Until fairly recently, few Palestinians believed that Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza would actually take place. It was assumed to be a trick. Israel expands; it does not contract. Arabs see Zionism as an ideology that exists solely to expropriate Arab land. For most Palestinians, a leopard would change its spots more quickly than Israel would evacuate its settlements without being forced by outside pressure to do so.
Thanks to the ubiquitous media, it is now apparent to the whole Arab world, and especially to Palestinians, that this view no longer describes today’s reality. Certainly, many Arab pundits describe Gaza as a media show, and are vituperatively skeptical about what it will lead to. But the real and visible anguish of thousands of people, and the split in Israeli society, is something that can help to humanize the enemy. Palestinians may still see Israel as the enemy, but to see Israelis as human is a very important step. Viewing the trauma of withdrawal on the screen has an effect that is unmatchable. As cynical as Palestinians are with regard to Prime Minister Sharon, his willingness to act against the expressed rage of a substantial, if minority, segment of his population, as well as his own lifelong convictions, has a significant effect. The fact that an Israeli government is evicting Israelis despite resistance gives hope for the future.
As someone who has traced the impact of historical narratives on both sides, I wonder whether the emotional aspect of the withdrawal could have a significant and positive effect on long-term political arrangements. Israelis and Palestinians, and their respective supporters around the world, understand their history in completely different terms.
Just a few examples make the point clear. Israelis celebrate the War of Independence of 1948, which they regard as wholly defensive, while Palestinians mourn the identical event as the Naqba (catastrophe), brought about solely by Israeli aggression. Both sides have wildly varying narratives of the history of the city each regards as its capital, Jerusalem. Camp David is seen as either a “generous” offer or as a cynical ploy. The varying versions go on and on, but the huge gulf in perceptions helps solidify a common belief that the other side consists of murderers and liars.
I suspect that this withdrawal can help those forces in Palestinian society and the Arab world as a whole, which argue it is necessary to recognize real Israeli fears.
Polls have consistently shown that a majority of Israelis say they are ready to give back most of the West Bank if they think their security will be protected. Strong Palestinian public reaction has had significant dampening effects on violent groups in the past, most notably in 1996 and in the current real, if shaky, ceasefire. The effect of Palestinians witnessing what they never thought they would see, Israelis evicting Israelis, can be a powerful force in moving towards a compromise peace.
Arab media accounts of the disengagement include straight reporting but also cynicism, recognition of Israeli ambivalence and much more. But, for once, inflammatory pictures, which have done so much to exacerbate violence and hatred in the last five years, this time may help forge a peace process based on common human feelings.
Some recent comments by Palestinian leaders have emphasized that the world now must move to push Israel out of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. While forceful diplomacy, especially by the United States, is an indispensable part of the process, what is even more essential is a belief within the two societies that the other side is willing to make recognizable moves towards peace, and feels connected to the process. Ultimately Israelis must make the choice for further withdrawals, and Palestinian leaders must recognize that fact.
This is perhaps the most important function of the Gaza withdrawal. Apart from creating the opportunity for Palestinians to control a contiguous and coherent part of Palestine, it can also serve to break the stereotypes of the past that the other side cannot change. Highly visible withdrawal has helped to crack the mold of ingrained cynicism. If Palestinians, over the next year, succeed in forging a system that can co-exist with Israel, Israelis will have to re-evaluate their own assumptions of eternal Palestinian enmity And that, to the surprise of all, could get to be a habit.
Paul Scham is an adjunct scholar with the Middle East Institute. He is the co-editor of the recently released book, Shared Histories: A Palestinian-Israeli Dialogue, and has worked on joint Israeli-Palestinian projects at the Truman Institute at Hebrew University and served as the Washington representative for Americans for Peace Now.
Disclaimer: Assertions and opinions in this Commentary are solely those of the above-mentioned author(s) and do not reflect necessarily the views of the Middle East Institute, which expressly does not take positions on Middle East policy.
