Читать книгу Peacebuilding in Israeli-Palestinian Relations - Saliba Sarsar - Страница 13

INTRODUCTION

“So when I think of and talk and write about peace culture, I’m writing about how we deal with difference creatively.”—Elise M. Boulding (1999, para. 2)

“Peace can be agreed around the conference table; but unless it grows in ordinary hearts and minds, it does not last. It may not even begin.”—Jonathan Sacks (2002, p. 7)

Peace is always preferable to violence and war. Peace, as path and destination, empowers and enables. Violence and war cause casualties, destruction, and pain. By conquering enmity, we value life, we enrich our soul, and we heal the world!

The task of bringing about peace is usually left to top government officials. They typically take the lead and credit in diplomacy and peace negotiations, not individual citizens. However, peace is too important to be the exclusive domain of governments. In the words of Harold H. Saunders, former United States Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs and a key participant in the Camp David Accords of 1978, “Only governments can write peace treaties, but only human beings—citizens outside government—can transform conflictual relationships between people into peaceful relationships” (2001, p. xvii).

←1 | 2→

This book addresses the issue of Israeli-Palestinian relations in Israel and Jerusalem, and to a lesser extent the West Bank. The Gaza Strip is not included. The emphasis is placed not on international interventions (e.g., funding, negotiations, resolutions, solidarity), even though these might be essential to successful peacebuilding efforts, or the institutional and structural assets of and obstacles to building peace at the national levels, but on how individuals, pairs, and entities enhance capacities and participation, and meet the challenge of moving away from conflict and trauma and engaging in healing, recovery, and reconciliation. In a 2002 article, “Reconciling the Children of Abraham,” I wrote, “Real peace comes to Arab Palestinians and Israeli Jews when they make it part of their dreams and their reality, when they prepare for it. Qui deiserat pacem, praeparet pacem!” (2002, pp. 323–324).

Unfortunately, Arabs and Jews are in a struggle and have been at it for over a century. They find it extremely difficult to let go of old habits and practices. This relationship crystallized in 1948 in what is called the Arab-Israeli conflict, with its main expression focused on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Israelis and Palestinians have painted themselves into national, territorial, ethnic, religious, and ideological corners. They have played zero-sum games, thus ensuring that peace will not materialize before one side surrenders and the other wins. Both—living near each other but unequally—have suffered and continue to suffer terribly. Their lives, property, and future are continuously being threatened. While many have been sacrificed on the altar of extremism, jingoism, and myopia, others suffer from fear, trauma, and the unknown. Their descendants then carry the resulting scars and accompanying thirst for revenge for years, if not decades. In this way, the dispute lives on.

The Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, the Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, the First Intifada (1987–1993) and the Second Intifada (2000–2005) of the Palestinian people against Israel’s occupation, the calls against normalization of relations, and extreme views on both sides of the divide—all have created added challenges for those involved in peacebuilding efforts in Israel and Palestine. While such activities have produced some progress, ranging from joint coexistence to shared society, peace moves have remained limited.

Countless national and international initiatives have attempted to end the Israeli-Palestinian dispute peacefully. National interests, territorial imperatives, security concerns, psychological barriers, religious dogmas, and ideological proclivities continue to block opportunities for finding an acceptable ←2 | 3→solution to the majority in both national communities. Forward steps taken toward peace are invariably thrust backward to agony and tragedy.

A Personal Connection and Commitment

We differ in our reaction to the ongoing tragedy and trauma. We usually find ourselves siding with the beneficial and the familiar. We sometimes promote and assist allies or “co-religionists” in ways that objectify, disempower, and demonize “the other.” “Might becomes right” and sacred texts are used to turn God into an exclusionary figure, sanctifying the unholy as holy, the inhumane as humane, and the unacceptable as permissible.

What has evolved in Arab-Jewish and Israeli-Palestinian relations has generated serious concerns for millions of people. It has not only divided Arabs from Jews and Israelis from Palestinians, but also generated fissures in each of these communities. It has deep personal and professional meaning for me as well. I think of my family and friends who live in harm’s way on both sides of the Palestinian-Israeli divide. I think of all the innocents who are losing loved ones and who are caring for those who are adversely affected.

My parents were negatively impacted by all the conflict cycles and wars between Arabs and Jews/Palestinians and Israeli Jews during the 20th and 21st centuries. As a child during the Six-Day War, I looked death in the eye. After the war’s first two days, my family escaped the area of the Jordanian-Israeli border in Jerusalem. In the heat of battle, an older brother and I were separated from the rest of the family and became internally displaced, at least temporarily, until we were reunited a few days later (Sarsar, 2018, pp. 10–15).

As a student of history and political science, I learnt further that war excludes and dehumanizes as it creates loss, misery, and a cycle of revenge; while peace includes and enlivens as it builds dignity and community. This simple fact has put me on a path in support of peacemaking and peacebuilding. My doctoral dissertation addressed the change in Egypt’s President Anwar Sadat’s foreign policy change toward Israel. In spring 1993, I co-founded Project Understanding in Monmouth County, New Jersey, which consisted of Arab Americans (Muslims and Christians) and Jewish Americans, to promote dialogue and peaceful coexistence. In 2006, I was a member of the American Task Force on Palestine delegation that visited with heads of state in each of Jordan, Palestine, and Israel. I authored and secured a Fulbright Scholar-in-Residence grant to bring to Monmouth University in spring 2007 Israeli Jewish psychologist Dan Bar-On and Palestinian educator Sami Adwan to ←3 | 4→teach and be a resource to the students, faculty, and the larger community. I co-produced the video, “Crossing the Border: Peace Building under Fire,” which highlighted the cooperation Bar-On and Adwan while they sojourned at Monmouth. Also, in 2007, I founded the Monmouth Dialogue Project (MDP) that organized monthly meetings, fieldtrips, and connections to similar organizations and groups. In 2009, members of MDP organized the first conference of facilitators of Arab-Jewish and Jewish-Christian-Muslim sustained dialogue groups in the United States, Canada, Israel, and Palestine. My firm commitment to peace and peacebuilding continues regardless of the ups and downs in Israeli-Palestinian relations and infuses my teaching, learning, scholarship, and service.

Why must children experience violence or lose their lives before they have a chance to grow? Why must adults be subjected to aggression and aggress against others in order to feel free and secure? Why must the innocent face Hell in order to enter the gates of Heaven? Why must peace be crucified so that it can be resurrected again? When will blind commitment to this cause or that master stop in order for peace with justice for all to materialize? Why not invest human energy and ingenuity in the future of our children and grandchildren instead of developing the weapons, military tactics, and strategies to oppress or terrorize another?

What we say and do will have serious repercussions on intensifying or reducing tensions. Irrespective of our beliefs, biases, and loyalties, our message must be one: the cycle of violence must stop. Terrorism, collective punishment, and the slaughter of innocents can never be justified. We are obligated to struggle against aggression no matter who commits it. Our praise must be balanced with our criticism, and criticism ought not be placed solely at the doorstep of strangers, but also directed toward those for whom we truly care. The truth is to enable people to heal the wounds of belligerence and ignorance and to hope for a better tomorrow.

Hence, there is an urgent need to develop responsive and responsible leaders who are willing to adopt and practice a culture of peace, one that does not define peace as cessation of hostility only, but also the implementation of peace agreements and the advancement of social justice; one that does not depend on power, but on values that promote the common good; and one that does not reduce security and stability, but also expands cooperation and opportunities. This requires a paradigm shift, as is indicated in Figure I.1, which can be fostered through intentional thinking and behaviors, all directed toward peace, mainly in vision, resources, personal commitment, ←4 | 5→institutional empowerment, meaningful education and programs, and partnerships. The goal is to properly align values and perceptions on one hand with attitudes and preference on the other in order to influence actions for producing peace, not war.

Understanding Peacebuilding

Historically, there has been a variety of peace leaders. These are usually divided into two categories: peacemakers and peacebuilders (Sarsar, 2005). Although working within a similar environment, each group follows “a different set of values and modus operandi, based on interest and ideological predilections, ←5 | 6→policy parameters or principles, power positions, locus of activities, and reservoirs of resources” (Sarsar, 2005, p. 70). Top-down peacemakers, who mostly draw on instruments of power and coercion, include government officials, military strategists, and diplomats. Bottom-up peacebuilders, who normally have influence on the minds and hearts of others through ideas and work in small communities, include artists, doctors, journalists, and teachers. While peacemakers concern themselves with the termination of hostilities and the initial phases of post-conflict periods, peacebuilders’ actions target peace promotion for the longer term.

Figure I.1: Paradigm Shift Toward Peace

Although peacemaking and peacebuilding have historically operated in separate spheres, with little or no structural and process synergy between them, they are two sides of the same coin. Both are necessary for the successful resolution of protracted conflicts and the creation of a sustainable culture of peace. Therefore, there is a need for synergy or even integration between them as peacemaking does not automatically translate into peacebuilding. When the ink on a peace agreement has dried, real peace will not automatically ensue. That is why the populations on both sides of a protracted conflict must engage in psychological and social transformation so that peace agreements are successful. Otherwise, unfulfilled expectations and a de-legitimatization of the peace process will occur, often producing worse conditions.

Given the book’s focus, the emphasis for the rest of this introductory chapter is on peacebuilding. What is its definition? What sort of general activities do peacebuilders undertake? How do these apply to Israel and Palestine?

Johan Galtung (1975), the founder of the discipline of peace and conflict studies, introduced the term peacebuilding when distinguishing among peacekeeping, peacemaking, and peacebuilding. For him, “The mechanisms that peace is based on should be built into the structure and be present as a reservoir for the system itself to draw up … More specifically, structures must be found to remove causes of wars and offer alternatives to war in situations where wars might occur” (1976, pp. 297–298). Less than two decades later, United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali coined the term for the United Nations in “An Agenda for Peace.” He defined peacebuilding as a post-conflict activity or action “to identify and support structures which will tend to strengthen and solidify peace in order to avoid a relapse into conflict” (1992, para. 21). His emphasis was on “concrete cooperative projects which link two or more countries in a mutually beneficial undertaking.” John Paul Lederach, a peace studies scholar, moved away from a state-centric model and argued for working together to resolve root causes of conflict so as to create ←6 | 7→and live a sustainable peace. He held that peacebuilding is “a comprehensive concept that encompasses, generates, and sustains the full array of processes, approaches, and stages needed to transform conflict toward more sustainable, peaceful relationships.” In addition, the term “involves a wide range of activities that both precede and follow formal peace accords. Metaphorically, peace is seen not merely as a stage in time or a condition. It is a dynamic social construct” (1997, p. 20). For Michael Barnett and his colleagues, peacebuilding involves more than “stability promotion.” It is meant “to create a positive peace, to eliminate the root causes of conflict, to all states and societies to develop stable expectations of peaceful change” (Barnett et al., 2007, p. 44). The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development/Development Assistance Committee (OECD/DAC) guidance report in 2008 acknowledged that peacebuilding has become “an overarching term for an entire range of actions designed to contribute to building a culture of peace … [and] covers a broad range of measures implemented in the context of emerging, current, or post-conflict situations and which are explicitly guided and motivated by a primary commitment to the prevention of violent conflict and the promotion of a lasting and sustainable peace” (2008, p. 15).

Peacebuilding entities engage in a variety of initiatives meant to enable their members, participants, or students to develop the aptitudes, skills, and behaviors necessary for going beyond conflict and living peace. The focus of activities is on young people; peace education; sensitive development; human security; the environment; gender and women’s rights; health and counseling; human rights, justice, and legal aid; mediation and conflict transformation; interfaith encounters; reconciliation; culture and media; and research. Hidden or missing in most of these activities, and which need to be prioritized, are healing and the cultivation of habits of peace, mainly a wider perspective, a long-term view, dialogue, compassion, forgiveness, nonviolence, and reconciliation.

Peacebuilding in the Israeli-Palestinian Context

Ned Lazarus defines peacebuilding in the context of Israeli-Palestinian relations as “voluntary civic engagement in organized non-violent social or political activity aimed at transforming perceptions, policies, and/or structural/sociopolitical relations between Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs with aspirations to contribute to longer-term resolution of intergroup conflict” (Lazarus, ←7 | 8→2017, p. 18). The current field of peacebuilding, according to him, has 164 active organizations in Israel and Palestine, which are engaged in peace, conflict resolution or cross-conflict, and human rights. Categorizing these organizations by the identity/citizenship/residency of the target populations of peacebuilding initiatives, he finds out that 68 (41.46%) active initiatives pertain to cross-border (Palestinian and Israeli Jews), 61 (37.20%) to shared society (Arab and Jewish citizens of Israel), 19 (11.59%) to Jerusalem (Palestinian Jerusalemites and Israeli Jews), 14 (8.54%) to primarily internal Israeli/Jewish, and 3 (1.83%) to mainly internal Palestinian (2017, pp. 18–20).

Sheila H. Katz writes of a century of joint nonviolence, also variously known as “coexistence, people-to-people programs, second-track diplomacy, citizen action, peace building, advocacy, solidarity, co-resistance, or simply work for equality and to end occupation” (2016, p. 3). She enumerates 500 initiatives, arranged into 14 categories: the arts; civil society, human rights, and democracy; communications; community activism; dialogue; economy and business; educational activism and research; political activism; political negotiations, parties, and policy; religious activism; science, environment, medicine, and mental health; sports and physical activism; women’s activism; and youth activism. Other sources have listed far less initiatives or organizations, principally because they are dealing with the current period. For example, Peace Insight, the leading online resource for local peacebuilding around the world, includes 88 peacebuilding groups, arranged into 15 categories, including conflict prevention; human rights; mediation and dialogue; peace education; transitional justice and reconciliation; and women, peace, and security. The Alliance for Middle East Peace (ALLMEP)—an organization consisting of non-governmental organizations that promote reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians and between Arabs and Jews in the Middle East—has 111 members, with most of them being peacebuilding groups.

This book considers 56 Israeli and Palestinian peacebuilding entities, with some involving both Israelis and Palestinians. Peacebuilding is not limited only to peace promotion in each individual society, but also includes relations between Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs, whether they happen to be Israeli citizens or not. A friendly modification of Ned Lazarus’s definition, therefore, views peacebuilding as “voluntary civic engagement in organized non-violent social or political activity aimed at transforming perceptions, policies, and/or structural/sociopolitical relations in each of Israel and Palestine, as well as between Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs in support of peace.”

←8 | 9→

The roots of peacebuilding in Israeli-Palestine relations actually go back to when Arabs and Jews lived in historic Palestine, first toiling under Ottoman rule (1516–1917) and then under the British Mandate (1920–1948). It took time for these roots to take hold, and now the leaves of peacebuilding are starting to sprout. Chapter 1 provides short narratives of Arab-Jewish/Israeli-Palestinian relations.

Meantime, peace scholars and practitioners have identified phases through which peacebuilding evolved. Walid Salem and Edy Kaufman, in their historical perspective on Palestinian-Israeli peacebuilding, elaborate on three main phases (2006, pp. 12–26), while Ned Lazarus recognize five historical turning points.

As per Salem and Kaufman, Phase I (late 1870s–1948) saw daily interactions between Arabs and Jews in neighborhoods, joint organizations, and at work. Jewish organizations, such as Hashomer Hatza’ir, Canaanite Movement, Brith Shalom, and Kedma Mizraha, advocated for coexistence, cooperation, or dialogue. Palestinian parties, such as the National Party, Farmers Party, Village Cooperation Society, Islamic National Society, Al-Ahali Party, National Bloc Party, Defense Party, Reform Party, Arabic Palestinian Party, and Independence Party, entered into negotiations with the Jewish leadership or pursued nonviolence to achieve their goals. This happened even though there were continual tensions between Arabs and Jews, especially during the British Mandate.

Phase II (1948–1967) experienced little peacebuilding activity as the Arab states and Israel erected physical and psychological walls between them, having gone through their first war in 1948. While there was some domestic Arab-Jewish rapprochement within Israel, there was no interaction between the Arab and Israeli civil societies. “Given the shock and despair of the Arab world, it would have been … an act of treason for any well-intentioned citizen to come to the Israelis with a message of peace” (Salem and Kaufman, 2006, p. 19).

In Phase III (1967–1993), intensive interactions between Israelis on one hand and Palestinians in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip on the other developed, with some focused on various approaches to peacebuilding. As Israel consolidated its military presence and increased its settlements, particularly in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, tensions rose and reached a crescendo in the First Intifada (1987–1993). But there were also peacemaking moves between Israel and its Arab neighbors as in the Geneva Conference (1973), Camp David Accords (1978), Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty ←9 | 10→(1979), Madrid Conference (1991) and Oslo Accords (1993). These and other factors encouraged the growth of peacebuilding initiatives within both Palestine and Israel. They also engendered various peace approaches between Palestine and Israel (e.g., Track II diplomacy), with each having its own traits and stamp of approval. As Salem and Kaufman argue, peacebuilding was seen as “an oppositional activity and, in the best case, the formation of the peace camp.” In the Palestinian environment, it was “an activity that was approved from 1974 onward by the first leadership of the Palestinian people (i.e., the PLO [Palestinian Liberation Organization])” (2006, p. 25).

As for Lazarus’s historical turning points, he begins with Israel’s founding in 1948 until the late 1970s. For him, this time had “no civil society peacebuilding sector, ‘peace movement’ or ‘peace camp’ to speak of” (Lazarus, 2017, p. 31). The second turning point focuses on the emergence of the peace camp from around 1977 with the election of Menachem Begin as Prime Minister of Israel and the historic visit of Egypt’s President Anwar Sadat to Jerusalem until the start of the First Intifada. The third turning point covers the First Intifada. It was during this time that leading Israeli officials and intellectuals became engaged in informal and unofficial backchannel or Track II diplomacy with PLO representatives or Palestinian personalities. The fourth turning point addresses the Oslo era, which “transformed a handful of activists and initiatives into an Israeli/Palestinian civil society peacebuilding field” (Lazarus, 2017, p. 35). The fifth and last turning point extends from the Second Intifada until present. During this period, many peacebuilding initiatives stopped. Others fell on hard times but are persevering as they learn how to ride the waves of conflict and absence of peace.

Following on the above formulations, I propose “the Oslo Accords-U.S. President Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’ ” period. It extends Salem and Kaufman’s historical phases while combining Lazarus’s fourth and fifth turning points. During this period, some Israelis and most Palestinians moved from the initial hope of Oslo to the dismay with Trump’s approach to Israeli-Palestinian relations. In the first half of this period, the momentum of peace and international funding generated by Oslo were countered by internal and external realities, including (1) rightist Israeli governments after Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination by an extremist Jew in 1995 and a huge increase or expansion of Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank; (2) concerns over leadership and good governance in the Palestinian Authority; and (3) lack of resolve and vision in the international community ←10 | 11→to bridge the gap between the Israeli government and the Palestinians, thus leading to a feeble peace process and stalemate.

In the second half of this period, Israel enhanced its settlement enterprise, thus endangering the two-state solution. The Palestinians suffered from infighting and division, which were caused by conflict between the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and the Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas in the Gaza Strip. In addition, three major confrontations flared up between Israel and Hamas in 2008–2009, 2012, and 2014. Peace negotiations or agreements—Oslo II (1995), Hebron Protocol (1997), Camp David Summit (2000), Taba Summit (2001), “Road Map” for Peace (2003), and Sharm el-Sheikh (2005), among others—helped a little but did not substantively advance peace or slow the birth of peacebuilding entities or projects. During this period, 130 peacebuilding initiatives were founded or 79.3% of the current field (Lazarus, 2017, p. 31). In my own study of peacebuilding initiatives, 67.8% of the current field started in 1993. Contrary to expectations, when the ebb and flow in the peace process ran out of waves, peacebuilding in and between Israel and Palestine intensified.

The Structure of the Book

This book contains separate analyses that focus on both individual and collective efforts to build peace, as is presented in Chapter 3 and in Chapters 4, 5, and 6, respectively. Most of the peacebuilding organizations mentioned in this book are listed chronologically in Appendix: Peacebuilding Entities and Initiatives in Israel and Palestine, 1949–2016. Moreover, this book highlights peacebuilding in Israeli-Palestinian relations by examining it at the individual, pair, and entity levels. The rationale is to explore how those involved at each level view the relationship with the other and act to bring about coexistence, a shared society, or peace in a sustained way amid major challenges and an uncertain future. It is also to discover the commonality or common ground at each level and how that can enhance the potential for peace.

In focusing on peacebuilding in Israeli-Palestinian relations, this book first argues for the need to think of Israeli-Palestinian relations instead of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Conflict is usually only part of a relationship. More and more attention in daily living and research must consider the human dimension, not only the political, military, and strategic. Humanizing the other will motivate individuals and communities for sustained commitment to peacebuilding. That is why there is considerable attention given to ←11 | 12→peacebuilding at the individual, pair, and group levels. Second, this book expresses the need to synchronize top-down peacemaking with bottom-up peacebuilding. When a peace agreement is signed, it is the people who must live the peace … together! Third, this book urges Israelis and Palestinians to take peace more seriously, as their present and future depend on it, and to do so in an intentional and strategic way. Fourth, if peace and reconciliation are to materialize and be sustained, memory must extend beyond the thoughts of suffering to enable the restructuring of identity, regaining of humanity, and embracing of constructive relationships. Fifth and last, this book calls upon people and groups of good will, as well as national governments, the United Nations and other international institutions, nongovernmental organizations, and foundations to increase their support of peacebuilding efforts.

With the above in mind, this book consists of this Introduction and seven other chapters. Given that Israeli-Palestinian relations are an extension of Jewish-Arab relations that date back for centuries, Chapter 1 elucidates the past or the historical and current contexts of peacebuilding. It provides a quick overview of Jewish-Arab and Israeli-Palestinian relations, using both a top-down “official” narrative and a bottom-up “people” narrative. This is meant to point to the gap between the two, thus alerting governmental decision-makers and security officials to consider more carefully how their actions have consequences on ordinary people and to limit violence so as to create understanding and enhance the potential for building bridges of peace. Lastly, this chapter gives a brief history of peacebuilding efforts in Israel and Palestine, clarifying how events have increased or reduced the number and value of such efforts.

Chapter 2 goes beyond competing narratives and contested histories by raising issues relevant to thinking about peacebuilding and peace in Israeli-Palestinian relations. Among these are the agreement on the language we use, the time periods we emphasize, the boundaries and maps we follow, and the ideological perspectives and narratives we espouse. In addition, the chapter checks the pulse of Arab-Jewish/Israeli-Palestinian relations by reporting the results of Israeli and Palestinian surveys in an attempt to discover how people feel about contending issues and under what conditions peacebuilders live and work.

Chapter 3 examines peacebuilding at the individual level. It presents five peacebuilders in Israel and Palestine—Gershon Baskin, Robi Damelin, Sami Awad, Yehuda Stolov, and Huda Abu Arqoub. Although they represent ←12 | 13→differing backgrounds and interests, they are joined by a strong commitment to positive change in their own national communities. The chapter brings to light common characteristics of peacebuilders, which are beneficial to understanding peacebuilding at the pair and entity levels.

Chapters 4 and 5 analyze how it takes special people to work together, challenge the status quo, and speak the simple truth of mutual respect and peace. The focus is placed on peacebuilding leaders from opposite sides of the divide who have found the courage to team up as “uncommon pairs” and engage in joint actions for the benefit of their respective communities. While Chapter 4 presents three case studies: the late Israeli Jewish psychologist Dan Bar-On and Palestinian educator Sami Adwan, Israeli Palestinian Ibtisam Mahameed and Israeli Jewish Elana Rozenman, and Israeli Jewish Yaniv Sagee and Israeli Palestinian Mohammad Darawshe, Chapter 5 expands the circle of analysis by showcasing five peacebuilding entities—Neve Shalom-Wahat al-Salam, Just Vision, Hand in Hand, Combatants for Peace, and Women Wage Peace—within Israel and Palestine. It explains how these have progressed over the years and struggled to find best ways toward coexistence, tolerance, peace, and reconciliation.

Chapter 6 looks at the challenges and opportunities of peacebuilding in Israeli-Palestinian relations. It points to how Israeli and Palestinian peacebuilders find or fail to find value in peacebuilding. It touches upon the challenge of funding, especially from the Western world. It concludes by going beyond peacebuilding with recommendations on how to move peace forward.

Finally, Chapter 7 argues for seekers of peace to start cultivating “the habits of peace,” which are a wider perspective, a long-term view, dialogue, compassion, forgiveness, nonviolence, and reconciliation. If internalized and properly practiced, these habits can spell hope and bring people closer to peace. The chapter ends with an open letter to Israelis and Palestinians, urging them to reconsider their past and present and imagine a better tomorrow for themselves and future generations.

References

Barnett, M., Kim, H., O’Donnell, M. and Sitea, L. (2007). “Peacebuilding: What is in a name?” Global Governance 13(1): 35–58.

Boulding, E. M. (1999). Peace culture: Living with difference. Keynote address at the Boston Research Center for the 21st Century, Boston, M.A. Retrieved from https://www.ikedacenter.org/thinkers-themes/thinkers/lectures-talks/boulding-peace-cultures

←13 | 14→

Boutros-Ghali, B. (1992, June 17). An Agenda for peace: Preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping. Report of the Secretary-General to the Security Council: New York. Retrieved from http://www.un-documents.net/a47-277.htm

Galtung, J. (1976). Three approaches to peace: Peacekeeping, peacemaking, and peacebuilding. In J. Galtung (ed.). Peace, war and defense: Essays in peace research, Vol. II. Copenhagen: Christian Ejlers, pp. 282–304.

Lazarus, N. (2017, July 24). Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre (BICOM) Report: A future for Israeli-Palestinian peacebuilding. Retrieved from Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre, http://www.bicom.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/A-future-for-Israeli-Palestinian-peacebuilding-FINAL.pdf

Lederach, J. P. (1997). Building peace: Sustainable reconciliation in divided societies. Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace Press.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development/Development Assistance Committee. (2008). Guidance on evaluating conflict prevention and peacebuilding activities: Paris, France. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluations/dcdndep/39774573.pdf

Sacks, J. (2002). The dignity of difference: How to avoid the clash of civilization. London & New York: Continuum.

Salem, W. and Kaufman, E. (2006). Palestinian-Israeli peacebuilding: A historical perspective. In E. Kaufman, W. Salem and J. Verhoeven (eds.). Bridging the divide: Peacebuilding in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc., pp. 11–37.

Sarsar, S. (2018). Jerusalem: The home in our hearts. N. Bethesda, MD: Holy Land Books.

Sarsar, S. (2002). Reconciling the children of Abraham. Peace Review 14(3): 319–324.

Saunders, H. H. (2001). A public peace process: Sustained dialogue to transform racial and ethnic conflicts. New York, NY: Palgrave.

←14 | 15→