Why Peace Rarely Happens—And How We Can Change That

Most people assume peace fails because people don’t want it badly enough.
But the truth is more sobering—and more hopeful.

As Raphael Cohen-Almagor explains, peace between Israelis and Palestinians requires a rare convergence:
• An Israeli leader willing to pay the political price
• A Palestinian leader willing and able to compromise
• Both leaders persuasive enough to bring their people along
• A shared sense that delay is more dangerous than risk

These conditions are logical.
But they almost never appear together.

And if we keep waiting for the perfect moment, peace will remain a dream deferred—always just out of reach.

Some still believe Mahmoud Abbas could be that Palestinian leader. But few Palestinians follow his lead. Many see him as compromised or ineffective.
And here’s the real problem:
Leadership doesn’t appear in a vacuum. It grows—or withers—inside political ecosystems.

The Palestinian Side: Fragile Ecosystem, Faulty Incentives

The Palestinian political system is fractured. Power is split. Institutions are weak. Conspiracy theories about Israeli intentions thrive.
And worst of all: the system rewards militancy over responsibility.
In such an environment, expecting a peaceful leader to emerge spontaneously is simply unrealistic.

The Israeli Side: Trauma, Mistrust, and Paralysis

On the Israeli side, decades of violence—most recently October 7—have deeply scarred public opinion. For many Israelis, peace no longer feels like hope.
It feels like danger.
Any plan that relies on trust without proof is politically dead on arrival.

This is the core dilemma:
Each side is waiting for the other to change first.

But waiting has now become a strategy for doing nothing.
Israeli leadership has no alternative to the status quo. Even voices like Yair Golan, who mention “separation,” offer no detailed plan—because any specifics would cost them electoral support.

The Wall of Mutual Assumptions

There’s something deeper than political gridlock.
It’s not just that each side is waiting for the other to act.
Each side believes the other is incapable of change.

On the Israeli side, there’s a widespread belief that Palestinian hatred is cultural and immutable. That no political solution can overcome a hatred woven into identity.

On the Palestinian side, there’s an equally strong conviction that Israel’s ultimate goal is permanent dispossession. That every act of negotiation is camouflage for deeper erasure.

These beliefs become self-fulfilling:
• If Israelis believe Palestinians will always be hostile, why risk peace?
• If Palestinians believe Israelis will never accept their existence, why invest in coexistence?

And so:
Each side’s assumptions become the very evidence that confirms them.

Why Waiting Fails

These beliefs don’t soften over time.
They calcify.
Each violent event, each failed initiative, becomes another data point reinforcing hopelessness.

And no single peace agreement—no matter how well-crafted—can overcome this.
Because the problem isn’t only what people want. It’s what they believe is possible.

Peace Is Not a Deal. It Is a Capacity—and a Demonstration

Kobi Michael introduces a key concept: positive peace. Not just the absence of war, but the presence of functioning systems that normalize nonviolence.

Positive peace is not a signature. It’s a structure.

And here’s where past efforts failed:
They assumed that political agreements would eventually create peace capacity.
But giving power before the groundwork was laid led to chaos—not stability.

A Reversed Logic: Let the Process Create the Partner

The solution, as also proposed by Shaul Arieli, is this:
Don’t wait for the right leader. Create the process that gives rise to them.

Rather than demand a fully formed Palestinian partner from the outset, the process must generate peace-capable leadership by:
• Building governance
• Establishing rule of law
• Earning public trust
• Fostering a culture of coexistence

And to make this credible, the process must be staged.

Staging Is Not Delay. Staging Is Proof

Under this model, Israel presents a detailed, permanent standing offer for full Palestinian statehood—including clear borders, security arrangements, economic structures, and international guarantees.

This offer does not expire. It does not shift with elections. It becomes a permanent part of the political landscape.

Then, implementation proceeds in stages, with each stage requiring demonstrable Palestinian progress:
• One legitimate authority
• Real governance, not slogans
• Active prevention of violence
• Coexistence messaging in media and education
• Public understanding that peace serves their long-term interests

Advancement to each next stage is earned, not granted on faith.

Israel is not asked to gamble.
It is asked to observe.

What This Does to Palestinian Politics

This approach rewires the incentive system.
Because power flows through demonstrated responsibility:
• Militancy loses value
• Responsible leadership gains legitimacy
• Stability becomes a political asset

And most importantly:
The Palestinian story begins to shift.

Instead of “We must resist because they want to erase us,”
the emerging narrative becomes: “We are building a state—and each success brings us closer.”

Cognitive Dissonance: The Power of a Standing Offer

A permanent, detailed offer reframes Palestinian assumptions:
If Israel seeks erasure, why offer a roadmap to statehood?
If occupation is the goal, why commit to withdrawal under measurable terms?

The old narrative loses its grip—not through argument, but through contradiction with reality.

And slowly, the locus of control shifts:
From “Will Israel ever let us have a state?”
To “Are we building a society ready to govern one?”

Why This Works

Because success becomes something Palestinians can achieve by their own choices.
Because failure becomes harder to blame solely on Israel.
Because responsible leadership becomes politically valuable—not suicidal.

And because for Israelis: They are not asked to believe.
They are asked to watch.

The Role of the International Community

Outside actors play a role—not as enforcers, but as supporters.
They offer guarantees, resources, and transparency.
But they do not impose.

Peace is not delivered.
It is built.

What This Requires from Israel
• The standing offer must be real—not PR.
• The stages must be clear—not shifting goalposts.
• Evaluations must be fair and transparent.
• And most of all: Israel must follow through when standards are met.

Because the moment Israel delays or denies progress without cause, the old Palestinian narrative returns in force:
“See? It was never real.”

A New Lens on Preconditions

Cohen-Almagor’s conditions are still valid.
But they are not prerequisites.
They are outcomes—produced by the right process.

Don’t wait for the perfect moment.
Build the conditions that create it.

The Test of This Approach

It won’t convince everyone overnight.
That’s not the test.

The test is whether it:
• Gives hopeful Palestinian leaders something to point to
• Gives parents a vision of a real future for their children
• Makes Israeli fears less justifiable through observable Palestinian reform
• Makes Palestinian despair less plausible as sovereignty becomes visible

This Is Not Naïve Optimism. It Is Strategic Courage

The choice is not between fantasy and failure. It is between waiting for a miracle—or building one.

From “It’s impossible” to “It’s underway.”

Because peace isn’t something that happens to people.
It’s something they build—together—one stage at a time.

And people only choose to build when they believe it’s possible.