Steps in the Right Direction:
A Three-Pillared Approach to Peace
between Israel and Palestine
George Mason University
School of Conflict Analysis & Resolution
CONF 642: Integration of Theory & Practice
Professor Rob J. Ericson
Megan L. Strum
December 7, 2014
1
I.
About the Author
Megan Lowery Strum was raised in Chicago, IL and attended Brandeis University, where
she studied Islamic & Middle Eastern Studies, with focuses on Religious Studies and Peace,
Conflict & Coexistence Studies. She has spent significant time living and learning in Israel and
received her Masters of Science in Conflict Analysis and Resolution from George Mason
University in 2014. With her work at the Harvard Global Negotiation Initiative in Boston, as
well as her time on Capitol Hill working with Rep. Jan D Schakowsky's Foreign Affairs
Legislative Aide, Megan's interest in Track-2 Diplomacy and International Aid on all levels
began to show through. She hopes to practice conflict resolution in the field, and plans to gain
experience in human rights protection, sustainable development, and democracy promotion.
II.
Publication Information & Brief Abstract
American University’s Journal of Peacebuilding & Development integrates a balance of
theory and practice in an attempt to link sustainable development best practices to the field of
peacebuilding and disseminate theory to practice conversion ideas and strategies to the conflict
resolution profession as a whole. Their publishing requirements and instructions can be found
here: http://www1.american.edu/cgp/jpd/submission.htm.
This paper will analyze the current relationship and conflict between the Israeli and
Palestinian nations through the lens of Dennis J.D. Sandole’s Three-Pillar Framework (3PF) for
Mapping Conflict1 in an attempt to develop a peacebuilding plan for the two groups and their
1
http://www.gmu.edu/programs/icar/pcs/sandole.htm
2
shared future. This research focuses mainly on the third pillar of Sandole’s framework, which is
the break-down of a sustainable peacebuilding plan, based on the author’s identification and
analysis of a number of contributing factors to the conflict, found in the first two pillars of the
framework. This process of gleaning a solution to a problem from the aspects of the problem
itself echoes Clifford Geertz’s working theory of developing elicitive, rather that prescriptive,
approaches to conflict and conflict resolution, established in his 1973 article, “Deep Play: Notes
on the Balinese Cockfight.” 2 The connection of these two theories applied to the IsraeliPalestinian example is a step toward action in this seemingly intractable conflict, a step that
needs to be taken if the international community wants to establish a precedent of sustainable
peace in the Middle East.
III.
Introduction
When the world looks back at history and changing trends in conflict resolution as a field
and peacebuilding as a developing process, one conflict in particular will stand out as having
persisted through many stages of growth and change, remaining a seemingly impenetrable gap in
theory and practice. The conflict between the State of Israel and the Palestinian nation remains
an obvious and blaring failure on the part of the international community to set into motion an
effective and lasting plan for peace and, as Dennis J.D. Sandole reminds us in his 2010 book,
Peacebuilding: Preventing Violent Conflict in a Complex World, that, “while the European
Union has been the greatest accomplishment, the dominant exemplar, of peacebuilding in the last
sixty years, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been the greatest failure, driving terrorism locally,
2
http://itu.dk/~miguel/ddp/Deep%20play%20Notes%20on%20the%20Balinese%20cockfight.pdf
3
regionally, and worldwide.”3 What are the root causes of this conflict and why does it continue
to plague the Middle East and the Israeli and Palestinian people? How do we build real, positive,
and sustainable peace between these two peoples?
These questions are connected in an important way. Not only does the history of the
conflict and the two parties involved in it inform the process of coming up with a peacebuilding
plan for the region, these factors are fundamental building blocks in that process. A neverending cycle of analysis and action, Sandole’s three-pillar framework (3PF) for analyzing
conflict and conflict resolution explains that, “the 3PF rests on the fundamental premise that, in
order to do something (pillar 3) about any conflict (pillar 1), we have to know what makes the
conflict ‘tick’ (pillar 2)…the point is to have a Pillar 3 design that captures the complexity of
Pillars 1 and 2: ‘given the complexity of much contemporary conflict, attempts at conflict
resolution have to be equally comprehensive’.”4
In an attempt to delve into the first and second pillars of Dennis J.D. Sandole’s threepillar framework for analyzing conflict and conflict resolution5, which identify both the conflict
elements (parties, issues, objectives, means, orientations and environments), and the conflict
causes and conditions (individual, social, international, and global/ecological)6 of any given
conflict, this research will use the Palestinian-Israeli conflict as a case study and source of
analysis.
