For most conflicts, there are two sides that demonize each other while declaring their way is not only right, but the only option that should be considered. There are also usually outsiders who are drawn into the conflict and made to pick one side or the other to support. This is how conflicts can grow exponentially and cause much destruction. The ethno-religious conflict between Israel and Palestine is no different, in that each side has a unique point of view that reduces the "other" to less than human as one way to justify their violent acts.
Mark Juergensmeyer writes two chapters in his book, Terror in the Mind of God, that allows the reader to see the justification behind the Israeli side but also from the Palestinian side. To ensure accurate information he interviews several leaders in each camp and also tells a bit of their history. The reader also learns that the conflict is not as simple as Israeli vs. Palestinian, but within each of these nationalistic groups are subgroups that cause conflict within each country. The dispute is much more complex than a simple land compromise could solve. Religion, nationality, politics, and culture are all intertwined and violence is the result.
At this point, I think that Juergensmeyer does a good job portraying both sides to have internal logical rationale that justifies their actions (at least in their mind). Using examples such as Yoel Lerner, Rabbi Meir Kahane, and Baruch Goldstein to give insight into the Jewish mindset allows the reader to see that "the Jewish faith is inextricably linked with the land, and how the liberation of the land is a prerequisite to spiritual liberation." (53) On the other side, interviewing Mahmud Abouhalima, Abdul Aziz Rantisi, and Sheik Yassin showed that the Muslim side held their beliefs firmly saying that "acts of self-martyrdom- the suicide bombings- were allowed only in the response to these and other specific acts of violence from the Israeli side, acts that frequently affected innocent civilians." (75) Neither side is willing to compromise, because at this point, a compromise might as well be a loss; not to mention how much time, energy, and life has already been given to this conflict.
In psychology, a personal investment model might be used to describe why the tensions have not ceased between Israelis and Palestinians. According to this model, the more that someone has personally invested in a situation or conflict, the less likely they are to back out or settle for less than was originally thought to be possible. This model applies to gambling, some relationships, and many other situations in our daily lives. Things might not be going well but we will continue to suffer because we feel that we lose all the we put into the situation by quitting or stopping. I think this model applies to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because both sides have years and years given to this dispute so each side wishes to see it to the end and make sure that the end result is in their favor
I think its really valuable that we're coming from different perspectives, in terms of major. These conflicts have so much to do with psychology that its interesting to see what psychological concepts correlate to them. It definitely adds to the analysis and discussion on how to understand all aspects of religious conflict.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Matt that it is very important to understand and analyze the perspectives of each side in a conflict. It often shows, as it does in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that the cause/reasons for conflict lie mush deeper then what is seen on the surface. Additionally, I think that the psychological perspective Matt provides is very important to consider as well. When you put the psychological investement of the thousands of years these religions have been in existence, that adds some serious fuel to the fire.
ReplyDelete