Beyond the Headlines: A Compassionate Look at Middle Eastern Complexity and What Can Be Done Next

From my mom on October 7, 2023:

Hamas attacked Israel. The bombs are falling very close to where M lives. E is in touch with R. All 4 kids got pulled into the army. R is on reserve. Many hostages taken, many civilians killed including children in their beds. Remains to be seen how Israel will retaliate.

In the coming days, I had more questions than I found answers online and in the news. Days went by, and I didn’t much nuance or context. Understandably, as a terrorist attack that kills hundreds of civilians is not usually a time to slow down and weigh nuance.

But I am not in the military or government leadership.

I simply have family there, and I simply am human. So I wanted to take a broader view, in order to calm my nerves.

Approaching the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with empathy, let’s venture beyond overly simple narratives. This inquiry aims to embrace complexity without rushing to judgment, and seeks understanding over immediate conclusions.

Let’s step into the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian story with hearts open to the human behind every action, remembering that pain touches all and we all carry grief unequally, historically, and unequivocally. I asked these questions without need for quick answers, and with listening turned way up.

Below the main text, you’ll find a bodymind practice to help integrate this particular complexity, chosen to align with the themes of this conflict.

Q: From an integral perspective that honors number of perspectives and altitude of development, what are the most relevant perspectives involved in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict?

I imagine: Israeli government, the Israelis, Global Jews, Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank, Muslim perspectives, and Hamas. Who or what else?

Please give a gentle and nuanced point of view from each point of view, how they see it, what they want, and why.

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is one of the most complex and long-standing political conflicts in the world. An integrative approach that honors multiple perspectives and altitudes of development is essential to understand the multifaceted nature of the conflict. Here’s a nuanced overview of the perspectives you’ve mentioned, along with a few additional ones:

Israeli Government:

• View: Israel sees itself as the only Jewish state in the world, and the Israeli government often emphasizes its need to ensure the security of its citizens. They see the conflict as one where they are surrounded by hostile neighbors.
• Wants: Security for its citizens, recognition by all neighboring countries, and a peaceful resolution that ensures the Jewish character of the state.
• Why: Historical persecution of Jews, the trauma of the Holocaust, and the belief in the historic and religious connection to the land.

The Israelis:

• View: There’s a diversity of views among Israelis, ranging from those who support a two-state solution, to those who believe in a greater Israel, to others who advocate for a single binational state.
• Wants: Primarily, security and peace. Some also want more integration with Palestinians, while others want separation.
• Why: Daily experiences of conflict, mandatory military service, and a shared national narrative.

Global Jews:

• View: Varies widely. Some diaspora Jews feel a deep connection to Israel and its security, while others are critical of Israeli policies.
• Wants: Often, a peaceful resolution to the conflict and security for Israel. Some also advocate for Palestinian rights.
• Why: Historical and cultural ties to Israel, religious beliefs, and the global Jewish experience.

Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank:

• View: Many see themselves as living under occupation, facing daily hardships and restrictions on movement and economic opportunities.
• Wants: An independent Palestinian state, end of occupation, and the right to return for refugees.
• Why: Historical connection to the land, daily experiences under occupation, and a national narrative of displacement and resistance.

Muslim Perspective:

• View: Many Muslims around the world feel solidarity with the Palestinians due to shared religion and see the conflict as a struggle against occupation and for self-determination.
• Wants: End of Israeli occupation, protection of Islamic holy sites, and justice for Palestinians.
• Why: Religious ties, shared cultural narratives, and geopolitical interests.

Hamas:

• View: Views Israel as an occupying force and has historically rejected its right to exist. However, there have been nuances and changes in its stance over time.
• Wants: End of Israeli occupation, establishment of an Islamic state, and the right of return for Palestinian refugees.
• Why: Ideological beliefs, resistance against perceived aggression, and the desire for political leadership among Palestinians.

Palestinian Authority (PA):

• View: Recognizes Israel and seeks a two-state solution based on pre-1967 borders.
• Wants: A sovereign Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital.
• Why: Desire for self-determination, end of occupation, and international recognition.

International Community:

• View: Varies by country, but generally sees the need for a peaceful resolution, often favoring a two-state solution.
• Wants: Stability in the Middle East, security for Israel, and justice and statehood for Palestinians.
• Why: Geopolitical interests, humanitarian concerns, and historical ties to the region.