The first pillar begins to dissect the conflict by identifying the parties involved, the issues
points of contention surround, the objectives of each party, their means of obtaining these
3
Sandole, Dennis J.D. Peacebuilding: Preventing Violent Conflict in a Complex World. Cambridge, UK:
Polity Press, 2010. Print. Pg. 139
4
Sandole, Dennis J.D. Peacebuilding: Preventing Violent Conflict in a Complex World. Pg. 56-72
5
Sandole, Dennis. “A Comprehensive Mapping of Conflict and Conflict Resolution: A Three Pillar
Approach.” Peace and Conflict Studies, December 1998, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1-30
6
Sandole, Dennis. Peacebuilding: War and Conflict in the Modern World. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press,
2010. Print.
4
objectives, the conflict-handling orientations of the parties, and the environment in which the
conflict takes place. The second pillar consists of the individual, societal, international, and
global implications of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Now that the background has been established, an identification of the causes of the
conflict itself, along with an analysis of the highly complicated and protracted nature of the
conflict becomes necessary if any positive progress is to be made by third-party interveners in
the future. Dennis Sandole asserts that, “complex conflicts, even at the interpersonal level, can
be impacted by factors from all four levels [individual, societal, international, and/or
global/ecological] of explanation…”7 Each of these levels has a number of sub-sections which
this research will now address as applicable to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict specifically.
Through a step-by-step analysis of the Pillar 1 conditions and Pillar 2 drivers of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and through reference to a number of solutions provided by
peacebuilding theorists and practitioners, this research will set forth proposals for addressing the
steps toward peacebuilding between Israel and Palestine (Pillar 3). The following suggestions
are not the ultimate and infallible ‘solution’ to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, they are not
necessarily answers to all of the problems that plague both sides of this conflict. They are
merely driver-based ideas for improving the life of everyday Israelis and Palestinians and
thoughts on how best to mend their tenuous relationship and build a sustainably positive,
peaceful future together.
7
Sandole, Dennis. Peacebuilding: War and Conflict in the Modern World. Pg. 68
5
IV.
Pillar Three
In dealing with any conflict, one has to first identify the kind of conflict in question, and
what implications that specific type of conflict has on changing its future. In Oliver
Ramsbotham, Tom Woodhouse, and Hugh Miall’s 2011 work, Contemporary Conflict
Resolution, Edward Azar’s theory of Protracted Social Conflict (PSC) is explained as,
“characterized by a blurred demarcation between internal and external sources and actors…there
are multiple causal factors and dynamics, reflected in changing goals, actors and targets…the
sources of such conflicts lay predominantly within rather than between states…”8 These are
conflicts between narratives and identities, deeply tied up with the psyche, emotions, and
fundamental mentalities of two groups living in the same land, grasping to ownership of it and
associating their survival as nations to maintaining that claim of ownership.
There are a number of approaches to conflict intervention available to practitioners, but
only a few apply to the Israeli-Palestinian case in its present form. The third pillar consists of
conflict prevention (stopping violence before it starts), conflict management (preventing the
conflict from proliferating), conflict settlement (stopping the violent confrontation of a conflict),
conflict resolution (confronting and dealing with the underlying drivers of said conflict), and
conflict transformation (changing the future of the conflict in a sustainable way, changing actors
opinions and habits in regards to one another).9 Since conflict between Israelis and Palestinians
has already resorted to violence multiple times, conflict prevention is, unfortunately, no longer
an option. Conflict management and conflict settlement are also not as useful in this particular
8
Ramsbotham, Oliver, Tom Woodhouse, and Hugh Miall. Contemporary Conflict Resolution. Cambridge,
UK: Polity Press, 2011. Print. Pg. 100
9
Sandole, Dennis. “A Comprehensive Mapping of Conflict and Conflict Resolution: A Three Pillar
Approach.” Peace and Conflict Studies, December 1998, vol. 5, no. 2, pg. 1-30
6
analysis, due to the fact that the conflict is not currently active in a violent way, nor is it currently
spreading. What we are concerned with here is conflict resolution and conflict transformation.
We cannot make Israelis and Palestinians agree on the barriers that have prevented peace
in the past, the wrongs committed by both sides, or even the accurate history of the conflict, but
we can get them to agree that the conflict needs to be acknowledged as having done wrong to
millions of people, that it needs to end forever, and that a plan has to be implemented that honors
both groups and builds a solution together, with major stakeholders on both sides and a
sustainably positive peace plan for future generations to benefit from. This is conflict resolution
and transformation.
John Paul Lederach identifies the contributing factors and possible solutions to this kind
of deeply protracted social conflict. He explains first that, “In the immediacy of such localized
settings…people seek security in increasingly smaller and narrower identity groups. This, it
seems, is why the lines of contemporary armed conflict are increasingly drawn along ethnic,
religious, or regional affiliations rather than along ideological or class lines.”10 He goes on to
paint images of the ‘big brother’ that is the international relations approach, with realpolitik and
hardline realism, and terrorist deterrents only being satisfied with more violence, and the ‘little
sister’ that is conflict resolution, which employs social psychology to try and tap into the psyche
and underlying causes of said violence in order to cut it off at the root.11 He explains that
synthesis of these two fields is the key to sustained change in PSC’s, “In dealing with the
challenge posed by contemporary conflict, an important meeting point between realism and
10
Lederach, John Paul. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington,
D.C.: United States Institute for Peace, 1997. Print. Pg. 13
11
Lederach, John Paul. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Pg. 24-25
7
innovation is the idea of reconciliation.”12 His three main working assumptions for this
reconciliation are the basis of the plan this research will present.
