Kick-starting the peace process to death
President Bush and Ehud Olmert didn’t achieve much during their press conference and meetings, but they did manage to kick the peace process to death and to tell moderates like me to stop wasting my time. Israel will never compromise with the Palestinians and that means that the future is only defined by the extremists who believe violence is the only way tto achieve their goals.
Although Bush has made some cheesy comments about how a Palestinian State can’t be Swiss Cheese, he stood by like an idiot as Prime Minister Olmert declared, unilaterally and against the international rule of law, that Israel plans to keep all the land around East Jerusalem and that it will continue to increase those settlements and continue to land grab that is stealing land from Palestinians.
Bush stood by while Olmert used Israeli finesse to play the usual shell game, moving settlements from one category into another, and telling the poor, sad Bush that Israel will suspend expansion on the remaining settlements, but not in those settlements that are now defined by Israel — non one else — as population centers.
And, Bush stood by like the foolish clown when Olmert explained that the land on the Israeli side of the Wall is now Israeli land and that land is outside of the reach of compromise, especially around East Jerusalem, which is non-negotiable.
Well, a Palestinian State without Jerusalem is no Palestinian State at all.
And instead of kick starting the peace process, Bush and Olmert joined in kicking the peace process to death. Bush is merely helping Israeli extremists who pretend to be moderates — because Bush is so naive — to greedily grab everything they now have and to re-define peace negotiations as discussions involving ONLY the future of those few remaining lands the Palestinians have been left to hold. And even the future of those lands is uncertain.
Peace is dead folks. Moderates like me will find a new role to play, and the extremists have been given the go-ahead to wage a new wave of violence, since apparently, violence is the only thing Israel belives must be addressed.
Ray Hanania
Join the Conversation
“Peace is dead folks.”
No. Peace will come. The question is whether peace will come to the dead, or to the living. The choice is ours.
Ray, I agree that the likelihood of peace being negotiated by the current crop of leaders is dim at best. But that is because the leaders we have now, have created a situation in which the momentum for peace is not there. Once you create that momentum, even the most stubborn leaders will not be able to stop it. The will of the people will not be deterred. The extremists will not be able to capture the public’s imagination once people begin to imagine a better life for themselves.
Therefore, people like you and me have to figure out how to create the momentum that favors peace. Look at you hand, Ray. You have five fingers. Each finger represents a different aspect of what has to happen, for peace to happen.
Your thumb is the new ideological framework that displaces nonsense with common sense.
Your index finger is our willingness to invest in one another; in projects that resonate with hope, that create jobs, and that protect the environment.
Your middle finger is the Hope you will inspire using Ideology and Investment.
Your ring finger is the Public Diplomacy Programs you will launch to sustain a Vision of Hope, once it’s in place.
And your pinky, your smallest finger, is the willingness to fight, and to fight hard, when you have to. But you will position the fight within a Vision of Hope. You will raise the fight on the ground to a higher moral plain by giving the fight a moral clarity of purpose.
If we do these things Ray, instead to rushing to the peace table with empty promises, then we will create realities on the ground which speak louder than words, and we will let loose a power of spirit, that once unleashed, will overwhelm any attempt to stop it.
Ray, these are a lot of demands. Demands that you make solely on the expense of other people. Actually, you make the whole thing about Palestians statehood Israel’s problem. After all what has happened, I am afraid that nobody buys that any more.
I used to be a hot headed supporter of the ‘Palestinan Cause’ but even I learned the hard way that this is nothing than a arab pipe dream.
“Well, a Palestinian State without Jerusalem is no Palestinian State at all”
You know, that is fine with me.
I agree that Bush is useless, or perhaps even worse. I suspect he’s desperate to achieve something that can go in the history books as a positive note on his Presidency. Being more concerned with accomplishing something — anything — soon than with finding a lasting solution he’ll probably try to bully both sides into some unworkable deal that looks good on paper but blows up in a year or two.