"...to promote knowledge of the Middle East in America and strengthen understanding of the United States by the people and governments of the region."
-- MEI Mission Statement
Related Resources
Countries
Regional Issues
Until fairly recently, few Palestinians believed that Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza would actually take place. It was assumed to be a trick. Israel expands; it does not contract. Arabs see Zionism as an ideology that exists solely to expropriate Arab land. For most Palestinians, a leopard would change its spots more quickly than Israel would evacuate its settlements without being forced by outside pressure to do so.
Thanks to the ubiquitous media, it is now apparent to the whole Arab world, and especially to Palestinians, that this view no longer describes today’s reality. Certainly, many Arab pundits describe Gaza as a media show, and are vituperatively skeptical about what it will lead to. But the real and visible anguish of thousands of people, and the split in Israeli society, is something that can help to humanize the enemy. Palestinians may still see Israel as the enemy, but to see Israelis as human is a very important step. Viewing the trauma of withdrawal on the screen has an effect that is unmatchable. As cynical as Palestinians are with regard to Prime Minister Sharon, his willingness to act against the expressed rage of a substantial, if minority, segment of his population, as well as his own lifelong convictions, has a significant effect. The fact that an Israeli government is evicting Israelis despite resistance gives hope for the future.
As someone who has traced the impact of historical narratives on both sides, I wonder whether the emotional aspect of the withdrawal could have a significant and positive effect on long-term political arrangements. Israelis and Palestinians, and their respective supporters around the world, understand their history in completely different terms.
Just a few examples make the point clear. Israelis celebrate the War of Independence of 1948, which they regard as wholly defensive, while Palestinians mourn the identical event as the Naqba (catastrophe), brought about solely by Israeli aggression. Both sides have wildly varying narratives of the history of the city each regards as its capital, Jerusalem. Camp David is seen as either a “generous” offer or as a cynical ploy. The varying versions go on and on, but the huge gulf in perceptions helps solidify a common belief that the other side consists of murderers and liars.
I suspect that this withdrawal can help those forces in Palestinian society and the Arab world as a whole, which argue it is necessary to recognize real Israeli fears.
Polls have consistently shown that a majority of Israelis say they are ready to give back most of the West Bank if they think their security will be protected. Strong Palestinian public reaction has had significant dampening effects on violent groups in the past, most notably in 1996 and in the current real, if shaky, ceasefire. The effect of Palestinians witnessing what they never thought they would see, Israelis evicting Israelis, can be a powerful force in moving towards a compromise peace.
Arab media accounts of the disengagement include straight reporting but also cynicism, recognition of Israeli ambivalence and much more. But, for once, inflammatory pictures, which have done so much to exacerbate violence and hatred in the last five years, this time may help forge a peace process based on common human feelings.
Some recent comments by Palestinian leaders have emphasized that the world now must move to push Israel out of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. While forceful diplomacy, especially by the United States, is an indispensable part of the process, what is even more essential is a belief within the two societies that the other side is willing to make recognizable moves towards peace, and feels connected to the process. Ultimately Israelis must make the choice for further withdrawals, and Palestinian leaders must recognize that fact.
This is perhaps the most important function of the Gaza withdrawal. Apart from creating the opportunity for Palestinians to control a contiguous and coherent part of Palestine, it can also serve to break the stereotypes of the past that the other side cannot change. Highly visible withdrawal has helped to crack the mold of ingrained cynicism. If Palestinians, over the next year, succeed in forging a system that can co-exist with Israel, Israelis will have to re-evaluate their own assumptions of eternal Palestinian enmity And that, to the surprise of all, could get to be a habit.
Paul Scham is an adjunct scholar with the Middle East Institute. He is the co-editor of the recently released book, Shared Histories: A Palestinian-Israeli Dialogue, and has worked on joint Israeli-Palestinian projects at the Truman Institute at Hebrew University and served as the Washington representative for Americans for Peace Now.