First, a third-party actor must look at the relationship as a whole comprised of working
parts and explore how those parts fit together. Second, the third party must assist the parties in
acknowledging the past without letting it take hold of any future defining characteristics of the
relationship. People need to feel fully acknowledged and respected and only then can they move
on under a changed perspective. Third, the third party actor has to create a space for creation, for
togetherness. Building a peace plan together is a way to ensure its sustained effectiveness. If
everyone can create new paths toward peace, everyone become a stakeholder in both the process
itself, and the future of their plan.13
V.
The Sovereignty Gap
Another work by Lederach, The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace,
explains that in analyzing conflict and how to best address the contributing factors to both the
past and future, complexity and simplicity in regards to forming a peacebuilding plan have to be
in a reciprocal relationship. In order to come up with a simple choice, a solution or the problem,
one has to fully understand the vast complexity of the situation, “complexity emerges from
multiplicity, interdependency, and simultaneity. In many regards this is the greatest challenge of
peacebuilding: how to build creative responses to patterns of self-perpetuating violence in a
complex system made up of multiple actors, with activities that are happening at the same
12
13
Ibid, pg. 25
Ibid. Pgs. 25-30
8
time.”14 The relationship between complexity and simplicity does not end there, in fact, “rather
than focus directly on the complexity, it would be useful to locate a core set of patterns and
dynamics that generate the complexity. In other words, simplicity precedes complexity…think
about simplicity as a source of energy rather than as the choice of reductionism.”15 A major
source of the complexity in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the sovereignty gap effecting the
Palestinian people, which requires a look at rebuilding civil society in an inclusive, sustainable
positive way.
Ashraf Ghani and Clare Lockhart identify a major road block facing the Palestinian
people in their book, Fixing Failed States: A Framework for Rebuilding a Fractured World.
When Israel established its state after the British Mandate, they entered with a well-formed plan
for governing and developing the land.16 They quickly and successfully became a sovereign
state, convincing the British that they were the rightful heirs to the land and the Palestinians were
left without organization, representation, or a legitimate claim to the land their families had been
living on for generations.17 This is Ghani and Lockhart’s sovereignty gap, “The people then
rendered powerless are victims of what we call the sovereignty gap—the disjunction between the
de jure assumption that all states are ‘sovereign’ regardless of their performance in practice—and
the de facto reality that many are malfunctioning or collapsed states, incapable of providing their
citizens with even the most basic services…”18
14
Lederach, John Paul. The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace. New York, New
York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print. Pg. 33
15
Lederach, John Paul. The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace. Pg. 33
16
Massad, Joseph. "Palestinians and Jewish History: Recognition or Submission?" Journal of Palestine
Studies 30, no. 1 (2000): 52-67. Page 55
17
Massad, Joseph. "Palestinians and Jewish History: Recognition or Submission?" Page 60
18
Ghani, Ashraf, and Clare Lockhart. Fixing Failed States: A Framework for Rebuilding a Fractured
World. New York, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print. Pg. 21
9
The Israeli government effectively removed themselves from the responsibility of
governing or serving the Palestinian nation by allowing the Palestinian Authority (PA) to take
control of the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs), but they did not provide any support or
accessible resources to the PA to effectively serve their population. There is no accountability,
no organization. Governments are seen as representing their people but PA does quite the
opposite19, if the sovereignty gap was closed in the OPTs, we might see efforts toward
peacebuilding, because the majority of Palestinians would prefer any other situation than the one
they live in every day. If Hamas and Fatah represented the true will of their people and were
made to be solely accountable to them, funds might not be diverted to stockpiling rockets,
smuggling in small arms and light weapons (SALWs), and provoking the IDF into cat and mouse
games in Gaza.20 It might be diverted instead to hospitals, food banks, schools, and mosques,
only strengthening the community and allowing those ever-important institutions to thrive and
provide a basis for a sustainable peaceful and functional state for the Palestinian people to call
their own. Simple, yet complicated.
VI.
Rebuilding Civil Society
Thania Paffenholz and Cristoph Spurk explain how best to analyze the context of a
failing civil society (CS) through seven factors that build a new framework for re-constructing a
functioning civil society that serves its entire population in their chapter, “A Comprehensive
Analytical Framework” from Paffenholz’s 2010 work, Civil Society & Peacebuilding: A Critical
Schulz, Michael. “Palestinian Civil Society.” Trans. Array. The Routledge Handbook on the IsraeliPalestinian Conflict. New York, New York: Routledge, 2013. Print. Pg. 244
20
Schulz, Michael. “Palestinian Civil Society.” Pg. 250-251
19
10
Assessment. Paffenholz and Spurk point out that, “a functional approach does not sufficiently
explain why certain functions are performed or not. It is crucial to also analyze the context, as it
is the enabling and disabling environment for civil society peacebuilding.”21 The context
includes analyzing seven separate civil society factors: protection, monitoring, advocacy and
public communication, in-group socialization, social cohesion, intermediation and facilitation,
and service delivery.