Of course, it’s entirely possible that there is no solution: “a Palestinian State without Jerusalem is no Palestinian State at all.” If that’s true then I’m afraid you’re screwed: King David declared Jerusalem the Jewish capial about 3,000 years ago; you’re a bit late to the party.
On a different and less controversial note, even if it’s politically possible, would a Palestinian state be economically viable?
Two Cents, there is no reason to have a Palestinian state, unless it can be made economically viable. Why have a failed state? In fact, I would argue that you will not be able to bring a Palestinian state into existence, unless you first prove that it can be made economically viable. In other words, economic viability is the pathway to statehood, not the other way around.
The reason for this, is that there are such overwhelming ideological obastacles in the way, on both sides, that the only way to overcome that is to have an economic and ideological alternative in place, which would be so persuasive, that even the die hard ideological extremists will not be able to fend off the cry of the masses for change.
You could begin to create new economic realities on the ground, which would in turn result in new ideological perspectives, even without a state, and gradually the groundswell of support will constitute an irrefutable arguement in favor of statehood, and in favor of peace.
All other issues, including Jerusalem, boundries, and refugess could be finessed if the will of the masses is brought to bear.
“You could begin to create new economic realities on the ground”
What do you have in mind?
If the West is good at anything, it is making and investing money. Why not use this strength as part of our strategic arsenal to promote the peace, and to win the war against ideological extremism?
Set up an International Fund for Economic Development in the Middle East, under the banner, “We stand ready to invest in you, if you are ready to invest in yourselves.” Invest in projects which resonate with hope, which create jobs, which protect the environment, and which allow people to become who they want to become, even if they want to become different from us. Build industrial parks, vocational schools, decent housing, and the like.
And don’t forget, Two Cents, in this competitve global economy, the West will need to open new markets in order to compete. Why not create new markets for our goods and services in the Middle East and in Africa. We’re talking investment, not handouts. And Israel, with her knowhow, and her drive, could be the linchpin of an effort to revitalize the economies of the Middle East.
If you can get some economic activity going, even before rushing to the peace table, you will begin conditioning people for the possibility of peace, by creating facts on the ground which speak louder than the words of hate. Among the Palestinians, this is particularly important, because not only are they not conditioned for peace, but many of them have been conditioned for hate.
I am not trying to be judgmental. I know there are equities on both sides. I am just trying to find a way to bypass all the ideological nonsense, with new economic realities, so that a new ideological dialectic could begin to materialize.
I agree that an emerging state must have the prospect of being economically feasible. And at one time, Palestine was very much so. If Lebanon was “The Paris of the Middle East” then Palestine was a financial and cultural center…..at least that’s what I’ve been told. Then Israel “happened” and that screwed that up. Lebanon also got screwed up because that’s where the displaced Palestinians went…even the ones that survived being kicked out of Jordan for making trouble. Piles of money have been contributed to the “welfare of the Palestinian people” by concerned brother arabs from around the whole middle east. Somehow all that money was spent on weapons and useless attempts to conquer the Israelis instead of improving the lot of a defeated people. That didn’t work out real well. Everybody got their ass whipped. After WWII, all the countries that surrendered to the Allies, are now, 60 years later, economic powerhouses and have OUTLAWED WAR. Dang! The answer is simple….surrender! What do you think?
Ray,
I don’t know about how Palestinians and Israelis will agree on dividing the land, but as they do we have to support them. If they come to a point where both are willing to set aside the problems and look into the future, we need to support them. I know it is going to be hard for both, both might think they will lose much, but the outcome would be a better life for both which people really deserve. I don’t know the details about what is what in that region, I just support a peace plan, I really feel it is going to be nice to have both countries side by side, we come visit Palestinians in Palestine and Israelis in Israel and then pray in the holy sites of Jeruslam, Muslims in the Al-aqsa mosque, and Jews By the wall. Christians enjoying the bliss of their holy sites as well, what is wrong in this picture? I see sooqs shooqs filled with people, I see trade and interaction, I see festivities and life, kids going to school , universities promoting knowledge and women not worried about every moment of their kid’s life being threatened.