Arab Neighboring Countries:

• View: Historically, many have supported the Palestinian cause, but views are changing, especially with recent normalization agreements with Israel.
• Wants: Stability in the region, resolution of the refugee crisis, and often, a Palestinian state.
• Why: Geopolitical interests, shared Arab identity, and historical conflicts with Israel.

It’s crucial to note that within each of these broad perspectives, there are diverse views and opinions. The above overview is a simplification and aims to highlight some of the primary perspectives and motivations. The conflict’s resolution would ideally come from recognizing and integrating these diverse perspectives into a coherent and shared future vision.

Q: In the news just days ago, Hamas attacked Israel from gaza, and killed over 1000 israelis. Israel has declared war. Please give a nuanced view of what could be done now to optimize for human life and peace, from each of the 9 points of view.

The scenario you’ve described is a tragic escalation in the conflict, and it’s important to approach it with sensitivity and care. Here’s a nuanced view from each of the perspectives mentioned, focusing on optimizing for human life and peace:

Israeli Government:

• Optimal Action: Ceasefire negotiations to prevent further loss of life, while ensuring security measures to prevent future attacks. Engage in diplomatic talks with international and regional actors to mediate a longer-term peace agreement.

The Israelis:

• Optimal Action: Advocate for peace and security measures that prioritize human life. Grassroots movements could engage in dialogue with Palestinian counterparts to foster understanding and cooperation. Support humanitarian aid to affected areas.

Global Jews:

• Optimal Action: Advocate for a peaceful resolution that prioritizes human life. Provide support and humanitarian aid to affected Israelis. Encourage dialogue within Jewish communities worldwide to understand the complexities of the situation and promote solutions based on mutual respect and understanding.

Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank:

• Optimal Action: Encourage non-violent resistance and dialogue with Israeli counterparts. Support local NGOs providing medical and humanitarian aid. Advocate for international mediation to ensure an immediate ceasefire and longer-term peace efforts.

Muslim Perspective:

• Optimal Action: Advocate for an immediate ceasefire and humanitarian assistance. Engage in diplomatic pressure on both sides to prioritize peace and the sanctity of human life. Protect Islamic holy sites and ensure they are not used in the conflict.

Hamas:

• Optimal Action: Agree to an immediate ceasefire and engage in diplomatic negotiations. Refrain from launching attacks that lead to civilian casualties. Engage with regional and international actors to mediate a longer-term peace agreement, focusing on Palestinian rights and statehood.

Palestinian Authority (PA):

• Optimal Action: Engage in diplomatic efforts to mediate a ceasefire. Coordinate with international actors for humanitarian aid. Advocate for the rights of the Palestinian people and push for a longer-term peace agreement based on mutual respect and understanding.

International Community:

• Optimal Action: Use diplomatic channels to push for an immediate ceasefire. Provide humanitarian aid to affected areas. Offer to mediate peace talks and ensure that both sides are represented fairly. Place emphasis on a solution that ensures human rights, security, and peace for both Palestinians and Israelis.

Arab Neighboring Countries:

• Optimal Action: Engage diplomatically with both sides to push for a ceasefire. Offer mediation and support for peace talks. Provide humanitarian support to affected areas. Use regional influence to advocate for a lasting solution that respects the rights and aspirations of both Palestinians and Israelis.

In all scenarios, prioritizing human life, respecting human rights, and focusing on long-term peace and understanding should be the ultimate goals. Immediate action should be taken to stop the loss of life, followed by measures to address the root causes of the conflict and ensure a sustainable peace.

Q: What is the healthy role, and the unhealthy role, of the Israel military, or any military, when a terrorist group that doesn’t necessarily represent the country (Hamas and Gaza) attacks a sovereign state’s people (Israel)? How could military response go well? How could it go badly? Give examples of both from history.

The role of a military, especially when facing non-state actors or terrorist groups, is complex. The primary objective of any military is to ensure the security of its nation and citizens. However, the methods used can vary, and they can result in different outcomes, both positive and negative.

Healthy Role of the Military:

Defensive Measures: The primary role should be to defend its citizens from attacks. This can include intercepting incoming rockets, protecting borders, and ensuring the safety of its population.

• Historical Example: Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system has successfully intercepted numerous rockets fired from Gaza, preventing significant civilian casualties.

Targeted Response: If a response is deemed necessary, it should be proportionate and targeted, aimed at neutralizing specific threats rather than causing broad destruction.

• Historical Example: The targeted killing of Osama bin Laden by U.S. Navy SEALs was aimed at eliminating the leadership of Al-Qaeda without causing widespread destruction.

