Related Resources

Major General (res.) Shlomo Gazit, former head of Israeli military intelligence, began with this piece of advice:“Stop reading the papers. Don’t listen to the radio. Stop watching television.” With the shock that ensued from the recent victory of Hamas in Palestinian elections, the headlines have been no less than “frightening,” and Gazit dismissed the media as “believing it knows what the public wants to hear,” and as only adding to the hype before the Israeli elections. Gazit offered an alternative:“Read history instead.”

Gazit emphasized that a genuine peace between Arabs and Israelis is “no longer a question of if, but rather, a question of how and when.” As a young child growing up in Tel Aviv, Gazit never imagined there would be an official state of Israel, but it happened. In the aftermath of the Six Day War in 1967, Gazit never believed there would be any peace agreements between Israel and its Arab neighbors, but those materialized as well. It is therefore because of this course of history that Gazit is hopeful for an eventual peace with the Palestinians. Taking into account the scope of the Arab-Israeli conflict, it is important to recognize, he stressed, that the conflict is indeed in its final stages, therefore, the issues will be scrutinized in newspaper headlines.

General Gazit posited that, between 1967 and the present day, the biggest change in the conflict has come from the Israelis, not the Arabs. The Six Day War, he said, was wrongly translated by the Israelis as a “messianic act from God,” or further justification for their presence in the Middle East. This launched the settlement movement, which Gazit noted, started out modestly, but has drastically changed since, as approximately 250,000 settlers currently inhabit the West Bank territories.

Today, Gazit said, Israel recognizes that it does not face an external, existential threat. Gazit noted that few countries exist in a state of genuine peace with their neighbors, so it is a futile hope for Israel. He equated the terrorist violence Israel faces on a day-to-day basis with that of the common cold. While there is no cure for it, the common cold will not cause death. In the same manner, Israel’s existence is not threatened by the bus bombings or other violent uprisings that frequently occur.

Rather, the existential threat Israel faces today is an internal one. If separation is not put into action soon, Israelis realize and fear that Israel will lose its Jewish character, and quite literally, its Jewish majority. Simply put, in the near future there will be no room for democracy and a Jewish majority to coexist. Because of this, Gazit said, the buzz- word for Israeli politicians today is “separation.” Gazit asserted that separation is what Israel needs to pursue in order to remain a Jewish state.

In light of the Hamas victory in the Palestinian Authority, Gazit stressed that it is now imperative for both sides to ignore declarations and ultimatums and instead pursue solutions to the practical problems common to both sides. Hamas’ victory in the Palestinian elections should not hamper the peace process, and Gazit believed that Hamas might be the leadership needed for a resolution because it lacks a strong right-wing opposition, much like the Likud Party in Israel. When the conservative parties lead the negotiating process, there is little opposition from the left-leaning parties that have traditionally supported peace negotiations. Gazit considered the “Roadmap,” which was presented in 2003, no longer a relevant guide for peace. If the practical problems are at least resolved, however, a real and genuine peace can transpire with time.

In regards to the Israeli government’s decision to freeze the monthly tax it collects on the Palestinian Authority’s behalf, Gazit felt that it could only lead to adverse outcomes for Israel. First and foremost, he said, the Palestinian Authority will get money one way or another, and it will most likely come from adversarial sources, such as Iran. Gazit further cautioned that financially squeezing Hamas is nothing more than a recipe for swift mobilization of Palestinian public opinion around Hamas and its extreme positions. What is needed now, he said, is an open dialogue with Hamas, one that will be focused on concrete issues, rather than a mere attempt to make Hamas change its platform.