I recall the Jerusalem once some one talked about, grandmother of one of rabbis in New york who is still alive and lived in the old city of Jerusalem recalled how Jews and Muslims lived together in the neighborhood :
Jews and Arabs lived door to door. Doors had wooden and metal bolts , in the day time the doors were wide open, and night time the doors would be closed but not bolted, it was unnnecessary, it was safe in the city of Jerusalem..women borrowed from one another, if a woman would go to shooq kids were kept by the neighbor. If a kid lost her mother by delivery, women of the neighborhood would come together and find a woman ( it didn’t matter if the kid or the woman was arab or jew), who has eccesive milk in her breast and would nurse the kid untill the kid grew a bit older, so the kid would survive…
WE are the same people with the same emotions. It can happen again, it is already there, but the hatred of war and conflict had exhausted people. I can’t claim I don’t have a problem with my immidiate relatives.
Ray i am very hopeful. I don’t see the distictions and divisions as substatial. The countries will be divided, but the soul cannot be divided, the soul is a mother hugging all her kids
R.E., I don’t see it as “surrender” in the traditional sense. I see it as a “surrender” to the dictates of common sense. Common sense tell us that we were put on this good earth to live, not to kill, and not to die before our time. Yes, we may believe in this and that. And yes, we are inclined to hold on tightly to our deeply held beliefs. But it is time, before time runs out, to begin believing in what makes sense.
And Elinor, I, for one, subscribe to your lofty vision. When you say that, “…the soul cannot be divided, the soul is a mother hugging all her kids,” you are absolutley right. Whether they know it or not, the people of the Middle East come from the same blood. For the most part, they share the same roots, the same values, and the same aspirations. All the fighting and the hatred are empty manipulations of the truth.
Think of a mother giving birth to her child. Think of what that child needs to survive. And think of what that child needs to be happy. Put it all together, and you’ll quickly discover that we’ve filled our heads with a lot of nonsense, and it may well be time to chuck some of that nonsense, to make room for what really counts.
Nissim,
I am even more hopeful when i realise the same words could be agreed on by people of the region who seem to have too much problems in the actual life. I mean there are people in my country and people in your country and people in Palestinian territories and people in the Gulf region and afar, who agree on the same concepts.
I pray for any one who walks on a path that leads to more understanding and spread of peace.
Nissim, Elinor. Your words brought tears to my eyes. Beautiful dreams. For the USA as well as the middle east. I really want to see it happen. Too many wonderful and good people suffer for just a few idiots.
RE Konard
Hugs
Come on, guys.
Ray has a really good point: we can talk about economic revitalization of Palestine, or Jerusalem as a place where Muslim, Christian and Jewish kids can skip happily through the streets together. No one who lives there can live in these rosy unrealities. Israel is refuting international law and creating facts on the ground that are hard to erase.
One example: the Israeli government recently declared that Palestinians living between the Wall and the Green Line cannot receive services from the Israeli government. Israel built a wall that PREVENTS these people from traveling directly into Palestine, even though they are living ON PALESTINIAN LAND, because Israel is confiscating land in the name of security to build the wall. But these people also can’t get health care in areas they are geographically contiguous to because they are Palestinians. Israel will then wait until these people become so fed up with their lot that they leave, and will start building on the land.
Those who do stay will be considered “stubborn,” “unreasonable” and “part of the problem, not the solution.”
Nissim, with all due respect your five steps to change comes across as condescending. The truth of the situation today is that there is one entity that has the power to really, actually change the situation on the ground. That’s Israel. Just like any occupying power in history.
