The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Is Not Really About Land. It’s About Religious Discrimination, Intolerance, and Hatred. The Only Way Out: A Novel Approach.
Hopefully the Israeli and Palestinian leaders, including Hamas, will finally face the truth: That their interminable conflict, dating back to biblical times, is exclusively due to their differing, clashing absolutist religions. That their interminable conflict is not really about land. That their interminable conflict is essentially about religious discrimination, intolerance, and hatred, stemming from their holy books, the Old Testament and the Koran.
A true breakthrough will only come when the warring sides admit that problematic, awkward truth. In fact, the reason all “land for peace” negotiations have failed is precisely that the conflict is about their clashing, discriminatory religions, not about land. In fact, if the Israelis were Muslim, or the Palestinians were Jewish, or they were all atheists, would they have a violent conflict today, would there be an irresolvable “land” dispute? Of course not.
The reason peace talks between them have never delved into their conflicting religions is that neither side wants to broach the embarrassing topic of religious discrimination (a violation of modern morality, as stated in the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which all U.N. member nations have undersigned and pledged to uphold). Religious discrimination today is intellectually discredited, being a violation of human rights, whereas in antiquity it was not, being a valued instrument of tribal unity. Since the three monotheistic religions have religious discrimination at their core, in the 21st Century their leaderships want to avoid discussing the topic for fear of losing partial intellectual legitimacy, if not total legitimacy.
There is an escape hatch to their dilemma, however, which the monotheistic religions can avail themselves of in order to at least partially preserve their legitimacy while at the same time removing their historically virulent discriminatory traits. The escape hatch consists of admitting no one knows who transcribed the Bible (on which the Koran is openly based through multiple verses embracing the Bible), no one knows who directly witnessed the events of the Bible, including what happened to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, which is nothing less than the wellspring of the monotheistic religions. At the very least, one can question the veracity of the monotheistic authors of the Old Testament who introduced and institutionalized the concept of religious discrimination. Could they have distorted the word of God to suit their tribalistic feelings and interests?
The Israeli and Palestinian leaders and ordinary citizens should be forced to publicly discuss in live televised broadcasts whether it is illogical or not to believe that God would have a favorite religion or favorite tribe or nation. Is it logical to believe that God would want humans to viciously discriminate on the basis of religion? Are athletes who pray to God to win, or thank God for having scored, being logical? Is it logical for fans to pray for their club’s victory, believing God has favorite fans or sports teams? Is it not much more logical to believe God loves all humans equally, regardless of their nationality or religion or race? And that the holy books of monotheism have some biased passages, misrepresenting God’s words?
Humans are emotional, but clear logic can overwhelm emotions. Multiple live televised debates between Israeli and Palestinian leaders on the validity of their religions’ discriminations could not but end up with much intellectual discrediting of religious discrimination and the validation of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, even among believers.
During the live televised debates, they should recall what happened to Samson and Delilah (Bible’s Old Testament, Judges, 13,14), who both lived in Ashkelon (a town currently near the Israeli-Gaza border) around 1500 BC. Samson, a Jew, saw Delilah, a Palestinian, walking around Ashkelon and fell in love with her beauty. He announced to his parents that he was in love with Delilah and wanted to marry her. His mother objected “Can’t you marry a nice Jewish girl?” Why did Delilah, who happily married Samson, end up being persuaded to betray him and having him killed by her Palestinian countrymen? Simply because he was a Jew, and Palestinians were not Jewish. Who can be proud of continuing that deadly biblical discrimination?
Why, on October 7, 2023, did Hamas target young Israeli boys and girls dancing and having fun at an outdoor music festival, and target nearby kibbutzes with attractive homes and gardens, instead of logically targeting military and civilian infrastructure? Because young Palestinian boys and girls in Gaza can’t go dancing in discos or at outdoor music festivals because of their ultra-puritanical religion dictated by the Koran. Because Israeli girls are not covered and can publicly flirt, while Palestinian girls are covered and not allowed to publicly flirt, because of their religion. No dancing, no dating, so jihad! Because Israelis enjoy having homes with gardens, while the great majority of Gaza’s Palestinians do not, as a consequence of losing their religious wars of aggression against the Israelis in 1948, 1967, and 1973. (It is undisputed that the Israelis never started those wars, only reacted to the attacks. Had the Palestinians and their Arab allies never attacked Israel, no Palestinians would have been displaced, losing their homes and ending up living in Lebanon and Gaza. The Palestinian “Nakba” of 1948 was the predictable and entirely normal result of that lost war of aggression, intended to prevent the Israeli state from coming into being. A precedent: Germany lost territory after its defeat in World War II, with many Germans losing their properties, but accepted those losses as reasonable given that Germany was the aggressor.)