Intelligence Gathering: Effective intelligence work can preemptively thwart terrorist activities, arrest key figures, and break up plots before they come to fruition.

Collaboration: Working with international partners and allies to share intelligence, understand the broader geopolitical context, and coordinate responses can be more effective.

Avoiding Civilian Casualties: Taking measures to avoid or minimize civilian casualties, even in combat zones, by using precise weaponry or warning civilians before strikes.

Unhealthy Role of the Military:

Disproportionate Response: Overreacting to a threat can lead to significant civilian casualties, further radicalization, and international condemnation.

• Historical Example: The heavy bombardment of Gaza in various conflicts has often resulted in significant civilian casualties, leading to international criticism and further radicalization.

Occupation: Long-term occupation of territories can lead to resentment, guerilla warfare, and prolonged conflicts.

• Historical Example: The U.S. occupation of Iraq post-2003 led to the rise of insurgent groups and eventually ISIS.

Torture and Human Rights Violations: Using torture or violating human rights can lead to international condemnation, erode moral authority, and often does not yield reliable intelligence.

• Historical Example: The Abu Ghraib prison scandal during the Iraq War severely tarnished the U.S.’s reputation and its mission in Iraq.

Lack of Transparency: Not being transparent about military actions, especially when civilians are harmed, can erode trust both domestically and internationally.

Ignoring Underlying Causes: Focusing solely on military solutions without addressing the root causes of radicalization or conflict can perpetuate a cycle of violence.

How Military Response Could Go Well:

• Clear Objectives: Having a clear, achievable goal for any military action.
• Proportionality: Ensuring that any response is proportionate to the threat.
• Engaging Diplomatically: Using military action as one tool among many, and always looking for diplomatic solutions.

How Military Response Could Go Badly:

• Escalation: A disproportionate or heavy-handed response can escalate the situation.
• Civilian Casualties: Not taking enough care to avoid civilian casualties can lead to further radicalization and international condemnation.
• Ignoring Diplomacy: Focusing solely on military solutions without engaging in diplomatic efforts.

In any conflict, especially one as complex as that between Israel and Hamas, there are no easy solutions. Military actions, while sometimes necessary for immediate defense, often come with long-term consequences. Balancing immediate security needs with long-term peace objectives is a challenging task for any nation.

Q: Given all this, what I Ching Hexagram would be most opening and relevant for a human suffering, witnessing or participating in this terrible conflict?

The I Ching, or “Book of Changes,” is an ancient Chinese divination text that uses a system of hexagrams to offer wisdom and guidance. Each hexagram is composed of six lines, either broken or unbroken, representing yin and yang, respectively. There are 64 hexagrams in total, each with its unique interpretation.

When considering the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, or any significant conflict, the most appropriate hexagram would ideally reflect the complexity of the situation, the need for understanding, the importance of balance, and the hope for a peaceful resolution.

One hexagram that might be particularly relevant is Hexagram 11, T’ai (Peace or Harmony).

Hexagram 11: T’ai (Peace or Harmony)

Image: Heaven and Earth unite: the image of Peace. Thus, the ruler divides and completes the course of heaven and earth; He furthers and regulates the gifts of heaven and earth and so aids the people.

Interpretation: T’ai indicates a time of harmony and peace, where opposing forces are balanced and integrated. It suggests that a time of conflict or difficulty can be followed by a period of balance and harmony if the right actions are taken. The hexagram underscores the importance of leadership, understanding, and unity in achieving lasting peace.

In the context of witnessing or participating in a significant conflict:

• T’ai could serve as a reminder of the inherent balance in nature and the universe, suggesting that even in times of extreme strife, there’s potential for harmony.
• It underscores the importance of understanding and integrating opposing views rather than suppressing or dominating them.
• It reminds individuals to strive for peace in their personal lives and the broader community.
• It encourages leaders to work toward unity, balance, and the greater good.

Read more on the details of these patterns at Visionary I Ching.

This bodymind practice takes us right into the healing and creative benefits of the 11th Hexagram, which reflects fundamental archetypal psychological, social and societal patterns. We’re all suffering. There’s more potential.

How: If you’re called, set a timer and give yourself 6 minutes with this practice at a minimum. If you do up to 6 rounds of 6 minutes each, I find maximum benefit begins on the 3rd round of 6 minutes. By that point, surface emotions will have been acknowledged and deeper insights can begin to emerge.

What else?

What do you think? What’s your story? What’s your vision for a better world?