Peace or Justice: Which Side Are You On?

The ongoing conflict in the Middle East is mired in despair and suffering, with outrage and finger pointing on all fronts and in all directions. 

In a world of short attention spans and sound bites, the conflict is often oversimplified as pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian. The more meaningful and productive framing, however, is not based on which ethnic team you align, but the values that lie at the core of your position. If you favor peace over justice, you might feel a greater kinship with Israel, with its primary hopes to be free from terrorism and other security threats. And if you favor justice over peace, you may find common cause with the Palestinians, who have long yearned for international recognition and the right to self-determination. Of course the correct answer, from a secular humanist perspective at least, is to value both simultaneously – indeed, peace is only attainable if there is justice, while justice can only exist in a world of peace.

On the Israeli side, predominant concerns are for peace, which is really a shorthand for security. Israel can only realize its promise as a safe haven for the Jewish people when it is free from terrorism and other threats to its security. In this story, the Palestinians are to blame through their courtship of extremism and terrorist violence. If only the Palestinians would stop fighting there would be peace. Little time or energy is spent on self reflection and the role that Israeli actions and policies have played in creating the conditions for extremism and violence to take root.

On the Palestinian side, the overriding focus is on justice. The Palestinian experience is one of historic wrongs, decades-long abandonment on the world stage, and ongoing mistreatment through settlement building and a deprivation of rights. Justice for the Palestinians would offer them the human rights of dignity and self-determination. In this story, it is Israelis who are principally to blame. Again, little time or energy is spent on self reflection and the role that the Palestinians themselves have played in sabotaging past meaningful opportunities to take the reins of their future.

Endless social media posts bolster these reductionist framings and narratives and, in turn, demonize broad swaths of people on the other “side.” These framings, though widespread, are overly simplistic and obscure reality. To be sure, the parties to this conflict are, indeed, Israelis and Palestinians (and therefore Jews and Arabs). But the true divide is not between these ethnic groups, but between those within each who are committed to peace and justice for all, and those who prioritize their group’s interests at the expense of the interests of others. 

Which side are you on? 

On one side are people whose hearts have been hardened by legitimate and relentless grievances and loss, and who have succumbed to anger and the thirst for reprisal. Quick to condemn acts of people on the other side, they fall silent in the face of wrongdoing from “their own,” forgetting that human suffering is a universal experience. They become caught in the cycle of sorrow and fear, which beget hate and blame, which beget tribalism and demonization, which beget radicalization and violence. 

On the other side stands people with the humanity to recognize the legitimate fears, historic claims and grievances, and hopes of Israelis and Palestinians alike. They can simultaneously empathize with dreams of peace (in the form of safety and security on the one hand), and justice (in the form of dignity, self-determination, and equal rights, on the other). This morality enables them to advocate for solutions that seek to bridge the divide; for them, the only tolerable solution is one that provides the peace for Israel and the justice for the Palestinians that both have long sought.

An end to this conflict will not come from total military or political victory for one at the expense of the other. It will only be realized when the forces of universal values and rights prevail, and when those now in command of both sides yield their ground to those who will negotiate a peace that will enable two peoples to co-exist, rebuild what has been destroyed, and disavow revenge and retribution. 

To get there, we must free ourselves from the pernicious influence of social media narratives that seek to settle the righteousness, historic validity, or political or moral appropriateness of one position or another through one-liners, simplistic graphics, and appeals to ethnic loyalty. The world – and particularly this conflict – are far more complex than Facebook posts in your feed would have you believe. 

To do so, we must have the courage to call out human rights violations wherever and whenever they occur, regardless of who is claimed to be responsible. We must be voices of moderation. 

We need to seek out and gain strength from the like-minded – those who share a commitment to honest and respectful dialogue and understanding, and a core commitment to peace and justice for all. Here’s a hint: if you are only exchanging dialogue with people who share your ethnicity or religion, or even your politics, you are probably doing it wrong.  

 The Israel-Palestinian conflict need not be intractable or eternal, despite the complicated moral, historical, and religious issues at play. In the end, it is a political conflict of ideas – two peoples both claiming the same land as their national home, despite there being sufficient land and resources for all involved to live in peace and with dignity. And for this reason, a solution is possible and will be found in compromise.

Ultimately, the question is not whether you stand with Israel or the Palestinians. It is whether you stand for universal human values of peace and justice for Israelis and Palestinians alike.

—

DJ Rosenthal (@DJRosenthal1) is a visiting fellow with the National Security Institute at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School. He served as director for counterterrorism at the National Security Council in the Obama White House and as senior counsel to the assistant attorney general for national security at the Department of Justice.