Also, you say
Yes, they are being conditioned for hate. By living under an occupation. That Israel could stop. Starting today. Just as Israelis are being conditioned for hate. By being forced to perpetrate an occupation. That Israel could stop. Starting today.
Thank you, Miriam: I couldn’t quite bring myself to throw cold water on such hopeful dreamers.
You might be being overly optimistic yourself, though. If Israel stopped the occupation today, tore down the wall and the checkpoints, how many Israelis do you think would be dead by the end of the month? Honestly, I’m not trying to be provocative: I think that’s a very legitimate question.
Miriam, Israel does have power, but there is a limit to her power. She has military and economic power, for example. But she does not have the power to alter the thinking of certain militants that want to see her destroyed. It is this existential threat, in light of an historical legacy of persecution of the Jews, that prevents her from taking serious steps toward peace. In other words, I respectfully submit to you, that even if Israel left the West Bank tomorrow, there would still be a concerted effort to destroy her, even a more emboldened effort than before.
There is evidence for what I’m saying. Israel pulled out of Lebanon, and there were still provocations going on. Israel pulled out of Gaza, and there are still hundred of missiles being fired from there. In the year 2000, Barak and Clinton offered a deal that was substantially in keeping with Arafat’s demands, and there was no counteroffer. The only response was the Intifada.
I have no doubt in my mind, that if Israel became convinced that a real peace deal was in the offing, that she would make substantial sacrifices, along the lines of the 2000 offer, and that a lot of the injustices you point out would disappear. But if Israel continues to believe that its ultimate demise is the ultimate goal, then it will continue to be as intransigent as ever in the name of security.
As far as my 5 step plan goes, I don’t mean to be condescending. I am proposing these ideas as a way of creating some movement toward peace, and paving the way for a possible deal. What am I really saying? Filter what you believe through the prism of common sense. Start creating new economic realities by investing in one another. Sell people on a Vision of Hope. Sustain the hope with public diplomacy. And when you have to, fight, and fight hard, but position the fight within a Viison of Hope.
I suggest Miriam, that this is not only a good idea, but is probably the only idea that is likely to work. I personally don’t have the ability, by myself, to pull it off, although I’m still going to give it a shot. But I honestly can’t think of something better.
Nissim, what “common sense” tells me is that investors tend to be leery of pouring money into projects which might be destroyed in an air strike.
I don’t even know why everyone is taking this Bush visit so seriously. Quite frankly this is just the Israel/Palestine version of his aircraft carrier announcement “The war is over! We won! DURRR”. Both Israel and the PA know full well that there is absolutely no representation from Hamas or the Gaza strip in these talks, rendering them useless! This is just a little funding dance they have to endure so “I wanna be a statesman now” Bush can limp through his last couple of months under yet another comforting delusion. The only serious possibility for peace in this area, folks, is NOT going to come from the Israelis or Palestinians. It’s going to come when the two extremist camps (Zionists and evangelist Christians on one side, the Iranian Mullahs and a crowd of Sunni Militants on the other) get tired of this conflict. Since it is not their respective home turfs that are getting mauled yearly, or their people getting killed, why back down on their principles just because the people who have to live on the battlefield are complaining? I know thats horribly cynical, sorry, but, really, I think this years nasty little spring war is going to rip through Gaza and result in things being exactly the way they were several years ago before the Israelis left there, save perhaps founding a couple more refugee camps in Egypt. You can’t have peace until the groups that are paying for the bullets want it.
Two Cents, I’m proud of you for using your “common sense.” To my mind, your common sense is the greatest gift you have, because it lets you see the beauty of all your other gifts.
But you’re right. It won’t be easy convincing investors to invest in war zones. So what’s the answer?
First of all, not all 22 Arab countries are war zones. You could begin by investing in countries that are relatively stable. But doing that will spread the message. The Middle East resonates with symbolism. Remember the Danish cartoons? Just as negative images resonate with hate, so too would positive images resonate with hope.
