The Middle East Peace Process is a Charade




Intelligence Squared show

Summary: This event took place at Methodist Central Hall, Westminster on 21st September 2010. Highlights of the debate will be available on this page soon, and full video for our Premium Members will follow soon after. Arguing in favour of the motion are Shlomo Ben-Ami, Mustafa Barghouthi, and Edward Luttwak. Shlomo Ben-Ami believes that there is a very serious asymmetry in the positions of the two parties. Whenever Zionism is faced with the choice of more land without a Jewish majority or less land with Jewish hegemony, they choose the latter. Mustafa Barghouthi states that the talks are taking place between unequal sides. Israel is strong and Palestine is weak; in the absence of any serious international pressure on Israel, the peace process has become the substitute for peace. Edward Luttwak says that throughout history it has been war itself that has brought peace, not Swedish diplomats, US senators and former British prime ministers. The peace process perpetuates the illusion of peace. Arguing against the motion are Manuel Hassassian, Jonathan Paris, and Martin Indyk. Manuel Hassassian concedes that, for some Palestinians, the very idea of making peace with the perpetrators of so much Palestinian bloodshed and misery is hard to fathom, but that without peace, their suffering will only be prolonged. Jonathan Paris is “cautiously optimistic” that, this time round, the peace process has a chance. Among his reasons he lists the threat of Iran, the slowed rate of settlement building under Netanyahu’s government, and the popular support for the peace process among Israelis and Palestinians. Martin Indyk agrees with Luttwak that peace has to come out of the “education of war”, but he says that this is exactly what is happening. He points to certain encouraging new factors in the case for peace, most tellingly an uncharacteristic willingness in right-wing Netanyahu to support the process. First vote: 407 For, 315 Don't know, 332 Against Final vote: 543 For, 521 Against, 40 Don't know The motion is carried by 22 votes