Step 1 to Peace: Opening up the mind
https://blog.gale.com/understand-whats-behind-the-israel-palestine-conflict/
For many years, Jerusalem has had a conflict of ownership based on religious and political reasons. As we looked through different readings and videos in the class this week, it is clear that these tensions are challenging to clear up with a simple, single solution. This is mainly due to both Israeli and Palestinian people believing in their ownership of the same land. That's why, to many, the idea of a two-state solution is the best solution to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
However, as said above, a simple solution is not that simple and may not complete the task of making peace. Marc Ellis explains this well in his article we read for Wednesday's class by noting how "if the Oslo process has brought the following reality into focus – that Israel now extends from Tel Aviv to the Jordan River with millions of Palestinians within that state, that there are two remnant Palestinian populations within Israel…then the two-state solution becomes a slogan increasingly void of substance," (page 74). In other words, the idea of two separate states with clear borders becomes less meaningful when Israel's control extends over such a wide area and includes a significant Palestinian population.
For a society to function, we must work with each other instead of against it. And to me, as a foreigner who may be naïve to the deep complexities, this conflict seems based more on personal gain than on society's. Although I understand Ellis' points, I still believe that the two-state solution is possible if people are able to open their minds to it.
For example, in one of the videos we watched, a businessman spoke about building an attraction place for tourists and the people living in Jerusalem. He explained the idea and said this construction would "benefit all of the people in Jerusalem." However, this statement cannot be true because it would be at the expense of many Palestinian homes and land that is already in the area. This example emphasizes the idea of selfish gain rather than what benefits society. Because this businessman believes that the land is rightfully his to use, the people already living there do not have much impact on him.
As an outsider, it is easy for me not to understand the significance of the state to both religions. To me, creating a two-state solution is still a viable option. But for this to be completed, or any solution to be implemented, the biggest barrier that must be crossed is shifting the mindset from personal ownership and benefit to societal benefit and ownership.
Nice post that explores Ellis's ideas and pushes back on his claim that the two state solution is no longer possible.
ReplyDelete