Protection, or security, is a major concern for both the Israelis and the Palestinians,
“…states, once weakened by armed conflict, cannot properly fulfill even a self-protection
function. As a result…the provision of security and the reduction of violence are necessary for
effective peace work.”22 Israel puts the need to protect itself first on its list of concerns. A long
history of persecution has led the Jewish people to the conclusion that the only way they will
survive as a nation is to maintain a Jewish majority state, with a Jewish government, Jewish
laws, and a Jewish military. This can exist for them alongside a similar structure for the
Palestinian people if two separate states develop in the land that is currently occupied by Israel
and the Palestinian people. In the transition period between the current state of affairs and this
proposed ideal dual state system, protection and security for both people would have to be
temporarily “ascribed to external NGOs that support national or local civil actors either
indirectly (e.g., as a watchdog through a presence on the ground, facilitating humanitarian or
development service delivery) or directly (e.g. through international accompaniment).”23 This
third, external actor would remove fear of retaliation and mistrust from the equation, and would
21
Paffenholz, Thania, and Cristoph Spurk. "A Comprehensive Analytical Framework." Trans. Array. Civil
Society & Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment. London, UK: Lynne Rienner Pubishers, Inc., 2010. Print. Pg. 65
22
Paffenholz, Thania, and Cristoph Spurk. "A Comprehensive Analytical Framework." Pg. 67
23
Ibid. Pg. 67
11
allow a safe space for the two groups to work together in creating a sustainable plan for their
futures.
Deborah Avant expounds on the importance of security in her chapter in Ramsbotham,
Woodhouse, and Miall’s book, entitled “Making Peacemakers out of Spoilers: International
Organizations, Private Military Training, and Statebuilding after War." She points out the
intricate risks involved in picking the right external security actor because, as she explains,
“incapable security institutions undermine immediate prospects for order. Capable security
institutions without political control risk coups. Capable security institutions that operate outside
international norms can breed resentment and the resumption of conflict.”24 The ideal balance
would be struck only if the theoretical external security actor in the Israeli-Palestinian case
would “depend, though, not only military capacity but capacity that operates through political
processes and values seen as legitimate…forces (would) need to have…moderate capacities,
under coordinated political control with some modicum of respect for the population they
serve.”25
Monitoring is the next function essential to re-building these two new civil societies,
“within the context of peacebuilding, monitoring remains closely related to protection, advocacy,
and early warning as a means for action. International and local groups monitor conflict
situations and give recommendations to decision makers, and they provide information to human
rights and other advocacy groups.”26 This aspect resembles Sandole’s conflict prevention and
conflict management functions, but does so in a way that serves conflict resolution by
24
Avant , Deborah. "Making Peacemakers out of Spoilers: International Organizations, Private Military
Training, and Statebuilding After War." Trans. Array. The Dilemmas of Statebuilding. Oxon, Canada: Routledge,
2009. 104-127. Print. Pg. 104
25
Avant , Deborah. "Making Peacemakers out of Spoilers: International Organizations, Private Military
Training, and Statebuilding After War." Pg. 105
26
Paffenholz, Thania, and Cristoph Spurk. "A Comprehensive Analytical Framework." . Pg. 68
12
acknowledging that a lack of monitoring in the past has contributed to the need to rebuild two
functioning and separate civil societies that will employ monitoring in the future to avoid future
re-ignition of hostilities and violence.
Advocacy and public communication are also fundamental aspects of rebuilding civil
society in a sustainably peaceful way. This function consists of two routes, public or private, to
spreading awareness of, and advocacy for, pressing issues that threaten civil society (awareness
workshops, public campaigns, mass mobilization for peace negotiations, inter-group violence
protests, etc.).27 Continuing on, “(In-group) socialization is a key civil society function that
supports democratic behavior and upholds democratic attitudes and values within society.
Democratic behavior is realized through citizens’ active participation in associations, networks,
and movements.”28 This in-group socialization can be increased through two means, either by
disseminating a culture of peace throughout a given identity group or population with conflict
resolution training and pro-peace activities, or through cultural appreciation activities that
solidify in-group identity. It is important to note here that careful attention has to be paid to the
in-group in question, so that they may not perceived as being aggressively nationalistic or antiany other group’s identity. The goal here is to establish two sovereign neighbors who respect
and value one another, rather than fearing or hating one another.