Historically, the Palestinians never had their own nation, and lived peacefully governed by the Turks for centuries under the Ottoman Empire. Why peacefully? Because the Turks were Muslim, like they were. Under the British Mandate, after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I, the League of Nations devised a “Partition” plan to divide the Ottoman province of Palestine (Judea and Samaria were renamed Palestine by the Romans after driving out the Jews in 80 AD) into one third for a Jewish state (justified because of centuries of pervasive anti-Semitism and pogroms culminating in the Holocaust, not because of the Old Testament, as the Israelis should finally realize: that makes a big difference, since a justification based on documented history is objective, strong and cannot be denied, whereas a justification based on a holy book is biased and therefore weak), and two thirds for a Palestinian state. There was plenty of land for both states. No Palestinian property was to be expropriated. No Palestinians were to be displaced. There was to be no law preventing Jews from living and owning land in the Palestinian state, and no law preventing Palestinians from living and owning land in the Jewish state. Why were the Palestinians and their Arab allies against the “Partition” plan? Why did they object to living together and side by side with Jews? Only because the Koran incites extreme hatred and violence against Jews, purely as religious discrimination.
Examples of the Koran’s incitements to hatred and violence against non-Muslims and Jews in particular: 1) Surah II,89: “Allah’s curse is on the unbelievers.” 2) Surah II,90: “…so they have made themselves deserving of wrath upon wrath, and there is a disgraceful punishment for the unbelievers.” 3) Surah II,98: “Allah is the enemy of the unbelievers.” 4) Surah II,178: ”O you who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you.” 5) Surah II,191: “…kill them wherever you find them… slay them…such is the recompense of the unbelievers.” 6) Surah II,193: “…religion should be only for Allah…” 7) Surah III,151: “We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve.” 8) Surah IV,89: “They desire that you disbelieve… seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or helper.” 9) Surah II,211: “Ask the Israelites how many a clear sign We have given them; and whoever changes the favor of Allah after it has come to him, then surely Allah is severe in requiting evil.” 10) Surah III,10: “As for those who disbelieve… these it is who are the fuel of the fire.” 11) Surah IV,46: “Of those who are Jews… Allah has cursed them on account of their unbelief.” 12) Surah IV,140: “Surely Allah will gather… the unbelievers in Hell.” 13) Surah V,41: “We believe and their hearts do not believe, and from among them who are Jews… those are they for whom Allah does not desire that He should purify their hearts; they shall have disgrace in this world, and they shall have a grievous chastisement in the hereafter.” 14) Surah IX, 29–30: “Fight those who do not believe in Allah… may Allah destroy them.” 15) Surah XXII, 19–21: “…as to those who disbelieve, for them are cut out garments of fire; boiling water shall be poured over their heads… And for them are whips of iron.”
Why are extremist religious Israelis intent on claiming all of the West Bank, destined to be part of a Palestinian state under the Partition Plan? Because of the Bible’s Old Testament, where it is written that God promised the biblical land of Israel to all the Jewish descendants of Abraham, so long as the males showed their love for God by being circumcised. (Old Testament, Genesis:15,17: God made a covenant with Abraham with these words: “I give this land to your descendants, from the river of Egypt to the river Euphrates… I give you and your descendants all the land of Canaan in perpetuity, and I will be their God… As for your side of the covenant, you and all your male descendants shall be circumcised; you shall cut off your foreskins, which shall be the sign of the covenant between us.”) Is it credible that God wanted cut-off foreskins as a sign of love and devotion, an essential element of the covenant? Is it logical in the 21stCentury to be guided by that passage in the Old Testament, which takes place around 2000 BC? Where is the proof of that promise to Abraham? A biblical text written by anonymous authors is to be believed as God’s will, rather than simply a transparently biased transcription by unknown writers?
Extremist religious Israelis are also driven by the biblical assertion that Jews are God’s “chosen people”, a highly offensive assertion for non-Jews, just as highly offensive for non-Muslims is the Koran’s assertion that religion is only for Allah and that non-Muslims, the “infidels”, should be hunted down, tortured and killed by Muslims here on Earth, and will then be tortured by Allah for eternity in Hell. In the Old Testament’s Deuteronomy: 7, Moses told the Israelites: “When the Lord brings you into the land [of Israel] that you are about to enter and occupy, and he clears away many nations before you -the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations mightier and more numerous than you- and when your God gives them over to you and you defeat them, then you must utterly destroy them. Make no covenant with them and show them no mercy. Do not intermarry with them for that would turn away your children from following Him, to serve other gods, otherwise the anger of God will rise against you and destroy you. This is how you must deal with them: smash and burn their altars… For you are the people holy to the Lord your God who has chosen you out of all the peoples of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.” A perfect biblical justification for Israel to take over the entire West Bank and Gaza, while expelling all Palestinians. As is Numbers:33.50–56, where God tells Moses “But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then those whom you let remain shall be, as barbs in your eyes and thorns in your sides; they shall trouble you in the land where you are settling.”
To be fair, and not point the finger at only the Old Testament and the Koran, the Bible’s New Testament also discriminates on the basis of religion, as Jesus Christ commanded in Matthew:10 “Go nowhere among the Gentiles…” and explained that all humans who do not believe in Him will not be admitted to Heaven, thereby encouraging Christians to be violent and discriminate against non-Christians, saying “Everyone who acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. But whoever denies me before others, I also will deny before my Father in heaven.” And of those who do not welcome His followers, “Truly, I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the Day of Judgment than for [them]”. In Matthew:12 “…whoever speaks against the Holy Ghost will not be forgiven, either in this time or in times to come.” In Matthew:15 Jesus makes clear that he is only interested in His people, the Jews of Israel, not in any other people, saying “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” In Matthew:13 Jesus told his disciples that He would “send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth”, establishing the limits of Christian mercy and introducing the eternal torture of humans in Hell, which clearly inspired many Christians to engage in torture themselves (e.g., the Inquisition, pogroms and the Holocaust, prisoners of war, political prisoners).
In Matthew:24 Jesus validates slavery, which was institutionalized and codified by Moses in the Old Testament (e.g., Exodus:12; Deuteronomy:5.14 and 5.21 and 15.12 and 21.14; Leviticus:19.20 and 25.6 and 25.39 and 25.42 and 25.44), by justifying extreme punishment of misbehaving slaves, saying “the master … will cut the wicked slave in pieces and put him with the hypocrites where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Jesus’ validation of slavery explains the contradiction between the Declaration of Independence (“all men are created equal, with the unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”) and the fact that slavery persisted in the United States for over half a century after the Declaration. The sad historical irony is that American slaves were Christians, venerating Moses and Jesus. Had Jesus asserted that slavery was immoral, American Christians would never have had slaves, there never would have been slavery in any Christian society. Jesus took the time to ban divorce, but not slavery. The thinking among Christian slave owners must have been: if slavery is OK with God, Moses, and Jesus, it’s OK with us.
Given the strong attachment and even fanaticism of many believers, it takes courage to objectively analyze the monotheistic religions, to point out what does not make sense, what is clearly religious bias and discrimination, and what violates various other human rights. Nevertheless, the Israelis and Palestinians must decide whether they want their murderous religious conflict to continue for eternity, or whether they want to embrace modern morality and the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, ditching the belief that God has a favorite religion and favorite tribe, and whether they want to fully reconcile and enjoy prosperity together in a lasting peace.
What about all the victims and suffering due to religious discrimination across centuries following the biblical recounts of storied conflicts between Israelites and Palestinians, e.g., Samson and Delilah (1500 BC) and David and Goliath (1000 BC, David a Jew, Goliath a Palestinian)? Was it all a tragic mistake? Can the Israelis and Palestinians admit it was indeed all a tragic mistake? That’s what would probably come out in multiple long, live televised debates on the Old Testamentand the Koran between Israelis and Palestinians, leading to a lasting peace, prosperity, and real friendship. Who will have the courage to suggest and promote such televised debates? Who will propose that the Israelis and Palestinians hold simultaneous parallel referendums, to determine if the majority on both sides wants an end of the conflict, sustained peace and reconciliation, and the removal of extremists from their governments? If not some courageous, perspicacious, open-minded leaders of the warring sides, then why not the United Nations, or some enlightened political leaders of the Western democracies? Or is the 21st Century to remain dominated by the illogical, unverified, discriminatory monotheistic holy books of antiquity, even as we plan to go to Mars, using logic?
For how much longer will the Israelis and Palestinians prefer to adhere to the religious discrimination and hatred of their holy books with consequent violence and multiple wars, instead of to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with consequent sustained peace, true friendship, and mutual prosperity? They both need to become introspective and objective, brutally honest with themselves. And empathetic.
Not to be forgotten: after World War II, no one expected Germany to fully reject Nazism and become a peaceful, honorable member of the European Union, a defender of democracy and human rights. Eventually, even the most problematic nations come to their senses and see the light. (Today, however, the USA seems headed in the wrong direction with the Republican Party being increasingly dominated by Evangelical Christians echoing Moses’ condemnation of homosexuality (though thankfully not also of non-virgin brides), and enamored of a sinful, dishonest, boorish, fascistic, corrupt demagogue, betrayer of the Constitution, admirer of dictators and human rights violators he clearly would want to emulate. The paradox is they seem to ignore that Jesus Christ would most probably not admit such an individual to Heaven, and certainly not consider him a good Christian. Some of those Evangelicals even believe the demagogue they love was sent by God, the implication being that they would not care if elections were dispensed with. Who needs elections when God is sending His king to be the leader? That’s all a demagogue needs to justify ditching democracy and becoming a dictator.)
To hasten the end of atrocities and human rights violations worldwide, the civilized world must forcefully condemn and oppose all countries, organizations and groups which violate the United Nations’ Charter and its Universal Declaration of Human Rights, while enjoining the United Nations to rigorously enforce its regulations and principles, even by expelling member nations from the Security Council, in order to regain the respect and credibility it has lost since shortly after its foundation in 1948. Inexplicably, the UN has not even enforced a simple but crucially important regulation, the obligation for all member nations to teach the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to all their citizens.
© Edward Sonnino 2024
January 18, 2024
