The Peace That Could Happen (But Won't): Understanding the Path Not Taken
In the labyrinth of Middle Eastern politics, few voices have been as consistently analytical and provocative as Noam Chomsky's. For decades, he has argued that a workable peace between Israelis and Palestinians isn't just possible—it's been tantalizingly within reach, repeatedly brushed by fingertips before slipping away into the abyss of missed opportunities.
The International Consensus
The framework for peace has existed for decades, supported by an overwhelming international consensus: a two-state solution based on pre-1967 borders, with minor and mutually agreed-upon land swaps. This solution, as Chomsky has repeatedly emphasized, has been supported by:
The majority of the world's nations
Multiple UN resolutions
The Arab League (through the Arab Peace Initiative)
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation
Significant portions of both Israeli and Palestinian populations
The Path Not Chosen
What makes this situation particularly tragic, in Chomsky's analysis, is that the broad outlines of a peaceful resolution have been clear since the 1970s:
Two sovereign states existing side by side
Security guarantees for all parties
Regional cooperation for economic development
A just resolution to the refugee question
A shared Jerusalem, serving as capital for both states
The Obstacles to Peace
Yet, as Chomsky argues, several fundamental obstacles continue to block this path:
Power Asymmetry
The dramatic imbalance of power between the parties means that without external pressure, there's little incentive for the stronger party to make significant concessions. This power differential affects everything from water rights to security arrangements.
Settlement Expansion
The continuous expansion of settlements in the occupied territories creates "facts on the ground" that make a viable Palestinian state increasingly difficult to achieve. Each new housing unit, road, and infrastructure project further fragments Palestinian territory.
Strategic Interests
Regional and global powers often prioritize their strategic interests over peace:
Access to resources
Military positioning
Regional influence
Domestic political considerations
The Role of Public Narrative
The conflict isn't just fought on the ground but in the realm of public perception. Competing narratives about history, justice, and security shape both policy and possibility.
The United States: The Missing Peace Broker
Chomsky has consistently highlighted the crucial role of the United States in this equation. As Israel's primary ally and aid provider, the U.S. holds unique leverage that could be used to advance peace. However, as Chomsky argues, U.S. policy has often:
Provided unconditional support rather than constructive pressure
Vetoed UN resolutions seeking balanced solutions
Funded policies that complicate peace prospects
Maintained military aid without humanitarian conditions
The Human Cost of Inaction
While diplomatic solutions remain unused, the human toll continues to mount:
Civilian casualties on both sides
Psychological trauma spanning generations
Economic stagnation and poverty
Environmental degradation
Cultural and historical loss
Deteriorating democratic institutions
The Peace That Could Be
Drawing from Chomsky's analysis, a realistic peace would require:
Immediate Steps:
Freeze on settlement expansion
Easing of movement restrictions
Humanitarian aid access
Cease-fire mechanisms
Medium-Term Measures:
Economic cooperation frameworks
Water-sharing agreements
Security coordination
Educational initiatives
Long-Term Solutions:
Border definitions
Resource allocation
Refugee rights
Jerusalem's status
Why It Won't Happen (Yet)
Chomsky's pessimism about immediate prospects for peace stems from his recognition of entrenched interests:
Political leaders benefiting from conflict
Economic interests in occupation
Ideological commitments
Regional power dynamics
Domestic political constraints
Beyond Despair: The Role of Civil Society
Despite the seemingly intractable nature of the conflict, Chomsky points to rays of hope:
Growing international awareness
Cross-border civilian cooperation
Youth movements for peace
Alternative media perspectives
Cultural exchange initiatives
The Way Forward
While the peace that could happen likely won't in the immediate future, understanding why it won't is crucial for eventually making it possible. Chomsky's analysis suggests several key actions:
Supporting grassroots peace initiatives
Challenging misleading narratives
Promoting human rights documentation
Encouraging international law enforcement
Fostering people-to-people connections
Conclusion: The Cost of Knowledge
Understanding that peace is possible but being prevented makes the current situation more tragic but also more changeable. As Chomsky reminds us, what humans have created, humans can change.
The peace that could happen may not come tomorrow, but acknowledging its possibility—and understanding the forces preventing it—is the first step toward eventually making it reality. The question isn't whether peace is possible, but whether we're willing to confront the forces that prevent it.
This analysis draws from Noam Chomsky's extensive work on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including his books, lectures, and interviews spanning several decades of observation and analysis.