+
JMJ
The Conflict
From my perspective, the Hamas / Israeli conflict is, at its core, a religious conflict that is buried beneath decades of rights, wrongs, stones, grenades, bullets, missiles, bombs, fighting and death.
Lots of death.
I've read "Son of Hamas" that provided a good perspective of the situation, specifically that there are "good" and "bad" people on both sides of the conflict.
Let's be clear, the "good" people are not the ones who act from a position of cruelty to kidnap, beat, rape, and kill civilians.
The recent events show the Hamas "soldiers" being guilty of these actions. From the "Son of Hamas" and Wikipedia (link) we have older accounts of Israeli soldiers being guilty of the similar actions.
So this is a situation where, from a cultural perspective (Edgar Schein link) deep and enduring assumptions have formed. Anything that contradicts or threatens these assumptions will create a strong emotional response and because of these emotions is at risk of being disregarded.
I recently watched some videos from a couple of months ago where people, Gazans I assumed, were asked if they would accept proof of Israeli civilization from archaeological sources. They denied the existence, said it couldn't exist etc. The denial of reality is a hallmark of Cognitive Dissonance and irrational behaviour of trying to recast reality to our perception instead of accepting it as reality and amending our ideas.
A Perspective from Tom Clancy's Battle Ready
Tom Clancy did some biographical work in partnership with various US Generals. One of these books was written with Gen Tony Zinni (Ret) and while the entire book provides a warriors perspective on various conflicts, in light of the current war between Irsael and Hamas, I thought the following comments by Simon Peres to be insightful.
General Zinni, [Peres said], you're going to find three kinds of people in this business.
At this time Zinni was a special envoy for the United States to Israel and the Palestinian Authority (2001-2003). He was in Israel to make another attempt and resolving the situation between the Palestinians and Israelis.
First, you're going to find the righteous. Don't waste your time with them. You'll find them on both sides, and they're always going to appeal to the righteousness of their cause. You're never going to get anywhere with people like that. There's no negotiating with righteousness. Yes, it's their right to believe what they believe. But you're never going to change them. They interpret facts from their religious angle, and the ignore any facts that don't support that.
I've seen this perspective from a number of Traditional Catholics, especially the 'resistance' types. I think it is tied to the cognitive dissonance they experience if they admit that they are wrong.
The second group you're going to meet .. are the collectors or arguments, the debaters. You see them on TV with all the talking heads. They're going to outdebate the other guy and score points. But where making real progress toward peace is concerned, these people are useless. If you want to get into the debate for academic purposes, that's fine. But it serves no other purpose.
I haven't had the pleasure to meet too many people of this ilk. Those I have encountered don't make progress during the debate, but at least one came to realise the validity of at least some of the arguments on the SSPX... after a few years.
The third group you're going to meet are the ones that count. These are the ones who want to figure out a solution on the ground. These are the ones who ask themselves over and over: "How the hell are we going to make this ghastly situation work and get out of this terrible nightmare? Focus on theme... and focus on what needs to be done and then get it done.
So, I would put forward that the SSPX, as an organization, falls into this last category. They are willing to look for a way to work within the Church provided they didn't have to compromise on things that would be tied to denying the faith. This upset the previous groups (Hardline Trads / Mods and Academics) immensely.
The first, I believe, because it transgressed their assumptions about the nature of the Church and the Crisis in which it finds itself. This applies equally to the Mad Trads as well as the Mad Mods.
The second because it didn't agree with their theories and would upset the academic history of the conflict between Rome and the SSPX.
Suffice to say that none of those groups were happy when it seemed that the SSPX was going to get a no-compromise agreements. Alas and luckily, it didn't happen as Pope Francis would have torn it up anyway and we'd (SSPX Trads et al) would be back where we started or perhaps in a worse place.
Zinni went on to write that it was the best advice he got in Israel.
I think that this last statement resonates for SSPX Trads, it wasn't that the deal was bad, but that the compromose (ie Mantra) was resinstated and the Pope didn't have the strength or will to resist it.
So all we need now is a young Pope who has the desire, strength, will and commitment to find a solution "on the ground".
Time to start praying for Pope Francis I to save his soul and for the election of a Great and Holy Pontiff after the timely death of his predecessor.
For the Palestinians, while I believe an enmasse conversion to Catholicism will aid the situation, the emotions cloud the line between was is dogma, doctrine and opinion, making it a difficult problem to solve.
P^3
Comments
Post a Comment