If you invest in projects which resonate with hope, and which create jobs, then a sense of hope will emerge even in people who are not beneficiaries of that investment. Let’s think of an example. Suppose you invest in an industrial zone in the West Bank, for example. And suppose the investment is successful and people start working and earning a decent living. Pretty soon, the people in Gaza may begin to ask, “Hey, where’s our share?” And even if you try to blow up a part of the industrial zone, people who lost their jobs may not look kindly on the perpetrators. The extremist intent will then be brought into sharp focus.
People in Gaza can sqeeze Hamas a lot better than the West can. When we fight Hamas, we actually increase their power by making martyrs out of them. Martyrdom sells big there. But when their own people begin sqeezing them, then it’s a different story. “Why are you guys holding us back from a better life?”
Let me give you an example. Remember Al Zarqawi? He was Al Qaeda’s leader in Iraq. Not the most friendly fellow, if you ask me. One day, he gets the bright idea to blow up Muslim weddings in Jordan. A few weeks thereafter, his exact location is turned over to the Americans, and a missle takes him out. Is there a connection here between blowing up the weddings and being turned in? My guess is yes.
If you can find ways to invest, in relatively peaceful areas, you will send the message that a Vision of Hope is in the offing. And Eric, that addresses your point as well. You’re right to say that there are leaders out there, who are outside the fray, who are calling the shots. The question is: How do you create pressure on these people to move in the direction of a peaceful accomodation. The answer is to find ways to empower the people on the street, with a Vision of Hope, and to have that pressure focused like a laser beam on the leaders. Even the strongest of leaders cannot, in the final analysis, resist the will of the people.
Nissim,
You give very pretty speeches, and you say all the right things. Most importantly, your central premise about grass roots prosperity is quite correct. The problem is that you seem to be unaware of certain practical difficulties.
“investing in countries that are relatively stable… will spread the message” I believe that’s already happening, and has been for quite some time, but the the message doesn’t seem to have spread to Gaza yet?
“you can get some economic activity going, even before rushing to the peace table, you will begin conditioning people for the possibility of peace, by creating facts on the ground which speak louder than the words of hate.” How many internet cafes, music stores, etc. have been destroyed or closed down in Gaza? These are the type of small start-up businesses you need, owned by locals not by foreign investors.
“suppose the (West Bank) investment is successful and people start working and earning a decent living. Pretty soon, the people in Gaza may begin to ask, ‘Hey, where’s our share?’” Do you think the people in Gaza are unaware that Hamas is an obstacle to their economic future? That they have no clue about jobs and decent living and must be shown examples from other places before they’ll get the point? “People in Gaza can squeeze Hamas a lot better than the West can.” How, by voting them out?
“And even if you try to blow up a part of the industrial zone, people who lost their jobs may not look kindly on the perpetrators.” Except the perpetrator would be Israel, wouldn’t it?
Nissim. I do not disapprove of your goals or even your strategies, I just don’t want you to fail thru underestimating the difficulties, which you seem very prone to do. “Even the strongest of leaders cannot, in the final analysis, resist the will of the people.” True again, but have you noticed that the “final” analysis can be a few generations in coming?
Two Cents,
My plan will take several generations to pull off, and probably one trillion dollars of investment. I think that my plan is probably as close to impossible as you can get. But given the alternative, what choice do we really have?
All you are saying is that it will be hard as hell. I agree. But it’s precisely in hell that we find ourselves. At a certain point in time, it will take some serious fighting on the ground. What we need to do is to create enough facts on the ground, and to underpin those facts with an ideological framework, so that a man or woman on the street comes to believe that this is something worth dying for. Because in the final analysis, yes, you will have to fight the extremists on all sides, because that’s the only language they understand. The trick will be to empower people for the fight that lies ahead. You can only do that by speaking to them with common sense and with a sense of personal dignity, investing in them, inspiring them with a Vision of Hope, sustaining the hope, and empowering them to fight, not a war against terror, but a war to win the peace,a war to realize a Vision of Hope on the ground.
