Interview with Rami Nasrallah

Can you give us a brief background about your life and how you got involved in peacemaking?

I don’t know if I am involved in peacemaking or not. Defining peacemaking work is problematic. I view myself as a person who believes in cooperation with Israeli groups, as they are the ones that control the stability in the whole region. It is not an issue of my belief in peace. I am against approaching the issue of peace as a belief. I think this approach is wrong. In my opinion, peace is not a romantic thing, but a reality that improves the people’s lives on the personal and social level. There is no Palestinian or Israeli who loves peace as an abstract concept. Peace improves people’s standard of living, and this is our aim. I don’t perform my work because I love peace, but rather because this is a Palestinian interest, through which we can change our position as Palestinians, build a democratic society, a strong economy and viability for the Palestinian state. All this can be achieved only through peace. In my opinion, peace is a means to achieve our goal of building a modern and democratic civil society.

Who founded the International Peace and Cooperation Center?

A group of young people founded the IPCC with the goal of creating change according to a Palestinian agenda. We had always expected to receive land, money or help. We never expected our needs or our demands. Appreciative of the significance of Jerusalem,1 we made it our focus. There was never a Palestinian vision for what we wanted in Jerusalem. We don’t know what we want. We had to found a think-tank that deals with the issue of Jerusalem, and even the viability of dialogue with Israel.

Dialogue with Israel should be based on Palestinian interests. When the Israelis initiated meetings in Europe that were funded by the Europeans, the Palestinians sometimes didn’t understand the intent of the meetings and we didn’t ask ourselves the right questions about the relations with Israelis. We were literally followers. This creates extremely negative reactions. Part of the people become “traitors” who work for Israel and part become nationalists who are against normalization.2 Can I free anything from Israel if I don’t meet with the Israelis? I can’t. The idea for the creation of the IPCC was the creation of a Palestinian agenda for the issues of peace, development and social and economic mobility. We would have liked to change the structure of the society, but we focused on the issue of Jerusalem. In the IPCC it was the first time a Palestinian team sat down and produced a number of studies about Jerusalem. Such knowledge is important. We don’t have knowledge. We can’t present the facts of the conflict drawn on a map without knowledge. We should deliver our message in an effective way. The West doesn’t regard our issue as a just, historical one. We should be able to send that message to the world.

How did you choose your Israeli partners?

In the last seven years we have worked with one or two Israeli partners. We didn’t work with everybody. We didn’t accept everybody who had a briefcase and wanted to work with Palestinians. The most important partner concerning the issue of Jerusalem is the Jerusalem Institute for Israeli Studies,3 because they publish statistics about Jerusalem, therefore we have an interest in working with them. We requested to work with them but they said that they don’t work with Palestinians from Jerusalem because the city is under Israeli control and therefore Palestinians have nothing here. We eventually managed to convince them to work with us. This led to a change. We started talking about an East-West and an Israeli-Palestinian Jerusalem.

There are two kinds of Israeli groups that are interested in relations with the Palestinians. The first kind needs some kind of therapy; they can’t believe that Palestinians are not terrorists, therefore they accept every Palestinian that can speak well. Yesterday I attended a lecture at Tel Aviv University which was attended also by Ran Cohen,4 an Israeli MK, Ziad Abu Zayad5 and Kais Abed, Karim Abu Layla6 from the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP).7 We discussed the concept of partnership. Ran Cohen concentrated on the final political solution. Ziad Abu Zayad talked about the reality of the settlements, etc. Abu Layla talked about the Palestinians’ strong desire for peace and the Israelis’ lack of commitment. I said that you [Israelis] shouldn’t look upon us as weak and poor, that we need your help and offerings. We don’t need anything from you.