Social cohesion is a fifth aspect to the reconstruction of civil society within a sustainable
network, “this is an essential civil society function within the context of peacebuilding, as ‘good’
social capital is often destroyed during war and thus needs to be rebuilt, mainly in order to
reconstruct trust and to prevent ‘uncivil virtues’.”29 This social cohesion can be achieved
27
Ibid. Pg. 69
Ibid. Pg. 70
29
Ibid. Pg. 71
28
13
through a combination of three methods of cohesion. Relationship-oriented, peace-centered
cohesion contributes to a different understanding of the ‘other’ through workshops, dialogue
sessions, and similar community-building activities. Outcome-oriented, peace-centered cohesion
takes relationship-oriented cohesion to the next level, ensuring future and continued group
efforts to build peace in their communities. And lastly, outcome-oriented business and
development cohesion gives a future to those previously ensnared in conflict. This cohesion
brings groups in conflict to a shared platform where they are incentivized to build a future
together, rather than tearing one another’s futures down.
Facilitation, “the (sixth) intermediation function of civil society within the democracy
discourse…highlights the role of civil society as an intermediator/facilitator between citizens and
the state. In the peacebuilding context, facilitation can also be an important function that takes
place between or among groups and at different levels of society.”30 By allowing civil society to
function in this way, trust in the rebuilding process can prosper and it can be a source of pride
and hope for both parties. The last function, service delivery, can be tied back to closing the
sovereignty gap, “during armed conflicts, the provision of aid and services by civil society actors
increases as state structures are destroyed or weakened.”31 Enabling both Israeli and Palestinian
civil societies to provide basic needs for their respective populations would serve the
communities by both meeting their needs, and showing that both groups can be served equally
and according to their specific requirements without getting in the way of one another.
However, Paffenholz and Spurk are reluctant to link service delivery to civil society action
necessarily, because different theorists see it as a humanitarian function, or as a function of the
economy, rather than the responsibility to civil society peacebuilders.
30
31
Ibid. Pg. 73
Ibid. Pg. 74
14
Esra Cuhadar and Sari Hanafi describe the specific functions Israelis and Palestinians rely
on most from their civil societies in their chapter, “Israel and Palestine: Civil Societies in
Despair.” First, they explain that, “the Oslo peace process, which allowed for the creation of the
PA and the commencement of statebuilding with the assistance of donor countries, carved a
space for the growth of NGOs and civic institutions in the Occupied Territories and in Israel.
However, the creation of this space was also accompanied by a detachment of local
organizations from society and their grassroots base.”32 The problem is that currently, “In the
Israeli-Palestinian context, advocacy, in-group socialization, and the inter-group social cohesion
have been the most frequently performed functions by CS. However, these functions are not by
definition more relevant or urgent…protection, monitoring, facilitation, and service delivery are
at least as relevant, if not more necessary”33
Because Palestinians lack a cohesive, functional state system, the protection, monitoring,
service delivery, and advocacy functions are more important and would better serve the
community. Additionally, “contrary to the rights-based peacebuilding approach of Palestinians,
Israeli CS has often adopted a more pragmatic approach to peacebuilding that emphasizes
dialogue and negotiation. This has made social cohesion and facilitation the preferred functions
within Israeli CS.”34 These two distinct CS’s can function simultaneously with each of their
specific needs being met if they can separate and tailor their approaches to their individual
populations.
32
Cuhadar, Esra and Sari Hanafi. "Israel and Palestine: Civil Societies in Disrepair." Trans. Array. Civil
Society & Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment. London, UK: Lynne Rienner Pubishers, Inc., 2010. Print. Pg. 213
33
Cuhadar, Esra and Sari Hanafi. "Israel and Palestine: Civil Societies in Disrepair." Pg. 230
34
Ibid. Pg. 231
15
VII.
Development, the Business Sector, and the Media
As Andreas Wenger and Daniel Mockli explain in their book, Conflict Prevention: The
Untapped Potential of the Business Sector, “The absence of prosperity and employment often
brings about much discontent and extremism, which diminishes the chances of preventing the
outbreak or recurrence of violence. Economic peacebuilding, in the sense of developing local
private sectors in conflict-prone or conflict-ridden countries, thus represents an important
component of any conflict prevention.”35 Basically, in order to ensure a lasting, positive peace
between Israelis and Palestinians, both groups must invest in and build functioning economies
that provide financial security and safety to their beneficiaries. This prosperity creates stakes for
both sides in maintaining the peace that stabilizes those economies in the first place.
In order to begin the process of developing a strong economy for the Palestinians and to
maintain the Israeli economy, Danielle Beswick and Paul Jackson explain in their book, Conflict,
Security and Development: An Introduction, that, “development strategies, which are
recommended by donors and international financial institutions in return for aid to developing
states, require the construction of particular types of economies…it seems from these strategies
that economic growth requires change in the balance between population and resources.”36
Wenger and Mockli believe that in addition to private donors acting as potential sources for
collaboration and improved relations between two groups in conflict, there is a reciprocally
beneficial aspect to be considered for these institutions and economic power houses themselves,
“there is a strong economic rationale for private actors to join international prevention efforts.
