Imagine a world where freedom of religion is nonexistent. Imagine a world where loved ones are dying to obtain freedom of religion. Imagine the birthplace of one’s savior was located within an area where one was not welcome. There are people in the world right now living this struggle; not imagining. The conflict between Palestinians and Israelis has been unremitting. In this problem proposal paper, I will be addressing the issue between Palestine and Israel by including information about their history, path to peace, modes of communication, and their use of interfaith leadership.
When visiting a doctor’s office for illness or injury, it is common for him or her to ask questions about the patient’s medical history. By giving one’s medical history, this could aid the doctor in diagnosing the problem at hand. In comparison, when evaluating the current state of the conflict between Israel and Palestine, one would need to review how they arrived at their current position.
In the early 1900’s, the Jewish people were guaranteed land within Palestine due to the religious significance of Jerusalem (AFP, 2017). However, Palestinians were not fond of the idea of Jewish people being on Palestinian soil. The United Nations divided up Palestine within two categories: Jewish or Arab states. Jerusalem falls into international territory(AFP, 2017). The Israelis and Palestinians did not see eye to eye on religion, land, or practices. Over time, wars occured and lives were lost (AFP, 2017). The conflict of Israel and Palestine still continue after 100 years.
A group of people is only as strong as their leader. If the Israelis and Palestinians had a strong leader, they would have someone to follow and look to for guidance. According to Jay Michaels (2017), the author of Social Forces Sustaining the Israeli-Palestinian Tensions: A Dynamical Psychology Perspective, he states “One likely reason for the failure of previous initiatives is that they largely relied upon political or third-party mediation.” If leaders within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict rose to the occasion, it is possible that their own leaders could guide the process to peace. Specifically, interfaith leaders within their communities could be the guiding lights in the unpleasant darkness their nation is experiencing.
There is a constant question of communication within the duo: the Israelis and the Palestinians. Based off of article The Israel-Palestine conflict — 100 years of history, history seems to repeat a common theme: reaction. The conflict between Israel and Palestine is largely due to the lack of communication. According to Vox and their video (2016), The Israel-Palestine conflict: a brief, simple history, they state, “They’re not really trying to solve the conflict anymore, just manage it.” Communication to the world consists of media, articles, and a TV show called Fauda. According to Sayed Kashua (2018), in regards to Fauda, he states “Fauda is about an Israeli undercover unit, whose members pose as Arabs as they charge through the West Bank breaking up cells of Palestinian militants and thwarting suicide bombings.” However, Sayed Kashua finds this widespread TV show one-sided and misleading. Additionally, Sayed Kashua (2018) states, “The most galling thing about Fauda is what the series chooses to hide. It shows no settlements, no Jewish extremists who abuse Palestinians and seize their land with either passive or active help from the government.” The problem presented is that communication around the issue could be one sided. Communication is lacking in the conflict of Israel and Palestine.
Interfaith leadership is becoming a frequent term in daily vocabulary in regards to politics, religion, and much more. Interfaith leadership has started to weave it’s way into the conflict of Israel and Palestine. Anastasia White traveled with a group of six individuals to further understand the conflict of Israel and Palestine by listening to stories. According to Anastasia White (2001), she states, “Over ten days, this interfaith team met in swift succession with a wide variety of ordinary people and Israeli and Palestinian activists in the Gaza strip, Jerusalem, Galilee, Nazareth, Tel Aviv, Hebron, Beit Sahour, and Bethlehem.” Interfaith leadership is not a quick process. Understanding one another is one of the first steps in finding common ground. Though her article did not end with a major triumph or ending the unceasing conflict, she showed empathy for the individuals of this circumstance. Understanding is a major step in resolving conflict with interfaith leadership.
When two people are not getting along, one’s ideal solution would be talking and being on good terms. However, sometimes, people can talk and decide it is best to keep their distance while still achieving acceptance for one another. I propose that there be two states: the Israeli state and Palestinian state. David Unger (2002), author of Maps of War, Maps of Peace: Finding a Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Question, stated, “the only realistic basis for a stable peace is the eventual creation of a Palestinian state, under a leadership of the Palestinians’ own choosing.” However, a proposition of this sort has been implemented in the past, but with interfaith leadership and effective communication, acceptance and peace can be achieved. Israel and Palestine have a long path to peace ahead. More importantly, they have to want peace.