I am ever mindful of the enormity of the challenge, and I respect you for pointing it out. But if I am right, as you suggest, we have no choice but to try.
Miriam
I love this vision. The kids of Jeruslam will live in their sacred city, they will host all the pilgrims of the three disputed major faiths the city represents. I will personally come and ask them to help me find my way to all the sacred sights I love to visit and pray, who is better than the kids of Jerusalem to host me
I remember a very insightful Israeli artist, Asher, who went back to Israel after years with a handicam interviewing people. He called his documentary Greetings. He goes to the tents of the beduin and drinks their strong coffee. He goes to the Arab villages and talks to the kids, teachers. He goes to Israeli people and talk to them in the streets and in their festivals. He shakes hands with every one and we see his right hand extended from behidn the cam to shake hands with people.
He goes to some Arab Sheiks and they are elegantly dressed in traditional white dress, he says : Common send your greetings! moslems from all over the world want to come and pray in the holy Mosque, you have to host them very soon, greet people who will see the movie. The men smile.
Elinor, you picture Jerusalem filled with children, because children evoke in you a sense of innocence, a sense of hope.
But in a way, we are all children. No? As the Israeli artist pointed out, there is a potential for innocence in all of us. We just have to find a way to tap into that sense, and to make it real.
Each of us has the potential for good or evil. We can swing either way. We need to tip the balance in favor of what is good, in favor of what makes sense. A lot of the so called insurmountable problems can be solved if we try to find the child that is within each and everyone of us.
Nissim
I think we are children as well…. true..
I have so much hope and faith in the peace process, and any time I hear dramatic news from either side of the conflict my heart aches and my eyes burn. I have to answer all the ones who have no faith in the peave, because I so enthosiactically talk about peace… I take the blame myself, the blame of all what is happening in the region and is wrong, as if I have dome all of that myself. I don’t want the rockets, the atomic ambitions, the rataliations and the suicide seeking attitude, I don’t want students being tortured to death some where in this region… then the claim that the student committed suicide…
I just can’t believe why suddenly every thing turns back to normal, I believe we all need a normal life and we are all frustrated with a life full of adventure, not an inspiring one…
Could we just one night sleep and wake upin the morning to a world we dream of ?
Nissim, I need a vision that supports my hopes… I am not saying you can provide that because you have a website, we need to develop this vision, expand it, refine it and support it….
Elinor,
I admire the fact that you seem to carry the weight of other people’s suffering on your shoulders. That can be a gift if the weight of it does not overwhelm you.
I also detect a sense of frustration in your words. You are right to say that “…we all need a normal life.” But most of what we do, and a great deal of what we believe seem to negate the possibility of normalcy. Does it ever seem to you that a lot of what we believe, and a lot of what we do in pursuit of those beliefs, just don’t make any sense?
I can relate when you say, “I need a vision that supports my hopes.” Me too. And as you know, I have come to the belief that Selling a Vision of Hope is the way to go. And you are right to say that my website is not enough. More has to happen for the vision to have any substance in reality.
So far, in addition to my website, I wrote and published a book Selling a Vision of Hope: A Refreshing Alternative to Armageddon. My game plan is a two step approach: first spread the word and then implement. So I talk about it every chance I get, including this forum. Last week I spoke to the head of a major think tank in Washington D.C. I thought I would get kicked out in five minutes. But actually the kind gentleman listened intently for two hours and took notes on everything I had to say. He said we may be able to work together to sell and implement a Vision of Hope. I’ve also contacted some of the presidential campaigns to see if there is any interest there. We’ll see.
But I am one person, Elinor. I need your help, and I like your approach, “…we need to develop this vision, expand it, refine it, and support it…” I’m open to all of that. I need equal partners to make something happen. The vision is not about me. I didn’t create the vision. The vision came and grabbed hold of me.