35
Wenger, Andreas, and Daniel Mockli. Conflict Prevention: The Untapped Potential of the Business
Sector. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Reinner Publishers, Inc., 2003. Print. Pg. 6
36
Beswick, Danielle, and Paul Jackson. Conflict, Security and Development: An Introduction. Oxon,
Canada: Routledge, 2011. Print. Pg. 45
16
Over the past decade, the corporate sector has become increasingly vulnerable to political
instability in developing and transition countries and associated asymmetrical threats against
business centers around the world.”37
Furthermore, “Increasing socioeconomic exclusion and economic inequalities, both
within and between states, represent potential new sources of instability. This is why the pressure
on companies is mounting to include wealth creation into the broader context of corporate social
responsibility (CSR).”38 When everybody participates in the peacebuilding process, in whatever
form they can, everyone also benefits from it. From both Wenger and Mockli, and Beswick and
Jackson, it is clear that, “Corporations must become comprehensively involved in economic
peacebuilding…in two ways: they can pursue core business activities, such as trade and foreign
direct investment, with a specific conflict prevention perspective; or they can transfer know-how
with regard to private sector development, especially to local communities.”39 Both approaches
would benefit the Palestinian people immensely, and simultaneously give them something to
cherish and protect, something to work towards peace with their neighbors to maintain.
Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson illustrate the chain of events that are made
possible when pluralism and inclusion are integrated into the development of a state in their
book, Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. They insist that
pluralism allows for not only widespread inclusion and participation in the process (hence John
Paul Lederach’s third working assumption for effective reconciliation), but it also creates what
Acemoglu and Robinson call a “virtuous circle,” or a self-fulfilling, self-policing cycle of rule of
37
Wenger, Andreas, and Daniel Mockli. Conflict Prevention: The Untapped Potential of the Business
Sector. Pg. 7
38
Ibid. Pg. 7
39
Ibid. Pg. 8
17
law, balance of power, and shared responsibility for the betterment of society.40 Then, as a
result, “the virtuous circle arises not only from the inherent logic of pluralism and the rule of
law, but also because inclusive political institutions tend to support inclusive economic
institutions.”41 With a more even distribution of wealth across the strata of society, the political
playing field is also widened and potential political power players become less incentivized to recreate extractive political institutions.
Further down the chain, “pluralism also creates a more open system and allows for
independent media to flourish, making it easier for groups that have an interest in the
continuation of inclusive institutions to become aware and organize against threats to these
institutions.”42 This would affect the global media factor from pillar 2 in the conflict to a
positive; from a tool of destruction and abolition to a tool for protection, security, and
widespread cooperation. In Gerd Junne and Willemijn Verkoren’s Postconflict Development:
Meeting New Challenges, Ross Howard’s chapter “The Media’s Role in War and
Peacebuilding,” expands on the global implications media has on conflict and how to best utilize
the media during a peacebuilding period. Howard discusses the more damaging “hate media” 43
as being fundamentally detrimental to society as a whole and basically becoming a propaganda
machine. On the other hand, though, media has the potential to “become a facilitator of positive
social change rather than a professional disinterested observer. This kind of initiative, called
intended outcome programming…values accuracy, fairness, and responsibility. It is attracting
40
Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and
Poverty. New York, New York: Crown Business, 2012. Print. Pg. 308
41
Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and
Poverty. Pg. 309
42
Ibid. Pg. 309
43
Howard, Ross. "The Media’s Role in War and Peacebuilding." Trans. Array Postconflict Development:
Meeting New Challenges. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Reinner Publishers, Inc., 2005. 117-128. Print. Pg. 119-120
18
audiences and donor support.”44 It does so by disseminating information about nonviolence,
peace talks, efforts to develop the economy, and encouraging civil society and politics to be
more inclusive and collaborative. Spreading messages of hope and shared efforts toward
widespread betterment only helps the community by giving it hope for its future, and serving as a
constant reminder of what can be built in the absence of hate and exclusion.
VIII.
Religion and the Environment
Two constant and undeniable factors currently contributing to the conflict have the
potential to become strong bases of mutual respect and collaboration for both Israelis and
Palestinians; religion and the environment. Craig Zelizer’s book, Integrated Peacebuilding:
Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict, contains chapters that discuss both of these
factors. The pillar 2 societal-level driver, religion, is an important early step in the process of
relating to and being accepted into the community. Both Judaism and Islam are crucially
important building blocks of the identities of both Israel and Palestine, as Qamar ul-Huda and
Katherine Marshall explain in their chapter “Religion and Peacebuilding.” The authors believe
that, “For peacebuilding to be effective, the process needs to be grounded in supporting local
institutions, empowering communities, and meeting people’s needs and aspirations. This often
means working in partnership with faith-based actors who in many regions of the world play a
central role in community life and stability.”45 This would be an effective and foundationally
important aspect of peacebuilding for any third-party actor to remember to utilize.
Howard, Ross. "The Media’s Role in War and Peacebuilding." Pg. 124
Ul-Huda, Qamar, and Katherine Marshall. "Religion and Peacebuilding." Trans. Array. Integrated
Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 2013. 151171. Print. Pg. 153
44
45
19
Fundamentally, both Judaism and Islam seek to help the disenfranchised, downtrodden members
of society, regardless of color, creed, or ethnicity and widely, “religious communities can work
holistically for social justice over the long term…religious peacebuilding efforts offer the
promise of repairing broken relationships, healing damaged communities, reconciling conflicting
parties, negotiating peace agreements, and re-creating a common vision of peace.”46
Ashley Laura McArthur’s chapter “Environmental Change and Peacebuilding” explains
the pillar 2 global/ecological level driver and the fact that environmental concerns plague not
only the Palestinians and the Israelis, but the entire Middle East region, and if we are not
proactive about slowing or ending climate change, the entire globe. McArthur explains that
collaborative steps have already been taken in the region, “In 2001, Eco Peace and Friends of the
Earth Middle East initiated the Good Water Neighbors (GWN) project to foster dialogue
between Jordanians, Palestinians, and Israelis in communities mutually dependent on shared
water resources.”47 This effort to provide clean water to the region helps build peace, both
actively and passively, “The initiative has spurred improvements in water management practices
by providing a basis for collaborative problem solving and newfound trust and understanding on
individual, communal and regional levels.”48 Just like all of the other processes of
peacebuilding, this cycle feeds itself, benefitting the sector it focuses on by building
collaborative processes for all parties, and strengthening that collaboration to contribute to the
peacebuilding itself, “Education, dialogue, and joint projects focused on safe, sustainable, and
46
Ul-Huda, Qamar, and Katherine Marshall. "Religion and Peacebuilding." Pg. 158
McArthur, Ashley Laura. “Environmental Change and Peacebuilding.” Trans. Array. Integrated
Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 2013. 173197. Print. Pg. 189
48
McArthur, Ashley Laura. “Environmental Change and Peacebuilding.” Pg. 189-190
47
20
cooperative water management have resulted in improved water allocation and the
implementation of new technology.”49
VII. Conclusion
The most important aspects of building a positively peaceful, sustainable two-state
solution for the future of Israel and Palestine include closing the sovereignty gap for the
Palestinian nation, rebuilding civil society in both countries according to their new neighboring
states, increasing public institution development and widening the business sector,
disseminating positive and constructive media, utilizing the religious communities as jumpingoff points for reaching the communities in a deep and meaningful way, and helping to curb
climate change and provide clean and sustainable water sources for the region as a source of
mutual concern and collaborative problem-solving for all actors involved.
Important to note here is the role of the armed forces for both Israel and Palestine, as well
as the role of third-party actors, international NGOs and watchdogs, and external humanitarian
aid organizations after active hostilities have ceased and state- and peacebuilding processes have
begun. Mary Kaldor provides the best plan for the role of the military in a delicate situation like
this, one that is highly susceptible to back-sliding into miscommunication and violence in her
book Human Security: Reflections on Globalization and Intervention.
Kaldor proposes a change in the way international intervention is handled in all aspects.
Firstly, civilian protection must become the primary responsibility of armed forces. Secondly,
this protection can and must be achieved through stabilization, rather than loss or defeat of a
49
Ibid. Pg. 190
21
specific fight, battle, or war. This stability must be desired and agreed upon by both sides of the
conflict, otherwise, us vs. them mentalities prevail and the cycle of violence continues. Thirdly,
and perhaps most interestingly, political and paramilitary leaders who threaten any of these
aforementioned policies should be regarded as individual criminals, rather than an anonymous
conglomerate of collective enemies and pursued and treated as such, “this means that human
security forces have the job of arresting criminals and bringing them to justice. It also
delegitimizes the enemy, who are no longer political foes but lawbreakers.”50 Ideally under these
new parameters, “The legitimate use of military force by states would need to be approved by the
United Nations or to conform to a clear set of criteria that are agreed internationally. The
adoption of the principle of ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P) by the United Nations General
Assembly is an important step in this direction.”51 The transformed military force this
peacebuilding plan proposes protects human rights above all else.
Finally, this plan recognizes the fact that too often, external third-party actors go into
conflicts with prescriptive, rather than ellicitive, solutions to the problems they face. Early
withdrawal of these actors is a constant problem in developing post-conflict scenarios and a main
contributing factor to why they manifest future, more complicated conflicts time and time again.
