ars-et-saliva



david p. eiser

zeitraffer




Why there will be no peace in the Middle East until…


Achieving peace as a satisfactory final resolution to a conflict is only possible if the conflicting parties
are willing to align their descriptions of the dispute. Afterward, within the framework of moderated
negotiations — in which, if necessary, compensatory measures must be taken into account — a vision
for the future that is desirable for both sides can be developed.

Note:
As long as the descriptions of the dispute do not coincide, the conflict cannot be resolved.

Example:
The Palestinians say: We are only defending our land, where we have been settled for centuries.
The Israelis say: We are defending our land, which was given to us by God.
The problem lies in the fact that one and the same object (the “land of Palestine”) has, for one party,
been “the land of their birth and their fathers” for centuries, while for the other party it has become
“the land of their refuge,” into which they were not welcomed but — from the perspective of the local
population — have invaded.

The great art of the peacemaker lies in either resolving this discrepancy or treating it as an insignifi-
cant side issue alongside a successful alternative solution.

Consensus does not arise spontaneously on its own but must be painstakingly worked out by both
parties. Whether this process will succeed after nearly a century of struggle remains doubtful; for
after such a long time, it must be assumed that both parties have become entrenched in their views
and, out of fear of loss and hatred accumulated over generations, are no longer capable of extri-
cating themselves from this vicious cycle without outside help.

After all these decades of cyclical repetitions of aggression and defense, reconstruction and destruc-
tion, the question should finally arise as to whether there is not a way to address the root causes
of this monstrous conflict in order to then develop a solution.

This is where the peacemaker’s work begins: by overcoming symptomatic obstacles through a deep
dive into the search for causes.

The root of the Middle East conflict lies in the fact that, following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire
— and particularly after the Holocaust — Jewish Europeans were offered by the  former League of
Nations (today the UN) the opportunity to emigrate to Palestine to build  a new life there, on what
had formerly been Ottoman territory.
This opportunity suddenly seemed to many like a gift from heaven. (The idea had already been pro-
posed by representatives of Zionism at the end of the 19th century.)

In 1920, the League of Nations assumed the right to place the Middle Eastern territories of the former
Ottoman Empire under French and British mandates, naturally without asking the local population
whether they agreed to this.

As a reminder:
2026 © GRA Foundation Against Racism and Anti-Semitism:
In 1947, the UN General Assembly resolved to partition Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab
state.
The tragedy of the Middle East conflict lies in the fact that Zionism represented a national
liberation movement for the Jews immigrating to Palestine and a European colonial move-
ment
for the indigenous Arab population.
Unfortunately, the immigrants also did not deem it necessary to ask the inhabitants whether they
were welcome there and whether and where there were opportunities to build a house, lay out a
garden, a field, a road, etc. Unfortunately, they shamelessly disregarded generally accepted social
norms and, in some cases using brute force, robbery, and murder (to this very day), sought out and
took possession of the places they deemed suitable for their lives.

This did not go unprotested by the local population and soon led to bitter backlash, which escalated
into the First Arab-Israeli War, which ultimately ended with the Israeli Declaration of Independence
in 1948.

Since then, the ongoing Israeli-Arab conflict has shaken not only Palestine but the entire Middle
East, where Arabs have declared their solidarity with the Palestinians and developed a unified,
oppositional foreign policy stance to make it clear to the prosperous and intransigent State of Israel
that its existence in its current form is not welcome there.

As a result, Israel is surrounded by states that are not favorably disposed toward it.
This includes Iran.

There is no neutral, objective authority that could mediate here without reservation. The UN,
through its hitherto ineffective involvement in the Arab-Israeli conflict, has shown no real willing-
ness to help or attempted to exert pressure on the contending parties and their supporters to final-
ly put an end to these cyclical states of war. However, there is no alternative but to compel the UN
to fulfill its role as a supranational protector and ensure law and order, so that one of the greatest
hotbeds of crisis on this planet may finally find peace.

Without this external intervention, it is highly likely that the parties to the conflict will con-
tinue to be unable to overcome their humiliation and hatred in the future.

The United Nations, as the successor to the League of Nations, and Great Britain, as the former
Mandatory Power, must admit that they made a grave mistake at the time and agree to take respon-
sibility for the consequences.
Israel must face charges for its uninvited presence and the resulting unlawful conduct (land grabbing,
expulsion, oppression, murders…) and make reparations possible.
As a powerful state, Israel  can be expected to take such a step without harming the state.

Following a process of reparations, a decisive plea must be made:
“Dear Palestinians, given the geographical conditions, we have no choice but to live together in a
secular state where democratic principles apply to all citizens without distinction; for a two-state
solution in which the second state consists of two separate territories accessible only via
foreign territory is not a conflict-free solution. The era of ethnocracies is over.

Only by acting and working together can we achieve a peaceful and prosperous future".

If such a state of affairs could be achieved, the root causes of the conflict would finally be addressed
and transformed into positive forces. And there would no longer be any reason for the surrounding
countries to fight in solidarity with Palestine against Israel.
Neither for Iran nor for its proxy forces in Lebanon or Yemen, nor for the other Arab states.

At the same time, this could become an excellent foundation for the formation of a common eco-
nomic zone between Turkey, Iran, and Arabia, open to additional members, similar to our Europe
today.

That would be a true goal of peace, worthy of a corresponding Nobel Prize.
What has happened so far has been a futile attempt to treat annoying symptoms.
Experience shows that this does not help with any serious illness. Apparently, there are also chronic
political ailments.
But they, too, can be cured.


© David P. Eiser
Apr 2026




home