Well.

This blog went entirely defunct over a year ago, and reading some of my old posts embarrasses me to the core, but now everyone is talking about the one thing I've devoted the past two years of my life to, and I can keep silent no more.

Before I begin, here are my stats, possibly my biases, laid bare in a portrait of myself: I am an American-Israeli agnostic Jew raised in New York City.  I have always considered myself a liberal-leaning moderate with an overall desire for peace.  I believe, firmly, that the resolution to the conflict lies in the education of the youth to want peace as opposed to the education of the youth to want victory.  Of course this education is similar to the propaganda I seemingly denounce below, but all education is propaganda anyway.  I will admit to civilly sympathizing more with the plight of the Palestinian population, because the humanist in me feels the conditions in which they live are utterly deplorable and entirely solvable.  I love the country of Israel (not necessarily its government) and want to live there one day, but I do not consider myself to be a Zionist in conventional definitions of what Zionism is.  I tend to find modern Zionism, its functions, and its endeavors to be mostly misplaced and misdirected and believe that there is greater good to be found and used in the power harnessed by the Zionist movement.  I do not support violent acts of any kind against civilians of any nationality.  In this conflict, I do not believe either side is more right or more wrong than the other, instead, I believe that both sides have transgressed equally but any system that would enable the general population to accept their own countries transgressions is inherently dangerous to present governments.

Israel may try to "crush" Hamas in a ground operation but the destruction is only temporary.  You cannot Israel may try to "crush" Hamas in a ground operation but the destruction is only temporary. You cannot crush an ideology that is furthered by your attempts to destroy that ideology.

Both sides are equally responsible for civilian deaths, for the civilian deaths on both sides. One cannot ignore the fact that Israeli settlers do deliberately place themselves in dangerous situations, make themselves essentially walking targets, because they are generally coerced by government incentives (usually financial) and religious conviction. Simultaneously Palestinians are coerced by a pervasive rhetoric that Israel is solely responsible for their suffering, when there is an incompetent and corrupt system of leadership in Palestine equally liable for the suffering of these people - the corruption present basically leaves the Palestinian population as a community without government, without protectorate representation, which in practical terms means they have no rights. Civilians are pawns which governments use to further capital gains. It's not so much that Palestinian blood means less to Israel (although you will hear many Israelis on the street refer to Arabs as "animals" - symptomatic of the propogandist education Israelis are privy to re: their Arab neighbors, purposeful only for the continuance of the perpetual war between the cultures) as that it's generally just a non-issue: A state in which all citizens re compulsorily required to serve militarily as they reach precisely the age of intellectual maturity creates a nation desensitized to the casualties of war who are not their own comrades. And the Palestinian militants have found a useful tool to invoke the world's outrage in the death of their own people - please, call me harsh, but if Palestinian civilians weren't killed in this conflict in such disparate numbers compared to Israelis, would international opinion really be so outraged? It is to the benefit, therefore of the Palestinian leadership to continue to allow for these deaths, and therefore continued incentive to use civilian homes and civilian bodies as bases and shields for their acts of violence and fear-mongering against Israel. So on both sides, you have a civilian population controlled by rhetorical propaganda education, propaganda the most effective tool in swaying the masses and education the mechanism most capable of reaching the masses.

And the same goes for the rest of us. It is not merely enough to read the news and assume we know what is going on, and it is not merely enough for us to dismiss this as a conflict that is centuries old and therefore ingrained in the cultural narrative. The narrative is so powerful because we are all taught to believe that it is still relevant, that the wounds of the past should continue to scar and twinge permanently. So long as we do not wish to move on, admit wrongdoings on both sides, and begin the healing process, we never will be able to despite concentrated political efforts. The belief simply is not there, because the people are not taught to believe. Any political endeavor peace-ward is hindered by massive public opinion, and public opinion is further aggravated by the acts of the opposing side, which feed straight into the rhetoric of each culture. The Palestinian narrative recalls land being snatched away from under their very feet and forced exodus (flight in fear of death and violent attack) from their homes into refugee camps, when in reality most land was bought by Jews from Arab landowners and this "exodus" was generally encouraged by Palestinian leadership with little or no basis, and the persisting impoverished conditions of the population continue to support this narrative -- "Had the Zionists never stolen our land, we would be living and flourishing in our rightful homes, instead we are the victims of the same brutality our ancestors were subject to decades past." This narrative enables radical splinter groups to continue their violent acts without major dissent from the population, and any Israeli action only serves to intensify negative feelings in the population, causing them only to support the radicals who are in part responsible for their pain.

Simultaneously, the Israeli/Zionist narrative is that Israel, the Biblical homeland, is an existential necessity for the survival of the Jewish people, that Jews cannot live as outsiders in another country for other countries will not and do not protect Jews, long considered in Western ideologies the outsider/alien. Because of this consistent perceived existential threat, any act of violence against Israel is perceived as an act of violence against the religion, symptomatic of a deeper underlying anti-Semitism that would see to the complete annihilation of the Jewish people when given the chance. Physical protection, then, seems entirely necessary in this light, requiring military presence/training/knowledge/development amongst the Israeli/Jewish population. The narrative is furthered by frequent violence from the neighboring communities who are not Jewish - go straight back to the 1910's and '20's, to the major influxes of Jewish immigrants into Israel, and you'll see violent protests from the local Arab populations, and violent responses from Jewish militias. These outbursts serve only to make the Jewish existence seem even more vulnerable to destruction, a common theme in Jewish history.

These two narratives are ultimately irreconcilable, and if you read even the 1929 British Mandate Commission's report on conditions of Palestine, you will find that although borders have changed locations and population centers and numbers have fluctuated, nothing fundamental in the conflict has changed in over eighty years. That report even states that the narratives are irreconcilable, and that the only possible solution is "surgical removal." But, so long as Palestinians feel oppressed and Israelis feel existentially threatened, militant cells will continue violent acts against Israel and the Israeli army will continue its campaign to destroy elements opposed to the state of Israel, and neither nation's leadership will find any true incentive to pursue viable peace because peace is not a prosperous condition.