Negative peace is ceasefire, conflict management and settlement. Positive peace is what this
plan strives for, it is conflict resolution, transformation and reconciliation. Rob Jenkins discusses
this problem, as well as the most realistic solution to correcting it in his book, Peacebuilding:
From Concept to Commission. He asserts that, “there may be no identifiable point when the
international peacebuilding effort can or will come to a definitive end… not (a) disengagement.
50
Kaldor, Mary. Human Security: Reflections on Globalization and Intervention. Cambridge, UK: Polity
Press, 2007. Print. Pg. 176
51
Kaldor, Mary. Human Security: Reflections on Globalization and Intervention. Pg. 173
22
Instead of departing in a once-and-for-all manner, external actors remain engaged in the process
of state-building, but generally reduce the intensity of their involvement.”52
The problems in the past were a general lack of institutional maintenance and
strengthening. Government, economy, and security are the three foundational pillars53 of a
functioning peacebuilding plan and are too often underfunded and generally slide back into their
all-too-familiar bad habits once the influence and infrastructure of external actors disappears.
Systems maintenance is as equally important to the future of this peacebuilding plan as creating
new infrastructure for the two new functioning and sustainably peaceful states of Israel and
Palestine.
52
Jenkins, Rob. Peacebuilding: From Concept to Commission. Oxon, Canada: Routledge Publishing, 2013.
Print. Pg. 41
53
Jenkins, Rob. Peacebuilding: From Concept to Commission. Pg. 41
23
References
http://itu.dk/~miguel/ddp/Deep%20play%20Notes%20on%20the%20Balinese%20cockfight.pdf
http://www1.american.edu/cgp/jpd/whatwedo.htm
Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity,
and Poverty. New York, New York: Crown Business, 2012. Print.
Avant , Deborah. "Making Peacemakers out of Spoilers: International Organizations, Private
Military Training, and Statebuilding after War." Trans. Array. The Dilemmas of Statebuilding.
Oxon, Canada: Routledge, 2009. 104-127. Print.
Beswick, Danielle, and Paul Jackson. Conflict, Security and Development: An Introduction.
Oxon, Canada: Routledge, 2011. Print.
Cuhadar, Esra and Sari Hanafi. "Israel and Palestine: Civil Societies in Disrepair." Trans.
Array. Civil Society & Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment. London, UK: Lynne Rienner
Pubishers, Inc., 2010. Print.
Ghani, Ashraf, and Clare Lockhart. Fixing Failed States: A Framework for Rebuilding a
Fractured World. New York, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.
Howard, Ross. "The Media’s Role in War and Peacebuilding." Trans. Array Postconflict
Development: Meeting New Challenges. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Reinner Publishers, Inc.,
2005. 117-128. Print.
Jenkins, Rob. Peacebuilding: From Concept to Commission. Oxon, Canada: Routledge, 2013.
Print.
Junne, Gerd, and Willemijn Verkoren. "The Challenges of Postconflict Development." Trans.
Array. Postconflict Development: Meeting New Challenges . Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner
Pubishers, Inc., 2005. Print.
Kaldor, Mary. Human Security: Reflections on Globalization and Intervention. Cambridge, UK:
Polity Press, 2007. Print.
Lederach, John Paul. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies.
Washington, D.C.: United States Institute for Peace, 1997. Print.
Lederach, John Paul. The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace. New York,
New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print.
Massad, Joseph. "Palestinians and Jewish History: Recognition or Submission?" Journal of
Palestine Studies 30, no. 1 (2000): 52-67
McArthur, Ashley Laura. “Environmental Change and Peacebuilding.” Trans. Array. Integrated
Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict. Boulder, Colorado: Westview
Press, 2013. 173-197. Print.
Paffenholz, Thania. Civil Society & Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment. London, UK: Lynne
Rienner Publishers, Inc, 2010. Print.
Paffenholz, Thania, and Cristoph Spurk. "A Comprehensive Analytical Framework." Trans.
Array. Civil Society & Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment. London, UK: Lynne Rienner
Pubishers, Inc., 2010. Print.
Ramsbotham, Oliver, Tom Woodhouse, and Hugh Miall. Contemporary Conflict Resolution.
Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2011. Print.
Sandole, Dennis. “A Comprehensive Mapping of Conflict and Conflict Resolution: A Three
Pillar Approach.” Peace and Conflict Studies, December 1998, vol. 5, no. 2, pg. 1-30
Sandole, Dennis J.D. Peacebuilding: Preventing Violent Conflict in a Complex World.
Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2010. Print.
24
Schulz, Michael. “Palestinian Civil Society.” Trans. Array. The Routledge Handbook on the
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. New York, New York: Routledge, 2013. Print.
Ul-Huda, Qamar, and Katherine Marshall. "Religion and Peacebuilding." Trans.
Array. Integrated Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict. Boulder,
Colorado: Westview Press, 2013. 151-171. Print.
Wenger, Andreas, and Daniel Mockli. Conflict Prevention: The Untapped Potential of the
Business Sector. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Reinner Publishers, Inc., 2003. Print.
25