RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

New Rules for Middle East Engagement

by Eboo Patel 01-06-2009

I spent much of the weekend communicating with Muslim and Jewish leaders on the recent crisis in Gaza.  Here was my basic question: “Have you reached out to leaders in the other community to find a solution to the conflict?”

Here was the most common answer: “I’d love to talk to people in the other community.  Can you give me the phone numbers of folks who agree with our position?  If they’ll appear with us at a media event, or put their name on our press release, that’s even better.”

That’s a perfectly understandable instinct, but it doesn’t lead to a solution.  It’s just a continuation of the logic that has led us … here.

As I stated in my previous post, the rules of rhetorical engagement for Muslim and Jewish organizations regarding the Middle East were set long ago.  I’m starting to think of these as the Status Quo Rules for Middle East Engagement.  If you like the status quo, these rules are for you.

Rule Number One: Use the current crisis to advance your narrative. If you’re Jewish, that story involves words like “security,” “terrorism,” and “right to exist.”  If you’re Muslim, it includes terms like “humanitarian crisis,” “occupation,” and “disproportionate violence.”

Rule Number Two: Talk about how bad it is where your people live. If you’re Jewish, that means highlighting the number of Hamas rockets fired into Israel and the number of lives lost and disrupted in cities like Sderot.  If you’re Muslim, it involves talking about the prison that is Gaza and the disaster that is the West Bank.

Rule Number Three: Blame it on the other side. If you’re Jewish, that means pointing at the violent and belligerent defiance of Hamas.  If you’re Muslim, it means talking about the suffocation of the blockade in Gaza and the occupation in the West Bank.

Following these rules makes perfect sense for the parties involved because just about every one of their talking points is true.  Hamas is violent and belligerent.  The blockade and occupation is suffocating.  Life in Sderot is rife with fear.  Life in Gaza does feel like a prison.

Here’s the only problem: the Status Quo Rules have not, and never will, lead anywhere but the status quo.

If we are going to move from Status Quo to Solution, we’re going to need a whole lot of courage and a different set of rules.  People are going to have to come up with the courage on their own, but let me offer a set of “Solution Rules” for Muslim and Jewish organizations regarding the Middle East.

Rule Number One: Make your first phone calls to the people who disagree with you on the current situation, but who agree with you on the basic outlines of a long-term solution – two states, with security and dignity for all. That’s a Coalition for a Solution, creative and courageous enough to get people’s attention.  This means, difficult as it might be, resist the instinct to use the current crisis to find more people who will wave signs for your side, show up at your rallies, or sign on to your petitions.  That logic serves mostly to further prolong the conflict.  Instead, use the spotlight on the Middle East to reach out to those on the other side who have the courage to play for a long-term solution and say, “Look, the status quo is untenable for everybody.  It’s time for a different set of rules.”

Rule Number Two: Acknowledge the real issues on the other side. Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, the first Muslim in Congress, models this in his recent press release when he says that he has been in Sderot and has “seen firsthand both the physical and emotional destruction caused by the rocket attacks.”  That acknowledgment doesn’t take away from something else that Ellison says –- which is that conditions in Gaza are “unliveable.”  It merely means that Ellison has the eyes and the heart to imagine life on both sides of the fence.

In Status Quo Rules, recognizing the challenge on the other side makes you a traitor.  In the Solution Rulebook, it makes you a true patriot, because it’s the fastest way to build trust with the people you have to build peace with.

Rule Number Three: Recognize that certain players who claim to be on “your side” are part of the problem.  The truth is, you don’t want them on your side anyway.  They are dangerous and destabilizing to your community.  When peace is finally made with the other side, your first battle is going to be against them.  Hamas is a destructive force to Israelis, and a destructive force to Palestinians.  Muslims should feel no obligation to defend them.  The militant settlers are murder to Palestinians, and also murder to Israel.  No Jews should feel like they have to defend them either.

Rule Number Four: The politics of the Middle East is about where your family is.  If your family is in Sderot, it is unbearable.  If your family is in Gaza, it is also unbearable.  Talking about whether scattered Hamas rockets are the equivalent of precision Israeli air raids, or whether Islamist rhetoric is as bad as Israeli occupation is logical but irrelevant.  Logical because you can write press releases for your side using such talking points, irrelevant because it doesn’t build a bridge to the other side, which is the only way to a solution.

