Ramallah for Real: What would Apple do

"Things are a lot more uh, uh...complex...I got certain information. Certain things have come to light...Uh... It might not be just such a simple... uh...you know?"

Ask a Middle East expert to explain, clear and succinct, what in God's holy name is the thing with Israelis and Palestinians, and you'll often get no more than incoherent Lebowskian blather. "Lot of ins and outs", to use the parlance of our times. 

People however crave categorical beams of truth, clarity, and my very own boots on the ground are often unrealistically expected to purvey just that. "Who's right?" "Who's wrong?" or, to paraphrase my uncle; "Whos doing what to who now?"

Condensing the megillah for outsiders, to 'Fox' it down most often portends an affront, both to accuracy and to one or other party.

Leave it to the experts then, or on the far side of that spectrum, the kiddie news channels? If we answer "no" to that question, does the answer necessarily entail common denominator hogwash, a diplomatic gibberish that ends up saying nothing at all?

Business schools and design gurus often entice students to dream up innovative ways to look at old problems. The exercise is called 'What Would Apple Do?' To apply it to a geopolitical conundrum in itself requires a contortionist's stretch of the imagination. Walkmans, phones and computers are machines. Not people. They were not handed down from a cloud. People invented them. Then after a while, other people took a long hard look, and invented them again. And better.

Perhaps we can't reinvent human relations. But it just might be possible to un-clutter the analyzing bit. Whittle away the extraneous. Peer into the core and make it truly accessible to all but the mentally impaired.

By means of a series of assertions and questions I will attempt to do just that; The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict For Dummies if you will. Don't try this at home. And if you do, wear lab-goggles and protective gloves at all times. Here we go;

1. What's the deal here?
Two people. One map. Your classic 'We Were Here First' situation.

2. How the hell did that happen?
For almost two thousand years, Jews had been horribly persecuted in Christian Europe. During World War two of the previous century this culminated in an attempt, led by a German totalitarian regime, to exterminate all of Europe's Jews. 

The survivors escaped to Palestine, an area run by the British at the heart of the Middle East where long ago a Jewish state existed. To reestablish a nation-state there was deemed the only way to prevent future persecution. Reasonably so. They called it a land without people for a people without a land. 

In reality however, the area was already populated. Concurrent with the Jewish desire for a homeland, there existed a Palestinian national movement led by a class of scholars and notables, desirous of emancipation from Turkish, and later British control. 

3. Can we undo the past?
No, of course not. It's impossible to prevent the Romans from destroying the second temple and dispersing the Jews. We cannot undo the holocaust. We cannot go back to 1948, 1967, 1973, 1987, or even 2000. They’re called The Laws of Physics.

Both parties need to keep in mind but a single phrase: "They're here, they ain't going nowhere, live with it."

4. Who fired the first shot?
Entirely irrelevant. Finger-pointing as to who started are best relegated to the playground. Both sides are shooting. Israelis have better gear, shoot better. Palestinians try to make up for the tactical imbalance with grit and self-sacrifice.

5. The Israeli army acts in self-defense. Palestinians target civilians.
Irrelevant. This is a tough one for the Israeli reader, but please stick with me. Statistically, many more Palestinian civilians die as a side-effect of Israeli defensive actions than Palestinians manage to kill on purpose (if one were at all to accept such a black-and-white rendering).   

It's a conflict, and both sides happily transgress into the murk where revenge and defense become indistinguishable. Here of course the media play a pivotal role in absolving oneself of blame, to color in the ambiguous blur according to the appropriate narrative. Remember, you are at war; the last place you will find objective information is your national TV station. Keep this in mind at all times.

Exercise: A Palestinian youth who attacks a checkpoint soldier with a kitchen knife is a terrorist. An Israeli pilot who strafes a jeep carrying Kassam launchers in a crowded Gaza street killing an innocent bystander is still called a pilot. Now do the blindfold taste exercise. Which taste the saltiest, Israeli or Palestinian tears?

5. Do conflicts end by themselves?
Nope. Wars, especially civil wars, or altercations between parties who live on the same turf, are self-perpetuating. They are vicious circles that grind on indefinitely until the only indispensable raw material, i.e. human beings, has run out. True grief-stricken hate requires neither F-16 nor Kassam. Like blood it runs thicker than water and no amount of sanctions, academic or economic boycotts, walls, checkpoints, or isolation can contain it.

In the end only outside pressure or intervention can stop the bloodshed. There still is a conflict today because the world at large has had, for whatever reason, an interest in its continuation. The most optimistic interpretation here is indifference. Sadly. 

6. How about this one though, is it unique? More intractable than others?
No, don't be silly (or vein if you are a Palestinian or Israeli reader). Conflicts do end. Solutions can be found. They require guts, imagination, perseverance and, as mentioned above, positive meddling. Granted, the Israeli-Palestinian brawl is a toughie. Nigh-impossible to Apple-fy. Don’t expect an elegant touch-screen solution. It will require bevies of ugly Microsoft dialog boxes, and even more distressed helpdesk appeals. Sure beats going back to the machine-gun tak tak of mechanical typewriters though.

7. Why does the current situation not work?
The bottom line is human dignity. Any situation where one group exercises control over another is bound to lead to instability, especially when that control, in whatever form, is not inspired by equality. There is no sustainable middle ground between integration and separation. The marble will eventually wobble, and roll one way or the other. You don't want to be around when it starts barreling down. 

8. How does religion fit into all this?
It doesn't. Like media, its role can be both positive and negative. The Promised Land, like Christianity's Kingdom Come, or Islam's Paradise with 24/7 on-call virgins are locally-inspired metaphors and apply to all of mankind (or so I hope). Any eight year-old can tell you that. Likewise, God hasn't got a seat on the Security Council, although some parties can arguably count the next best thing there as an ally.