Bill Ayers speaks out! An In These Times exclusive.

PrintDiscuss
Features » June 23, 2005

Hand Over the Keys

A generous gesture can make a difference

By Nir Eisikovits

Carlos Dulitzky is the first of thousands leaving Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip under Sharon's disengagement plan.

As Israel prepares to with-draw from the Gaza Strip, the question of what to do with the houses the settlers leave behind is becoming more and more contentious. Some policy makers argue that images of Palestinians dancing on the roofs of the handsome cottages vacated by the Jews would project Israeli weakness and embolden militants in the West Bank to step up their struggle. The only way to avoid this, they claim, is to destroy the houses before pulling out. Others warn that demolishing the homes would amount to a public relations disaster; that Israel cannot afford the kind of media coverage that comes with razing entire neighborhoods in one of the world’s most crowded pieces of real-estate.

The difference between these two arguments is not as significant as it seems. Both are concerned with appearances. They revolve around the question of how we might seem, instead of asking what we ought to do. For those Israelis not yet cynical enough to collapse these two concerns into each other, perhaps some ancient advice might be useful. In 425 B.C., six years into the Peloponnesian War, Sparta made Athens a peace offer. “If great enmities are ever to be really settled,” the Spartan envoys told the Athenian assembly, “we think it will be not by the system of revenge and military success, but when the more fortunate combatant waives his privileges, and, guided by gentler feelings, conquers his rival in generosity and accords peace on more moderate terms than expected.”

Generosity!? Would those crazy Spartans recommend we hand over the keys? That Prime Minister Sharon take to the podium in the Knesset and announce that the houses are a gift of good will? That, while he is at it, he pledge that Israel would finance new construction projects to replace the squalid refugee camps in Jabalia, Rafah and Khan Younis?

In fact, yes. That is exactly what they would suggest. The idea is pretty simple: A dramatic display of generosity can change the dynamics of a conflict. Generosity is so far removed from the predictable, petty, gruesome dance of blow and counterblow, that it can cause parties to stop and think. The bookkeepers of death might be forced to look up from their desks. Once such an act of generosity is performed, the Spartan envoy told the Athenians, “instead of the debt of revenge that violence must entail, [an] adversary owes a debt of generosity to be paid in kind, and is inclined by honor to stand by his agreement.”

Hopelessly naive? Not quite. On November 19, 1977, after fighting four wars with Israel, and in spite of violent opposition at home, Anwar Sadat, president of Egypt, stood before the Knesset and addressed it in Arabic. “We really and truly welcome you to live among us in peace and security,” he told a stunned Israeli public. Years of suspicion melted away that night. Sixteen months later, Sadat, Prime Minister Menachem Begin of Israel, and President Jimmy Carter were shaking hands on the White House lawn.

On March 16, 1997, King Hussein of Jordan stepped into a small apartment in the Israeli town of Beit Shemesh, kneeled before a woman sitting on the floor, took her hand and begged for forgiveness. He repeated this gesture in six other residences, personally apologizing for the killing of seven Israeli schoolgirls by a Jordanian soldier. “I looked in his face and I saw that he was ashamed, and he had tears in his eyes, and he was honest,” one of the mothers told the Washington Post. The tension over the incident, which had the potential to destabilize the relationship between the two countries, was dissipated. Generosity can make a difference.

Incidentally, the Athenians rejected Sparta’s offer. They had just scored a major naval victory, and did not want to quit while they were ahead. Twenty-one miserable years later, their legendary navy all but destroyed, they surrendered to Sparta on humiliating terms. The walls of their city were torn down, the fortifications of their port were destroyed, their popular assembly dissolved. Failing to be generous, it turns out, can make quite a difference as well.

Nir Eisikovits, an Israeli attorney, is a post-doctoral fellow at the International Institute for Mediation and Political Conciliation.

More information about Nir Eisikovits
  • subscribe to print magazine

  • Reader Comments

    “Some policy makers argue that images of Palestinians dancing on the roofs of the handsome cottages vacated by the Jews would project Israeli weakness and embolden militants in the West Bank to step up their struggle.”

    Sounds familiar . . . oh yes, kinda like the way Palestinians in Gaza, West Bank and Patterson, New Jersey were dancing in the streets upon learning of the 9/11/01 attacks on the world trade center.  (Now, if they really understood that the attack was on the Bush and Saud families and not America, I would have supported their celebration).

    “We really and truly welcome you to live among us in peace and security,” he told a stunned Israeli public. Years of suspicion melted away that night.”

    Let’s see, that must have been shortly before Anwar Sadat was assassinated by his own people.

    The problem with gestures of good will from the likes of Sadat (assassinated) and King Hussain is that they don’t speak for the Palestinians (nor their terrorist supporters, Iran), they are not supported by their own people or the majority of the Arab world.

    THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE AND THEIR LEADERSHIP DON’T WANT PEACE WITH ISRAEL AS THEY HAVE DEMONSTRATED 100’S OF TIMES OVER THE LAST 60 YEARS. 

    The best solution Israel is to build a Chinese wall between them and the Palestinians and leave them to fend for themselves.

    Posted by Lefty on Jun 23, 2005 at 10:40 AM

    Lefty,

    *** (Now, if they really understood that the attack was on the Bush and Saud families and not America, I would have supported their celebration).***

    You must be either Howard Dean, bin Landen or Dick Durbin.  Better go get in a little extra flag burning while you can.

    Posted by U Scare Me on Jun 23, 2005 at 11:05 AM

    What amazes me is that, on the on hand, conservatives are all either overt or latent racists and bigots who especially despise Jews, and yet, on the other hand, the Neo-Cons in control of this country and who support the christo-fascist Bush’s administration, are all Jews.

    What on Earth could be a bigger fool than a conservative republican Jew?  To be a fascist in this day is the height of stupidity and greed.  To be a Jewish fascist is a crime of stupidity of such monumental proportions that there could be no forgiveness in this life, or the next.

    Posted by Lefty on Jun 23, 2005 at 1:03 PM

    Hand over the keys..what an appropriate headline when you consider the ruling of the Supreme Court today. What has happened today is another mark on this country.

    Posted by Robin on Jun 23, 2005 at 1:05 PM

    I’ve wondered about this too, but your take on this misses an important point.  As I understand it, nobody wants to hand over the low density Jewish housing.... perhaps the Israelis don’t like the idea of Arabs living in their houses, but what I’ve read suggests that the Arabs don’t want the housing either.... supposedly because they want to and need to build higher density housing.

    Now they may also wish to uproot the symbol reprsented by the settlement architecture… I don’t know.  That wouldn’t be surpising.

    But the fact is that the settlement architecture doesn’t seem very well suited to the intense population density issues of the Gaza, and it carries some pretty nasty memories for the other side. 

    I looked for the article I read in Ha’aretz about this and couldn’t find it.  There seemed to be agreement on both sides that the settlements would be razed. 

    Were the Palestinians just going along with that because they have no choice?  Could be, but they seem to be going along with it for an articulatable reason:  a need for higher density.

    Symbolically it means “tearing down” instead of “building on the past"… but the history of settlement is a long and dishonorable one… it was never a path to co-existence.  No harm in tearing those settlements down.  Those buildings and zones are a poisonous symbol.

    Ah, but you say turn poison into peace?  Well, who are we to say?  I think the intense demand for housing for young families might be a more pressing issue in Gaza than symbolism.

    Posted by M. on Jun 23, 2005 at 3:52 PM
  • extended discussion >>>Continued...

    Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 32 posts.