In the last edition of the Common Ground News Service newsletter, Marzuq Halabi proposes a language of “reconciliation” as opposed to a language of “solutions” to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Halabi describes how the language of “solutions” in past attempts to resolve the conflict failed to recognize the “history, ideology, morality and self-preservation” of both Jews and Palestinians and therefore could not speak to the heart of the conflict.
Halabi cites the Oslo Accords as a failure because the agreements did nothing to articulate the real and implicit values of the conflict. By favoring considerations for Israeli security, the Accords continued to uphold the structures of oppression.
I agree with Halabi that the Oslo Accords and the current language of a “two-state solution” fails miserably on the ground when it comes up against such intractable realities as the Second Intifada and the latest war in Gaza. Both sides of the conflict scream for recognition of their legitimate concerns, but how can they hear one another when the language of dialogue fails to speak a language both can understand and agree upon? Halabi states that the only language that can be recognized across the borders is one that addresses both Palestinian and Jewish values, beginning with writing the history of the land “from a common script.”
My question concerns how this kind of dialogue can tangibly begin and work its way up to the state level?
You can read Marzuq Halabi’s full article here.
The picture below was taken in the Old City, Jerusalem, with the Dome of the Rock in the background.