Let me suggest a possible scenario of how we can actually work together to sell and implement a Vision of Hope: Elinor e-mails her friends about the vision. One of them is somewhat interested. She has a rich uncle who wants to leave behind a legacy that could make a difference in the world. He decides to fund some sort of project on the ground that creates jobs. He lets us use the project as part of a PR campaign to prove that a Vision of Hope could be made real if people choose to make it so. His willingness to help attracts the attention of other business people. Pretty soon a bunch of projects get going which create jobs and which protect the environment. This grass roots effort attracts the attention of policy makers in government. They translate it into foreign policy. An international fund is established for economic development in the Middle East. Economists and business leaders are hired to manage and grow the fund. More projects are funded, more jobs are created, and more of the environment is protected. People around the world begin to buy into a Vision of Hope. All sorts of Public Diplomacy Programs, like empowering women, and student exchanges, etc., are launched in a bid to sustain the hope. And when we have to, we confront the extremists, but only within the larger context of Selling a Vision of Hope. They become marginalized in the eyes of their own people, becasue now there’s a choice on the table.
That’s one possible scenario, Elinor, and it all started with your e-mails. Or maybe you have another idea. Believe me, I’m open. This is a long shot. I know. But considering the alternative; what choice do we really have? If we are really serious about peace, I think we have no choice but to try.
NIssim,
A hope can be realised, and sure it will take its route. I think not only myself but many people at least here in this forum would like to contribute to the vision of hope, but the methods to retain the hope and implement it might differ from aperson’s point of view to the other’s. It means to me that you are trying to support your vision, which could be a vision for all of us, the way you can. The idea sounds very reasonalbe and very wise. However, when it comes to how to treat the fundamentalism, I recall the message of my spiritual guru, the late M. Shneerson and his message to the world:
It is important to realize that in the individual’s struggle with evil, within the world at large or within one’s self, the approach should not be one of confrontation. Rather, by emphasizing that which is good in people and in the world, and by bringing the positive to the fore, the evil is superseded by the good, until it eventually disappears.
Accordingly I consider fundamentalism as an outcome of dissonance, and fighting it will increase it, make it worse, but emphasizing on good would gradually braing back the balance and then fundamentalism will step back, dissapear, as well as many other projections of inequity.
Elinor, Selling a Vision of Hope is a big vision, which will require the coming together of a great many people, people with varied skills: philosophers, philanthropists, economists, business people, workers, political leaders, diplomats, NGO’s, charities, foundations, military personell, etc. Each of these people, you are right to suggest, will bring to the fore their respective points of view, and each will affect the vision in a slightly different way. In this manner, the vision will take in the opinions of many, and will be modified to reflect those opintions. A Vision of Hope will give expression to the aspirations of many different people in different ways.
I can agree with a lot of what M. Shneerson has to say. In fact, I can agree to a lot of what a lot of people have to say, because I recognize the overwhelming presence of common sense in the human condition.
Shneerson is saying that you confront evil by opting for and emphasizing the good in people. In that way, he believes that the good will supersede the evil. To a great extent, I can buy that. In fact, confronting the extremists militarily, which I think will be necessary, is still a relatively minor aspect of Selling a Vision of Hope.
I do believe that you can confront evil by emphasizing the good, and “selling” it to the man on the street. I think the good is a better sell than evil, because it makes more sense.
So, for example, if the extremists believe in a violent ideology of Jihad; we will counter with An Ideology of Common Sense.
If the extremists invest in charitable handouts; we will invest in jobs.
If the extremists sell a vision of hope for paradise, or martyrdom, or 72 virgins, or what have you; we will sell a Vision of Hope- a Vision of Peace, Prosperity, and Freedom.
