Mutual goals for Israelis, Palestinians

The Gaza crisis spotlights how much both peoples seek democratic ideals.

|
Reuters
Demonstrators including Israeli and Palestinian activists take part in a 2016 march in support of peace near the West Bank city of Jericho in 2016.

Israel’s military operations in the Gaza Strip have raised urgent questions about what comes next if it succeeds in eradicating Hamas, the militant group that has governed the Palestinian enclave since 2006. Few see long-term Israeli administration as either viable or acceptable to the region’s Arab leaders.

The answer may lie in an alignment of Israel’s security interests with the aspirations of Palestinians for honest and democratic governance.

That shift would be the most consequential outcome of the current conflict – and it has arguably already happened. The deadly Oct. 7 assault by Hamas on Israeli villages adjacent to Gaza undermined Israeli assumptions that the country’s safety depended on keeping Palestinian leadership divided and off balance.

“This entire strategy has one goal,” Noa Shusterman Dvir, an Israeli national security consultant, told The New York Times. “Weakening the Palestinian Authority and strengthening Hamas is designed to hinder peace efforts, to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian State.” Now, she said, “the concept of ‘managing the conflict’ is broken.” 

Gaza and the Palestinian territories in the West Bank have been under divided leadership for nearly two decades. Attempts to reconcile and unify the separate governing factions have repeatedly failed. The last Palestinian elections were held in 2006. Since then, Palestinians have become increasingly discontent over corruption and lack of economic opportunity.

Those frustrations have erupted repeatedly before and since the Hamas attacks – particularly in the West Bank. Palestinians blame the Palestinian Authority, their main governing body, of failing to protect them, especially as attacks by Israeli settlers on Palestinians have increased in the West Bank.

A September report by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research found that Palestinians attribute their declining trust in their leaders to their financial dependency on Israel. That has exacerbated other grievances. The center also found that Palestinians strongly admired the mass demonstrations by Israelis against their government’s attempts to weaken judicial independence.

Those attitudes point to common cause. Israeli and Palestinian civil society groups agree there is a basis for unity in shared values. Prior to the crisis over Gaza, the two societies were involved in separate, parallel struggles to preserve or restore their respective democracies. Yet they also have two common aims: to ensure judicial independence and uproot corruption. Increasingly, people on both sides see those movements not so much as parallel but as intertwined.

As Shir Nosatzki, an Israeli activist, noted late last month, if the Israeli “protest movement builds a new agenda while Arab society is not sitting at the table, we won’t be able to call whatever it is we are building ‘democracy.’ I do think that the fact that Israeli Jews are starting to talk about what democracy is, has to bring us towards the fact that we are occupying another [people’s land].”

The hostilities in Gaza have deepened a crisis of confidence among Israelis and Palestinians in their leaders. They may be seeing similar paths toward restoring that trust.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Mutual goals for Israelis, Palestinians
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2023/1024/Mutual-goals-for-Israelis-Palestinians
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe