Everyone is getting emotional, a Kremlin spokesman tells us, in a condescending tone. He is right. Everyone is, and much good it is doing us. Throughout the West, from the bond markets to the Black Sea – not to mention the South China Sea – we seem to be facing strategic weakness, economic uncertainty and political incoherence. Those who regard themselves as possessing superior political wisdom often deplore the rise of populism. But there is a problem. For that charge to stick, the wise men ought to offer wise council: solutions to difficulties. As it is, we are thrown back on cliche. Reversing the order of Yeats’ words, the worst are full of passionate intensity, while the best lack all conviction.
This is never more true than in Israel and Palestine. For decades, it has been widely assumed that there was an answer: a two-state solution. With every passing year, and each new settlement on the West Bank, the task of achieving that grew harder. But Western diplomats clung to the hope. After all, what was the alternative? Now, it almost appears as if there is neither any hope nor an alternative. So what can be done?
When considering Israel’s perspective, a couple of points are worth remembering. First, Hamas and Hezbollah have suffered huge losses. Israel has succeeded in destroying a great deal of their fighting capability. Second, when it comes to the historical playbook, the Israeli government is using a different version. Western would-be negotiators have often tried to persuade the Israelis to look at Northern Ireland. If the UK government had obsessed itself with the IRA’s more blood-curdling rhetoric and more blood-stained objectives, there would never have been a peace process. So try to deal with relative moderates, whatever their dubious past; try also to minimise the suffering caused to civilians.
In Israel, that has had limited appeal. Many Israelis use a different historical parallel: 1939. When you went to war with Germany, they will say, and indeed when the Americans went to war with Japan, how much did you care about civilians who happened to live in the enemies’ territory? You did whatever was necessary to win. You were locked in a struggle for survival, and moral codes had to be adjusted accordingly. We Israelis are also fighting for survival. Needs must when the devil is our enemy. If our enemies were to prevail, there would be a second Holocaust.
Although there is more than one assessment which could be made of Benjamin Netanyahu, we should acknowledge the strength and sincerity of many Israelis’ beliefs. October 7 struck horror into the Israeli soul, as did the seizure of hostages. At the risk of repeating myself – a recurrent difficulty when discussing the Muddle [sic] East – there is a phenomenon identified by military historians: species pseudo-differentiation. If you come to believe that your enemy is a member of an inferior species, it is easier to kill him and civilians who belong to his group. There is a lot of that going on in Israel and Palestine today.
Even so, from the Israel side, it is not a sufficient response. Deep in the id of some Israelis, there lurks a fantasy, which may even have been entertained by Netanyahu: that there is already a Palestinian state. It is called Jordan, and the theory goes that once the Palestinians on the West Bank and Gaza have been induced – more likely, coerced – to settle there, Israel’s problems would be at an end. In every respect, practical as well as moral, that is a ridiculous idea. Any attempt to move in that direction would destroy all possibilities of a diplomatic modus vivendi between Israel and its neighbours and would indeed turn Israel into a pariah state. Not even Donald Trump would support such a policy.
In their own interests, the Israelis ought to renounce the temptations of the id and return to reality. For a start, the parallels with the Second World War will only take them so far. It is true that the RAF and the USAF inflicted terrible losses on German culture and the German populace. Some of these instances, most notably Dresden, may have been unnecessary. But the victorious Allies did not face one problem that now confronts Israel. They were not surrounded by a German population which hated them.
The Israelis may have taken the wind out of Hamas and Hezbollah. It may also be true that many Gazans would give anything for peace: no more bombing, no more risk of babies dying from starvation. It could even be that large numbers of Gazans blame Hamas for bringing destruction upon them. But what are we talking about in terms of percentages? Let us assume that only 10% of the population hate the Israelis: only around 200,000 people. But how many people do Hamas and its successors need to provide foot soldiers and martyrs? The Israelis count their dead, weep over their dead, mourn their dead: are even willing to trade live prisoners for Israeli corpses. Their military can always rely on a spirit of self-sacrifice. But Israelis are psychologically healthy enough to want to live. They are dealing with a foe in the grip of fanaticism. It is not easy to defeat a foe ready to commit suicide in pursuit of martyrdom.
That may sound like a despairing conclusion, and it could easily become so. But there is another route. The resources of civilisation are not exhausted. The West can mobilise individuals who have the brainpower and tenacity to begin a diplomatic process based on the Abraham Accords, acknowledging the need to create a Palestinian state and to guarantee Israel’s security. We could provide money, the men and the brains for a peace-keeping force. We could also find support in Israel. At this crucial juncture in that embattled, tragic and wonderful country’s affairs, it is not helpful to have a leader who is so widely distrusted.
It is easy to write down what ought to be done. That takes a few words. To get any part of it done would certainly take toil and sweat. We can only hope to avoid blood and tears and to be sceptical about hand-wringing. Ministers are lining up to complain about Israel and to threaten sanctions, which would have minimal effect on the Israeli economy. Their only point is to make people in this country feel good which is, alas, a fatuous exercise.
When contemplating Israel and Palestine, few would feel good about the current state of affairs, with one possible exception. The surviving leadership of Hamas, satisfied that it is destroying Israeli-Arab diplomacy and creating the conditions to recruit fresh levies, may well feel that events are moving in its diabolic direction. As for blood and tears, bring them on.
Yet there is one international figure who could make a difference. He helped to negotiate the Abraham Accords. He seems to have won the confidence of Arab leaders. Whatever the Israelis may think of him in private, they cannot do without him. Trump wants a Nobel Peace Prize. Let him try to earn one by starting a new Middle East peace process. A crazy idea? Probably. But in that region, anything which offers a path to hope seems like a crazy idea. If Trump could be persuaded to take it on, why not? Has anyone got a better idea? Otherwise it could be great hatred, little room, with oceans of blood and tears, for the indefinite future.
Click here to subscribe to our daily briefing – the best pieces from CapX and across the web.
CapX depends on the generosity of its readers. If you value what we do, please consider making a donation.