At every turn we will cut them off at the pass, and present a vision that beats them at their owns game, a vision co-opts their strategy, and which marginalizes them in the eyes of their own people, by showing that their ideas don’t hold up. We will, as Shneerson suggests, defeat evil by emphasizing the good, and showing that the good can and does have a basis in reality.
But Elinor, with all this, we will probably have to fight as well. I wish that weren’t the case. The extremists are strongly committed to their cause, and are emboldened by ideological conviction. They actually believe that God is talking to them, even though to my mind, they are hard of hearing. So if they continue with their campaign of terror, we will have no choice but to confront them militarily, but again we will emphasize the good by positioning that fight within a Vision of Hope. That is what is missing now in U.S. policy. We talk about freedom, but we haven’t as yet put in the ideological, economic, and diplomatic foundations on the ground, which would give substance to a true vision of freedom. We’ve talked the talk, but have failed, as yet, to walk the walk. It is time to match our lofty words with deeds on the ground which give substance to those words.
Nissim,
I understand what you say, the last option would be offense, not the first option.
I am an Iranian and some time after the revolution in iran, the war of iran and Iraq took place. I was out of Iran as a kid and when I came back, my father who thought more like you, took part in the war and he was killed. He did not like a war. He thought this war was rediculous. He would say ” two third world countries and a fight, who will benefit? There is no reason two countries have a war”. He never thought of joining the people who were going to the front, he had already done his military service and he didn’t need to be there. He came back to Iran with a single objective: promoting agriculture. He loved the farms and villagers and the tractors, cows, sun flowers, and the traditional ancient sports of Iranians ” Zoorkhooneh”. He did not get involved untill he heard of some woemn being raped some wherre and being killed, in the Kurdish part , in the west, but the boder, then suddenly he said i am not a man if I don’t go and stop that. He was not looking for 72 angels or virgins, he wanted to call himself a Man !
Any way, he was there only for two weeks before he was killed.
I wish he didn’t go. I wish he stayed with me, his own responsiblility who remained like an invaded village for long.
Rape is always there and people rape, Iranain or non- Iranian, war as well, evil cannot be stopped by fighting. I went to Iraq some time back, the people were like my own people, I couldn’t see the differnce, the kids, as needy as mine, as innocent, and their problems like ours, I couldn’t evn think they were another nation, we are all the same family Nissim.
Now my husband says, if any war happens for any reason he will not leave me by myself, unlike my dad he will stay with me and away from the war, unless some one tried to offend up or some one in front of us. That is some thing else, that we cannot avoid. I guess that is what you want to say?
Elinor,
I’m sorry to hear about your dad. He seems to have been a special man, who loved the best things in life. He probably loved his family most of all, but felt compelled, in the name of honor, to go to war. And your husband is right to stay by your side, because you and your family is what is most important for him.
I am not an advocate for war. In fact, Selling a Vision of Hope is a way of containing war and keeping it to a minimum. The war that lies ahead will be won in the heart and the mind of the man on the street, and not on the battlefield. Most of the “fighting” will be for the sake of winning hearts and minds. The actual military type fighting will only be a last resort, when there is no other alternative. The extremists may push us to that point as they see their popular support dwindling, as people begin to imagine the possiblity of hope.
If it would be possible to Sell a Vision of Hope without any blood shed, I would be the first to support that. I don’t want any more daughters to lose their dads. But your dad left, as part of his legacy, the idea that sometimes we have no choice but to fight for what we believe. We just have to inspire people with enough hope, so that there will not be any question in their minds, as to what they are fighting for.
Nissim,
Thank you for your kind comment. I am aware of the fact aht i am not the only one in the region, many kids share my story,perhaps too many of them, and all I wish is we help this to stop. I am very sure we people of the Middle East are capable of providing our kids with much better resolutions. I know what you mean by war being inevtable some times, it is more realistic to consider war but try to make it as less as possible, as close to zero as we can maintain. I believe in the vision of hope, because even if being hopeful is an illusion, it is a beautiful one, and it is more than a dream.