The sad truth of the Middle East conflict is that many Muslims and Jews agree that the Solution Rulebook makes sense to them, but when the crisis escalates and hits the front page (like now), the old logic takes over and Muslim and Jewish organizations revert to the Status Quo Rules.

But here’s the really sad truth.  Every day is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza and a humiliating subjugation in the West Bank.  And every day is a security crisis in Sderot and tightening fear in Israel.

And all the well-meaning organizations following the Status Quo Rules, thinking they are serving their side, are really only prolonging the crisis.

Eboo Patel is founder and executive director of the Interfaith Youth Core, a Chicago-based international nonprofit that promotes interfaith cooperation. His blog, The Faith Divide, explores what drives faiths apart and what brings them together. He is also author of Acts of Faith: The Story of an American Muslim, the Struggle for the Soul of a Generation (Beacon Press, 2007).

Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • newcreation1
    As I said in response to a previous post, I don't think it's possible to have dialogue (or any type of a two-state solution) when the government of Gaza is run by a terrorist organization that advocates the destruction of Israel. I am sure many of the Palestinians do not like Hamas, either; I suspect that most are too afraid to do anything about it. As long as they are in the picture, I don't think that the proposed "new rules of engagement" will work. I would love to see those rules work out, but both sides would have to operate in good faith.
  • That, however, doesn't take into account the history of that region. While I'm not excusing Hamas, I might take the same tack if I were a Palestinian whose people were exploited and abused by the West and had a state plopped right in the middle of it to continue such humiliation. The reality is that most Arabs regardless of nation view Israel as a bully propped up by the United States and Europe to continue such cultural domination.

    One other thing: At first, Hamas was actually aided by Israeli intelligence -- Shin Bet, I'm told -- to act as a counterweight/alternative to Yassir Arafat and his Fatah party, basically to keep the Palestinians weak and divided or perhaps cancel each other out. Obviously, that has proven to be a grave miscalculation.
  • dmkorman
    I could not agree more with Mr. Patel. The tragedy is that both sides are simultaneously right in their concerns, yet are unwilling to acknowledge the validity of the other's concerns. As Representative Ellison points out, acknowledging the pain of the other, does not negate the fact of one's own pain. Old thinking will not work. What might be needed is the intervention of third parties to demilitarize the area to meet the security concerns of Israel (eliminating the need for IDF intervention), along with humanitarian, technical and fiscal assistance the Palestinians need to establish a viable independent state. Surely the cost of such an intervention can be borne by the West and the Arab countries for the benefit of peace and stability in the area. The biggest stumbling block might be East Jerusalem. For that, the solution might be "E. Jerusalem to the Palestinians or ALL of Jerusalem " to be internationalized."

    Cousins should be able to make peace among themselves. indeed, they must.
  • There is no right side in the Israeli - Palestinian conflict. What gives any government legitimacy to exist? There is no standard for answering this question in scripture (if you find one, please email it to me at ndsnow@gmail - those who quote Rom 13 need not apply) because there is no support for the legitimacy of human governments in Scripture.
    The Israeli government is secular - pagan even. It generates arbitrary laws and forces its people into military action. Scripture makes promises to the Jewish people, but not to the nation - state of Israel.
    Palestine has no more right to exist, and Hamas has no more right to a monopoly on force in the Gaza strip, than anyone else does.
    What this crisis again illustrates is that the world strives for control of political power. Power-over as Greg Boyd calls it. In every fight among wolves, sheep ought to stay out. Let these pagans blow each other to bits, they are filled with the demonic lust of power.
    If there is a role for Christians in this tragedy it is to offer up our homes to the innocents. They can move in with me - Jew, Arab, Persian, Kurd. All of them.
    The most important work Christians can be involved politically in this regard is relaxation of immigration restrictions, first for refugees, slaves, and other oppressed peoples, and then for everyone else.
    Nathanael Snow
  • Hannity2
    Isn't it amazing how tiny little Israel is even still around? With all the hatred and desire to destroy this one nation for thousands of years. Even after being scattered, the Lord returned his people back to their land. End times prophecy is unfolding in front of our eyes. To think that Ezekial prophesized about a coaltion of Iran/Russia attacking Israel just prior to a 7 year peace treaty. And during a time of war, rumors of war, massive information, massive travel, and a coming global economy and global government.

