention without trial, particularly for juveniles. Strict laws to restrict hate messages in the Arab or Israeli press and online media.
If the exchange suggested in the earlier outlined peace plan whereby x-number of Palestinians gained right of return against a similar number of settlers remaining in Judea-Samaria-West Bank (thereby allowing the border to be drawn quickly and more integration between the two), was not acceptable, then something similar; or a compromise between this and the earlier suggested 'Saudi' and 'Trump' plans.
Strangely, my ‘exchange of populations’ suggestion, with both parties remaining residents in the other’s nation, is not vastly different to the earlier suggested ‘Federal proposal’, which was the favoured model of Israeli writer, Nachum Kaplan, in his earlier article on the various possible peace solutions.
A new aid organization to be formed to replace UNRWA – which in fact we see has already taken place with the formation of the American-backed GHF, Gaza Humanitarian Fund - with again staff chosen from a broad spectrum to avoid partisan activity and corruption. Since the Palestinian refugee problem will have mostly been settled - through right of return and absorption as citizens in other Arab nations - then a time limit should be set on refugee status, as is the case with all other nations.
The proposed 'peace corridor' linking Gaza to the West Bank to also have integrated Palestinian-Israeli communities with a focus on light, hi-tech industry, following the model of Jordan's 'Valley of Peace' initiative. BDS to be dropped, but new rules brought in whereby Israeli companies operating in the West Bank must have a minimum number of Palestinian workers on their books (40-45% plus), to include management and at least one Palestinian senior board director. This 'peace corridor' could also lend itself to leisure tourism, such as golf and tennis, which of course both President Trump and the Saudis would have strong interest in. Staff there, again, to be integrated Palestinians and Israelis.
Finally, more investment for Palestinian start-up companies and for extra housing. Increased investment on existing trade and peace initiatives. Incentives to abide by the new strict rules laid down in this peace plan to be largely through land - as land for peace has worked so well before with other peace accords, such as Egypt. The 'peace corridor' in particular would be a large extra strip of land not included in past 'green-line' plans. This could be on a 50%-50% lease between Israel and Palestine, with that percentage changed either way due to infractions of the plan on either side.
While some might question rounding off the respective plights of Israelis and Palestinians with the outline of a proposed peace plan - after all, writers and journalists are meant to be simply observers and commentators, not instigators of action - I felt it was important to at least end on a hopeful note. As the old Pandora's Box fable proclaims, 'When all the evils of the world were let loose, all that was left was hope.' I felt that to do otherwise would be like building up two characters, then simply leaving them drifting. If even a small part of this proposed outline plan ends up in any final peace plan, then I would feel its inclusion has been justified. Shalom and Inshallah.
******
John Matthews - Notes from the Edge. If you like my articles and wish to receive them regularly - 2-3 a week on Israel, Middle East and World Affairs, plus now a comedy spoof and two thrillers in serial form - then I look forward to getting your subscription.
*** SPECIAL OFFER***
I will be continue offering a FREE book to all new subscribers: Past Imperfect, an intense groundbreaking crime thriller set between England, France and the USA, exploring the link between two young boys thirty years apart. This will be in Word for Windows form, which you can either read on your computer or transfer to your Kindle. For all those who have already subscribed to me, I make the same offer of this free book if you add Notes from the Edge to your ‘Recommend’ list.
But for those choosing a paid option to compensate me for my regular weekly articles, I will be offering THREE extra FREE books: ‘Letters from a Murderer’, a classic murder mystery exploring whether Jack the Ripper has found fresh killing ground in 1890s New York; ‘The Crescent Wars’, focusing on the Lebanese Civil War and a British journalist investigating a large scale banking plot behind the war; and ‘The Vienna Writers Circle’, following two Jewish cousins, part of Sigmund Freud’s circle of writers and intellectuals, as they strive in 1938 Vienna to save themselves and their families from Nazi death camps.
******
John Matthews is an experienced writer and journalist. The author of 24 books, including two centred around WW2 and the holocaust in the name of J.C. Maetis (his father’s original Jewish name) his first experience of writing about the Middle East came as a war correspondent covering the last years of the Lebanese Civil War, which led to his second book, ‘The Crescents of the Moon’. He has since written on the subject for a number of journals, including The Times, Sunday Times, Newsweek, The Independent and The Spectator. He was also in the run-up to the millennium editor of European Brief, the main magazine for the European Parliament, editing the likes of Tony Blair, Al Gore and Henry Kissinger on subjects ranging from the fall of the Berlin Wall and European unity, climate change and nuclear fusion to, once again, the Middle East. He lives in London with his wife and family.
******
John, that ship ran aground, if indeed it were ever feasible, on October 7, 2023.
Your German example worked because they were all Germans and they were also subjugated in a way which would never fly in this century. You fall for the very concepts which CAUSED October 7.
You also fall for the fake stories about "settler violence" and minimise the real violence of Muslim society when it comes into contact with others.
The British received a mandate to recreate the Jewish National Home 100 years ago and immediately hived off 77% of it to create the previously non existent Kingdom of Transjordan, now Jordan, in which not a single Jew is allowed to live. There is zero difference between its people and those known as Palestinians. Incidentally, they also gifted the Golan to the French for their new protectorate which became Syria. To slash off even more will never again be accepted by Israel, while to leave even a rump state of Israel will never be accepted by the Arabs. Such a mess will only be used by the latter to continue attacking.
Integration? You just don't get it. Neither side wants it and it is a recipe for endless bloodbaths.
You will of course argue that Ireland managed. But again, they are all Irish.
No John, back to the drawing board.