Ahmad’s post is a perfect example of the why the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been so vicious and so long. When two people living side by side share two completely different and conflicting narratives of history of a piece of land, it would naturally pit them against each other. A few years ago, the historian Michael Oren (who is now the Israeli ambassador to Washington) gave a lecture to my visiting class from the US about the conflicting narratives of the Israelis and the Palestinians.

I’m not going to go into length to describe what the two narratives actually say, but one thing Oren said that makes the two narratives is that the Israeli narrative is always under scrutiny by its historians. The majority of Israelis recognize the destruction of hundreds of Arab villages during the 1948 war.

On the other hand, I’m not aware of any self-scrutiny of the Palestinian narrative. To some it may mean that it is just because there is no contrary evidence. So let me add this one bit of scrutiny. Ahmad quotes Ben Gurion saying,

We must expel the Arabs and take their places.

This is just a blog so he doesn’t really have to follow any academic standards such as citing his source so let me help him. That quote was published in Benny Morris’ The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949 (1987). The source is from one of Ben Gurion’s letters to his son Amos (1937). But after peer review, the quote was found to be a misquote with Gurion actually saying,

We do not wish, we do not need to expel the Arabs and take their place. All our aspirations are built upon the assumption — proven throughout all our activity in the Land — that there is enough room in the country for ourselves and the Arabs.

It is the little things that separate the Palestinian narrative from the Israeli narrative. But it is a lot of little things. Instead of “We must expel …”, it is “We do not need to expel …”. From Nabulsi’s full article, the author mentions that he and an Israeli encounter argue about the name of Nablus, a city in the West Bank. The Israeli calls it “Shkheim”, as is written in the Hebrew Bible. To Nabulsi, Shkeim is just a term the Zionists “dug up” just like they dug up the Hebrew Bible. To Nabulsi, their was never a Land of Israel, there was just Canaan, Palestine.

For many, their own narrative is all they know, something that they are willing to fight and die for no matter what the cost. But to those who are hoping for a better future, there must be a way to find a way to move forward, to reconcile our differences, our conflicting narratives. To Nabulsi, the Jews are from Europe (even though half of Israeli Jews are from Arab and Muslim countries). To settlers in the West Bank, God gave this land for the Jews.

So how do we reconcile? I think we can start by recognizing that we are neighbors and we are stuck with each other. Second, we can recognize that no matter what a place is called, Yerushalayim or Al-Quds, one name or the other does not disqualify me from living there. Third, we can recognize that we can do great things together. Right now, Israeli, Palestinian, and Jordanians are trying to solve the water crisis. Right now, a leading Israeli Arab scientist in an Israeli University is developing new technology helping doctors detect cancers in their patients easily and accurately. Nissim Dahan can tell you more about how Israelis and Palestinians can together make a better future for everyone.

The questions is, therefore, are we going to continue to argue this case, to beat this dead horse so to speak. Or are we going to do the hard lifting of bringing justice to both peoples?

And really, that has been the question all along. All too often, people on both sides of this dispute have contented themselves with the belief in the truth of their convictions, including their respective interpretations of the past. And that is all well and good, but both sides continue to perpetuate the injustices they find so offensive.

The Palestinian people deserve justice. Do we want to continue arguing their case before the court of world opinion, or do we choose instead to bring them justice, with a state of their own, living side by side in peace with Israel, and enjoying the bounty of peace, prosperity, and freedom?

Up to now, some Palestinians themselves, and those who supposedly support them, are satisfied to point to the injustices, and to demand, therefore, the dismantlement of the Jewish state, which puts Israel on notice to be wary of compromise. This story is getting old. It may well be time for a new dynamic. Palesitinians deserve justice. Jews deserve a state of their own. And the two can be reconciled if people of good will decide to make it so.

There is a chance now to cut a deal. The deal will not give either side exactly what it wants. But it will give them both enough to make the deal worthwhile, and we could start from there, and build something even better out of it.

How about tuning out the blame game, and tuning up a chance for peace and justice to the people on both sides of this dispute, on both sides of the wall/fence? Justice will come from the realization of hope for the future, not from dwelling on the injustices of the past. The past cannot be changed. Only the future holds new possibilities.