    Come quickly Lord Jesus.
  • PASTOR JEFF
    Is there some reason other than a "heads-up" from our buddy/God to we 21st century Americans that Ezekiel may have written this? The future belongs to God and those who dabble in soothsaying/witchcraft are under his curse. Why, it may even be an abomination on the level of homosexual sin.
  • Hannity2
    Rev. 1:3
    Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near..

    Pretty severe there Jeff, comparing Biblical prophecy to witchcraft!
  • Hannity2,
    Your entire perspective of prophecy is skewed by a simple flaw: you believe God extends legitimacy to governments. It is very hard to prove that the particular alliance you speak of between Iran and Russia is the same described in Ezekiel. I know many Bible teachers try to do this, but 99% of these make the mistake of equating the nation-state of Israel with the Biblical "Jewish People." They are not one and the same.
    Step back. If this particular claim is not true, then very little of what these expositors of prophecy claim remains true.
    The argument hangs by a very thin thread, one which I contend is diametrically opposed to the Christian ethic.
    Nathanael Snow
  • Hannity2
    There are very few Biblical Scholars who would hold to your position. In fact many of the few who do also deny the Virgin Birth, bodily resurrection of Jesus, and infallibility of scripture.
  • PASTOR JEFF
    You mean like all those Catholic Bible Scholars or did you mean like Calvin and Luther Bible Scholars?
  • neuro_nurse
    I have agree with Pastor Jeff; your interpretation of Biblical prophesy is no more valid than those tabloid Nostradamus predictions.
  • PASTOR JEFF
    You'll have to tell them we're not in collusion, NN. That was scary! At least you spelled Nostradamus right :-)
  • neuro_nurse
    I didn't understand what you meant until I realized that this comment was posted after your 'Nostradomus' comment. I don't think our similar observation is any more coincidental that it is obvious.

    Incidentally, I compose in Word and then cut & paste – I’m a terrible speller.
  • PASTOR JEFF
    I didn't compare Biblical prophecy to witchcraft. I compared your method of interpretation of Biblical prophecy (using Scripture to forecast the future) to witchcraft. What's the difference between you and Nostradomus?
  • Hannity2
    The difference between Biblical Prophecy and Nostradomus is that Nostradomus has been wrong. It has nothing to do with me. You claim that we shouldn't use prophecy to examine the future. That is the entire point of prophecy. Otherwise it is history. And again as the scripture says

    Rev. 1:3
    Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near..
  • PASTOR JEFF
    Are you aware that there are different *interpretations* of The Revelation. For starters, the first verse identifies that the book is primarily a revelation of Jesus Christ and proceeds to say it speaks of "things which must shortly come to pass". An Old Testament survey of prophesy will point you in the true direction of the purpose of prophesy. The entire point of prophecy is to call the people to return to worship of God. The futuristic element is a confirming sign to validate the message of the prophet. In this light, the early Church father's would have recognized the prophetic nature of The Revelation due to the truth of the events having already transpired thus validating John's encouraging message. Another concept that helped me with the book was the "Is, was and is to come" theme. God is able to be in more than one time/space at once. What is yet to happen for us, has already happened, is happening and will happen from God's view.
    As was stated before, applying modernistic/scientific interpretive methods to Scripture ignores the principle of "the things that are secret things belong to God"
  • neuro_nurse
    I didn’t compare the Bible to Nostradamus; I compared your interpretation of Ezekiel to those tabloid interpretations of Nostradamus.

    You are free to interpret the Bible, or follow someone else’s interpretation of Scripture, but don’t be surprised when other people don’t agree with you and may be offended by your insistence of the validity of your interpretation.

    I took a point off for your repetition of Rev 1:3; it doesn’t validate your statement.
  • Hannity2
    I didn't realize we were keeping score. I'll take Lebron James on me team then.
  • carlcopas
    Richard Baucham's The Theology of the Book of Revelation is an excellent analysis. From the back cover: Revelation is "not an esoteric and encoded forecast of historical events but rather a theocentric vision of the coming of God's universal kingdom, contextualized in the late first-century world dominated by Roman power and ideology."
  • carlcopas
    "Bauckham" not "Baucham"
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008