Progress in Israel: Best-case prediction
By 
Shan-ul-Hai •
June 3, 2008
I think we can all agree that the best possible solution to the Israel problem would be something that involves minimal violence and casualties. So here is what I’m expecting (as promised in yesterday’s post):
Best-case (realistic)
- May/June 2008: Israel works out a prisoner exchange with Hezbollah (done).
- The next few months: the first exchange gives way to more exchanges.
- The next year or two: more exchanges lead to semi-open talks between Israel and Palestinian groups.
- The next 3-4 years: Semi-open talks slowly evolve into open talks.
- The next decade or so: Open political talks eventually become accepted by the public, which means that they automatically hate each other a little bit less.
- Another 5-10 years later: As the hatred fades, some educated Israelis and Palestinians begin to live in the same areas without killing each other.
- Hopefully, as the more educated people start to live in harmony, this sentiment trickles down to the rest of the public.
Of course, plenty of people will want to say that “the Israelis should all just get out of the Middle East” or “the Palestinians should just go somewhere else”, but I think we can all agree that such an evacuation is highly unlikely. Tomorrow, I’ll talk about the worst-case scenario.
Popularity: 25% [?]
| 3.2 |
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Hey Shan, I just was checking out your site and looking at some of your blogs. I think your prediction of the best-case scenario is probably pretty close, but I just don’t know how practical it is. It is much easier to change the heart or mind of a single person, but is very difficult to sway an entire body of people, no matter how sound or rational your argument may be. Even if a large number of Israelis and Palestinians agree that a peaceful solution is best, it is very hard to go against the general consensus, or what you believe the general consensus to be. If you feel alone in your views then it is hard to voice them. Or look at it this way, even if the majority of both sides feel that a peaceful resolution is best, the violent minority will keep that from happening. Or better yet, even if within that minority, a majority of them are unsure what is best and there is just a tiny handful of violent radicals, their actions alone could put a great hindrance on finding a peaceful solution, because violence tends to breed retaliation. It’s just a thought, and I may be wrong, but that’s how I feel like things work in civil wars… even if it is not a true civil war, it just seems like the resentment never really fades, even if violence slows for a while.