Part Six: Some Possible Steps For A Solution?

…continued from “But Israel Is A Bully” (i.e. read the part(s) below first)

Most of my comments so far have been complaints about inefficacity of the attempted solutions. But how do you begin to address the injustice inherent in the Palestinian plight? How do you create meaningful peace in the area? You cannot negotiate with terrorists (Jack Layton suggested it, but I’m going to assume he’s brighter than that and was just hoping to score some cheap political points) because ideological or religious extremists pursue absolute and nonnegotiable goals. Hamas would not be satisfied by increased justice for the Palestinian people; they want Israel wiped from the map (though, as a political party, they seem to be somewhat corrupted (in a good way) by their newly achieved power).
For Israel, improving Palestinian life in a general sense often looks like rewarding terrorism. For example, when they began the program to “retreat to defensible borders” they demolished all the buildings and towns that had been established under Israeli occupation. There is a rational reason to do so, since leaving the area and the homes might appear as though they had been forced out of the area by the actions of terrorists and made it appear as though participating in this kind of activity had benefits. Destroying the buildings may have thwarted some of the expectations Palestinians had about reclaiming the area, but it is also a missed opportunity for a cheap act of goodwill. I call it cheap not because the homes were inexpensive to build, but because leaving them doesn’t cost anything whereas fuelling the heavy machinery and paying people to knock them down does. But this just goes to show that it isn’t Israel who should be responsible for making things better.
Stephen Harper commented during a speech at a B'nai Brith banquet that "our government believes in a two-state solution —in a secure democratic and prosperous Israel living beside a viable democratic and peaceful Palestinian state." Indeed most of the western democracies seem to agree with some version of this idea, but none seem to engage in its pursuit beyond the occasional concession in international negotiations. It’s easy to see why Iran, Libya and Syria are so influential; they invest in the area. You can’t blame someone for going to a school that encourages and trains terrorists if it’s the only one available. While the western states talk about establishing a thriving and stable economy, Palestine’s Middle-Eastern allies are the only ones spending any money. It is my belief that a strong middle class is necessary prerequisite to a peaceful Palestine. Not only would this curb the jealousy they feel, but well-off people don’t blow themselves up. They have something to live for.
I’m not exactly sure how all this talk about making Palestine a better place can be translated into action. Since we often criticize externally funded schools –for good reason; in these cases education is often an ancillary objective to more sinister agenda— we probably would look silly if tried to set some up, even if our intentions were sincere. We do have to be more proactive; granting liberties does nothing to improve relations, we may actually have to give something real. I believe that the first step should be to resume the aid-package program. While I realize that the program stopped because the political leadership in the country refuses to acknowledge Israel and that this response is likely to be effective (since Hamas is likely to be short-lived if they cannot provide the basic essentials for their population) this strategy looks to me like a kinder, gentler form of state-sponsored terror. For example, the definition of Terrorism offered in my intro political-science course is “the deliberate use of violence or the threat of such, directed upon civilians in order to achieve political objectives” (Thomas Kapitan). The cessation of aid-packages is deliberate, it is directed at the civilians and it is intended to achieve political objectives. Our moral principles are in serious jeopardy when we advocate such hypocritical standards.