Never fear. There will mbe no reconcilliation.
BTW, that photo is from March 2007. They have not seen each other since.
Indeed, reconciliation is not a real possibility. What is needed is for the Palestinian Arabs to overthrow both of these brutal, corrupt, incompetent and illegal governments and replace them with new government that is concerned with the present needs of the people living there rather than sacrificing their present welfare in order to pursue ancient ideological goals. When that happens, the aspirations of the Palestinian Arabs for a viable state with a viable economy will be possible because such a government would be able to provide reliable assurances to Israel about its security concerns. Until this happens, imo, no real progress will be made.
Ah you've missed that. That is what they are already interested in. I believe the Palestinian situation will resolve itself once it has it's recognised State and uses the law. I don't really think it can be avoided. The die has been cast.
Israel is one of the strongest military powers in the world. That you believe does not make her safe.
I have found this interesting article which I think captures my criticism of Israel and where Israel needs to move.
Israel is still traumatised. She still lives like a nightmare in the past. It is like the holocaust is still there, waiting to happen again. Indeed on another forum I have often heard people say such, that they believe that is what others still want. Israel is still living in survival mode and survival mode is not a good place to live. It takes all your energy and makes you unable to focus on other important dimensions.
Here the author, Tal Becker describes this. His belief is that Israel has got stuck in the original Political Zionism mode of trying to find safety and that this itself stifles Israel. Anyone who does not agree is seen as the enemy or antisemetic - you know it all. However he, rightly believes that this has caused stagnation. Israel needs he rightly says to move on from viewing things simply on terms of survival but rather on values.
Here is some of what he says
A values-based conversation about Israel differs from the crisis narrative in four important ways. First, it is internally motivated, not externally driven. In a values conversation, it does not matter whether Israel is being criticized or applauded. We are not concerned with what it will take to repel a threat or answer a critic. We are engaged in what it will take to address Israel's challenges and build a society that reflects the values, tradition and experience of our people. It is a conversation about us.
Those engaged in a values conversation measure success not by whether we can persuade the world about the justice of our cause, but by whether we are comfortable with the moral dimensions of our policies. In a crisis-driven narrative, the issue of minorities in Israel, to take one example, is unlikely to be addressed unless it is seen as a threat to Israel's survival or a propaganda weapon for Israel's opponents. In a values-based conversation the way a Jewish society relates to its minorities exists as an independent question that deserves our attention, regardless of whether it receives the attention of others.
-snip- If, for example, the conversation about Israel's response to the Turkish flotilla incident had been more values sensitive, the first question would be what moral issues are at play here. Rather than center the debate on the military and public relations implications of interdiction on the high seas, we would first identify the moral tension between our humanitarian responsibilities to others, and our security responsibilities to ourselves. We would examine, and argue about, how these moral responsibilities could best be met in the circumstances. And because this tension provides no easy answer, we may recognize that the Jew who questions the propriety of Israel's forceful response in this case is not engaged in an act of betrayal, any more than the Jew who supports it is engaged in act of moral bankruptcy. If both are genuinely trying to strike an appropriate balance between legitimate ethical objectives, they are both fulfilling the same responsibility to meet this challenge with a Jewish moral response.
Beyond Survival
I think he has hit the nail on the head on where Israel, for her own good, needs to change.
