Peres’s legacy of an expectant faith in peace

He was Israel’s driver of the Oslo Accords with the Palestinians, which offered a model for Colombia’s peace process. Can Colombia’s peace pact now be a model for Israel?

AP Photo
In this 2001 photo, the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, right, shakes hands with then-Foreign Minister Shimon Peres of Israel in Gaza.

Few conflicts have lasted for generations like the one between Israelis and Palestinians. Despair remains high over ending their hostility. But this was not the case for Shimon Peres. The former Israeli leader was a key architect of the 1993 Oslo Accords. While that pact eventually failed, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate always pointed to other conflicts, such as the one in Northern Ireland, that ended through a recognition by each side of the other’s dignity and interests.

Three years before his death on Sept. 28, Mr. Peres met with Colombia's president, Juan Manuel Santos, to learn of that country's negotiations at ending a war that had lasted for half a century. Colombia’s eventual peace pact, which aims to end a civil war over ideology, is not an exact model to help Israelis and Palestinians. Their differences are rooted in religion, ethnicity, and historical grievances. Yet the Colombian process holds at least one important lesson: The first task is to break from the mental despair over what seems like endless violence. And if Peres was known for one thing, it was his perpetual search for opportunities of compromise and to see enemies as potential partners for peace.

In one respect, the Oslo peace process was a model for Colombia’s. Only after the Israeli military struck hard against a Palestinian uprising (intifada) in the late 1980s was there an opening for talks. Mr. Santos, when he was Colombia's defense minister, also struck down the leadership of the armed leftist rebels called the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). Like Israel, Colombia could not claim ultimate victory. But the ground was set for talks. The two sides were ready to tackle issues such as land restitution and disarmament.

For Peres, Israel had to be able to trade land for peace and to accept a pacified Palestinian state. This “two-state solution” now seems distant. Yet the logic of the Oslo pact remains: Israel’s long-range security rests on making peace with its neighbors, as it has already done with Egypt and Jordan. Its military superiority in the Middle East is not assured forever. Peaceful relations are a far better fortress and deterrence than nuclear weapons.

Peres often talked of the need for a “quantum leap” in Israel’s hope and quest for peace. In its talks with FARC rebels, Colombia was able to make such a leap, helping it to find the right balance between demands for justice and demands for mercy and freedom.

Such decisions are not always made easier by fatigue over war but rather by a faith that peace could be the norm. For many Israelis as well as Palestinians, Peres leaves a legacy of such a faith.

[Editor's note: An earlier version mistakenly referred to Peres meeting Santos in Colombia. The meeting took place in Jerusalem.]

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.