The Movement for Reform Judaism

Seeing Ian Paisley and Gerry Adams sitting side by side and announcing that they will work together in peace and mutual understanding for the good of Northern Ireland is a message of hope to those in the Middle East who are trying to bring together Israelis and Palestinians for something similar. If it's possible there it may be possible here. For the Irish accord may have been even more difficult to bring about than an Israeli-Palestinian peace treaty might be. Let me argue my case and offer three reasons.

First, Unionist and Republican residents of Northern Ireland are really siblings, whereas Jews and Arabs are only cousins. There's much to suggest that it's much more difficult for siblings to accept reconciliation than for cousins.

Thus, for example, as difficult as it may be to imagine the present government of the Palestinian Authority and the government of Israel - the cousins - working together in peace and mutual regard, it's much more difficult to imagine Israel's two Orthodox chief rabbis sitting side by side with the leaders of the Reform and Conservative movements - the brothers. The tensions within Jewry may be potentially less lethal than the tensions between Israel and her neighbors, but they are likely to be much more difficult to resolve. The closer opponents are, the harder it's for them to yield.

A second reason why peace in Northern Ireland may have been more difficult than in the Land of Israel is because the Irish conflict was primarily religious: Protestants versus Catholics: brothers and sisters in Christ, yet bitter enemies with a long history of violence. Though the Israel-Arab conflict also has religious dimensions, these may not be as strong as those in Northern Ireland.

Finally, the aim of resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is to create two states that will live side by side. Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland have to learn to live in peace side by side, in the same country and under the same regime. This may turn out to be much more difficult.

*

The "troubles" in Ireland have a long history. Even when more than a decade ago it seemed that the parties had come to an agreement, there were setbacks that made many observers despair and fear that peace would never come about. Even now there may be skeptics who might warn us that the parties concerned may not live happily ever after. But the likelihood is that, even if they don't live happily ever after, they'll get by and make progress and no longer kill each other.

An important factor in the success was the presence of a third party. Though again, the role of Britain in the Irish conflict cannot be compared to the role of the United States (or Europe, or the "Quartet") in the Middle East conflict, without American active involvement in the peace process, nothing will happen here. That's behind the shuttle diplomacy by this US Secretary of State and many of her predecessors.

Britain became effective as it shed much of its partisanship. The United States must do the same, even if it's not, in the short term at least, to Israel's advantage. This is likely to happen with the next Administration.

Next time Olmert the Jew and Abbas the Muslim meet, they should set up a joint mission to Belfast to learn from the Christians. It may bring us some hope.

Jerusalem 28.3.07 

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed