Visualizing World Peace

September 13th: Ki Tetze
THIS WEEK IN THE TORAH
Rabbi David E. Ostrich

“Oseh shalom bim’romav Hu ya’aseh shalom alaynu v’al kol Yisra’el v’al kol yosh’vay tevel.
May the One Who makes peace in the high heavens make peace for us, for all Israel,
and for all who dwell on earth.” 
World peace is a holy aspiration—a prayer and a sacred dream. We hope with all our hearts and souls that yam’lich Malchutay, that God’s peace will soon reign.  

World peace, however, is not a plan. It is not a policy. Between the dream and the reality, there are thousands of steps, plans, and policies—and it is worthwhile keeping this difference in mind. It is not a matter of visualizing world peace. It is a matter of figuring out, step by step, how we get to our goal. We also have to figure out how to get everyone else to work with us. 

As heirs of the Prophets, certain aspirations resonate in our souls.
“And they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. 
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they study war.”
(Micah 4.3)
There is an element of messianism and utopianism in our faith—and we treasure it. And yet, the realities of life mean that this must be, for now, a distant dream. Our hopeful souls need to remember the many and challenging intermediate steps, and this week’s Torah portion comes with what we could call a reality check. 

Ki Tetze is concerned with dozens of difficult moments in life—situations that are messy and in which practicality and base instinct come face to face with the Torah’s hope for morality and holiness. Just look at the opening words, “When you go forth to war against your enemies…” (Deuteronomy 21.10) War! When war happens, it is serious business. Those other guys are trying to kill us—and perhaps our families and our future, too. 

Today, Israel—and in some ways the entire Jewish people—is at war. Terrible things are happening, and the hopeful among us often express their dreams for tranquility and love with utopian terms—terms like World Peace and Two State Solution. They are lovely sentiments, but is either a plan? The Two State Solution may be the obvious and long-term solution to the Arab-Israel Conflict, but it is not a policy—an actual possibility for this time. There is a big difference between utopian hopes and the current reality, and the recent and utterly gratuitous execution of Israeli hostages in Gaza is just a drop in a bucket of woe. 

If there is to be a Two State Solution, then there needs to be a polity of Arabs willing to step forward and constructively build it. There must be, in other words, Partners for Peace. When I usually hear this phrase, it is in the negative sense—and usually spoken by Benjamin Netanyahu. When he says, “There are no Partners for Peace,” some people hear this as an illustration of his intransigence and refusal to acknowledge the peoplehood and rights of the Palestinians. He is seen by many as a roadblock to any progress. Others, however, hear his words as exactly what he is saying: that there are no Arabs willing to step forward and make peace and build peace and preserve peace. I am neither a defender nor endorser of Mr. Netanyahu—or his politics or his military strategy, but, in this case, I wonder if he may know what he is talking about. 

There have been a few Arab leaders who wanted to work with Israel and build peace, but most of them are dead—murdered or maimed by other Arabs or Muslims who hate Jews more than they love the Palestinian future. Over the years, it has been very dangerous for Palestinian leaders to be too friendly with Israel, and this, according to many observers, is why Yasser Arafat refused land-for-peace offers that were 96% of what he demanded. Making peace with Israel would have put his life in danger—not from Jews but from more radical Arabs. So, whether we like Bibi or not, we need to answer the question: Are there Arab partners for peace? 

This is not a matter of a utopian vision; it is a practical matter of building and supporting a peaceful Palestinian State. By the way, simply speaking of a Palestinian State is not enough. For Israel’s existence, it must be a peaceful and cooperative Palestinian State, and a lot of people are waiting for the partners for peace to appear. Will they bravely step up and try to save their people from perpetual war—and will they survive to see it through? 

Let us not forget that Gaza is and has been an independent Palestinian State since 2005. From 2005 until now, the only times Israel has attacked Gaza have been in response to Hamas missile attacks or armed incursions from autonomous Palestinian Gaza into Israel. Remember that a cease-fire was in effect up until the moment Hamas launched its murderous and barbaric attack last October. Can anyone really think that Hamas—or Hezbollah or Islamic Jihad or even the terrorist-filled Palestinian Authority—are actual partners for peace? 

When we look at the latest outrage—the senseless and wanton execution of six Israeli hostages, we feel grief and anger and utter exasperation. But, we should not be surprised. The people who run and support Hamas are not good people. They are not merely people with different opinions. They are people who hate Israel and Jews more than they love their own Palestinian brothers and sisters. Filled with hate, they look for ways to torment and torture everyone in their orbit. 

One more consideration: the long-term hopes of the Palestinian/Iranian/Muslim coalition. Their hopes and plans have been, for the last year, well-voiced by the international public relations campaign launched in tandem with the October 7th attacks. There were no pleas for better relations with Gaza. There were no proposals for improving the economy or social fabric of Gaza or the West Bank. Instead, the persistent messaging has been existential:
“Israel has no right to exist.
Zionism is
settler-colonialism—and is illegal and should be destroyed.
From the River (Jordan) to the Sea (Mediterranean), the land will be 
Judenrein.
Jews everywhere are the enemy of Islam.”
Ubiquitous messages like these give me pause: are there any partners for peace? 

When listening to dreamers and politicians and other hopeful types, I always try to distinguish between serious plans and idyllic aspirations. Are calls for a Two State Solution serious policy proposals, or are they just rhetorical flourishes— perhaps rhetorical signals that the speaker hopes for a better world. Is the Two State Solution a reasonable and practical possibility, or is it a just a nice dream that nice people have on their utopian list? I share the dream. I agree with the aspiration. But, I know that, until there are real partners for peace, we are stuck in a fight for survival. Let us pray to God for strength and fortitude.
“Adonai oz l’amo yiten; Adonai y’varech et amo vashalom.
The Lord gives strength to our people; the Lord will bless our people with peace
.” (Psalm 29)