It’s funny, the multi-billionaire in the West Bank called me “naive” as well. But then he went on to say that he too is naive, having wished for peace for some 40 years, and still somehow, falling short.

I guess I am naive at heart, but I also think that I’m on to something realistic here.

I understand what you’re saying, that the key issues facing the Palestinians will have to be faced head on, such as the occupation, which should come to an end for the sake of Palestinians and Israelis alike. I also understand that there have been in the past attempts to invest in Palestine in order to bring about prosperity. And of course, these efforts did not bear fruit; much of the money going into corrupt hands, which partly explains why Hamas won in the first place.

However, what we have now is something which has not existed before. We have a situation in which Fattah perceives Hamas as a mortal threat. To the best of my knowledge, this situation is relatively new, and to my mind, offers an opportunity that has not existed before, and that must be seized with all vigor.

Fattah understand that corruption will not cut it at this point. I believe that a serious effort is under way to bring about prosperity in the West Bank and to consolidate security. The key businessmen in the West Bank do not want to see a Hamas takeover there. Israel has to show some measure of progress to hold on to U.S. support. Obama has to show some progress as well on the peace front. For the Obama Administration, success in the West Bank could be the beginning of an overall accomodation with huge parts of the Muslim world. Many developed and developing nations around the world see peace in Palestine as essential for the free-flow of oil, etc.

If you put this fruit salad together, it is possible, though not definite, that Israel’s willingness to help Fattah with security and with job creation could be pivitol in brokering a peace, at least with the West Bank. This will happen not because of wishful thinking, or naivete, or because it is the right thing to do, but because there is today an alignment of the self-interests of many of the players at the table. Self-interest, if played just right, could mean peace, not because people love one another, but because for the first time, they may actually need one another big time. Not to mention the Sunni need for Israel to help in keep Iran’s ambitions in check.

A partnership between Israel and the West Bank would be a way of putting pressure on Hamas. Ordinary citizens in Gaza would see the prosperity in the West Bank and would naturally say to themselves: “Hey, where is our share?” They could pressure Hamas in ways that Israel can’t. When Israel fights Hamas she creates martyrs. But when their own people pressure Hamas, now that’s horse of a different color. After a while, without the support of the people, even Hamas could decide to moderate its views, and join the bandwagon of job creation, as a means of legitimating its hold on power. At such time, Fattah and Hamas could become two legitimate political parties, each using legitimate means to consolidate political power. Each creating jobs, instead of instigating terror.

Nissim,

I know you mean well, but I have to say that this strikes me as naive. This idea of an economic peace is really nothing new. It distracts from the primary grievances of the Palestinians, which are largely civil and political. You leave out that Netanyahu is championing this economic peace as an alternative to the creation of a Palestinian state (an idea which he reluctantly had to accept), and quite frankly, this analysis seems to reflect Israeli priorities rather than Palestinian ones. There is very little indication, other than an Israeli and Western consensus based on misconception, that Fatah commands popular support.

The Bush administration’s primary strategy, after Hamas won the elections in Gaza, was exactly what you are describing. Shore up support for Fatah, create an economically stable and prosperous West Bank, and watch as Gazans reject Hamas. It has not worked, for the quite obvious reason that it does not address the primary grievances of the Palestinians.

I remember a politician in Likud once said that she could easily conclude that the only possible peace in the region would be through the economical freedom. Or Laissez-faire capitalism theories. I agree absolutely that labour, free trade, and extensive Israeli-Palestenian network of business can do what the diploamtic and political resolutions didn’t.

By the way, Fattah and Israel are already friends, and share common views about peace. Hamas are mere terrorists. And yes, Fattah and Israel businessmen can bring a resolution.

I agree!

There is a saying in the Middle East: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

Well, according to what you’ve said, it’d go like the Chinese proverb that says; “It is good to strike the serpent’s head with your enemy’s hand.”

Peace Out!