According to the Israeli mentality they are giving things up in order to give them to us, but these things were already ours to begin with. My principle is that if you don’t want to accept a viable democratic Palestinian state that exists beside the Israeli State, Israel will not exist. It is clear. It is an Israeli interest for the Palestinians to have power and viability. The Israelis are not doing us a favor. The Israelis should understand that in order for Israel to exist the Palestinians should build their state on their own land, a state that is viable and democratic like any other country. Israel isn’t a part of Europe or a part of the US; it is part of the Middle East. The only way to integrate the Israelis into the Middle East is to create a viable Palestinian state. Someone once asked me if there was an Arabic word for peace. I said that this question isn’t worth answering. All the audience clapped hands in agreement when I said this. He said that there are two words for peace: peace and reconciliation. I said that I would not answer this question because the person who asks this question is stupid and arrogant because he claims that he is civilized and yet he underestimates the Arab culture and its peaceful values. These incidents are very important.

There can’t be a solution to the conflict until the Israelis understand that they don’t have to give the Palestinians their rights because they feel sorry for them and because the Palestinians are poor and weak. There will be no solution before the Israelis stop viewing the Palestinians as a demographic threat that needs to be disposed of. The Israelis should abandon the idea of a pure Jewish state and stop trying to get rid of the two million Palestinians that they view as a threat to this state. The Palestinians are a part of the region and a partner. The Palestinians have a part in shaping the region’s future.

How does what happened on the ground affect relations and meetings with the Israelis?

The Israelis aren’t the main thing we deal with. Relations with the Israelis never stopped, even in the most difficult circumstances. We used to meet despite bombings in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv8 or incursions in Gaza.9

Why do you work with IPCC?

I was one of the founders of the organization, and the head of the director's council. The main reason we founded the organization is in order to maintain equal and comprehensive relations with the Israelis; we Palestinians need to strengthen our abilities. We need to reach a certain level of intellect, professionalism and culture in order to be partners with the Israelis. I am not, and will not be a member of an organization that sets peace as its goal. I believe in building our capabilities as Palestinians in order to achieve equality in partnership with the Israelis. This is the goal.

What are the actions you undertake?

The actions focus on putting in place policies for the future of Jerusalem and Israeli-Palestinian relations, not in terms of a peace agreement, but in terms of the impact and implications of the political agreement on the life of Palestinians and Israelis regarding all aspects: social, economic, political, environmental. Peace has become confined to one issue, political agreement. Political agreement will not achieve peace. What will achieve peace is building a system that changes people's lives for the better. Signing papers called the Oslo agreement10 or Camp David11 or Taba12 is not an achievement of peace, but an agreement between political parties. Real peace is achieved through fundamental change and by providing security for Palestinians, and at the same time allowing Israelis to enjoy the benefits of the peace. This did not happen in Oslo. There is a need to distinguish between an agreement and real peace.

What are the peace activities you engage in?

We have no field activities; we are not an activist organization, but a policy organization.We build cooperative relations with Israeli centers in order to study the conflict, its results and its effects. We try to put in place policies for working with the issues of economy, infrastructure, social development, transportation and tourism. We work to formulate policies to ensure peace as a way of life, and not as a negative reaction to the current situation.

What is the nature of your activities?

Most of the work is developing scenarios and policies for relations with the Israelis. We aren’t an organization that exists in order to achieve peace. We are an intellectual team that works on issues related to Jerusalem from an internal Palestinian perspective, with Israelis, and with foreign groups. We work on a project in association with Cambridge University concerning the buffer zones and frontiers between East and West Jerusalem. We are trying to assess the dynamic relations between the two parts of the city. Most of the IPCC's programs try to build a new concept for the relationship.

The main objective for me is the establishment of the concept that we need peace for leverage. A weak partner cannot be a partner for peace. We need to strengthen Palestinian society so it can face a modern and civilized country like Israel equally. We cannot speak of a fair and secure peace without good relations with the Israelis. We are afraid of relations because we don’t believe in normalization, but Israelis themselves don’t want any relations with Palestinians. They created the wall.13 The wall is also a means for mental separation. They don't want to see the Palestinians. People in Kfar Saba14 don't want to see the people in Qalqilia,15 therefore they build an eight-meter high wall.16

The claim Israelis want to have relations with us is wrong. The Israelis depend on not seeing the Palestinians, and the separation is fundamental. We as Palestinians tied the issue of a political solution to the reaching of an agreement. We didn't accept any relations with the Israelis until after an agreement was achieved. This is acceptable, but we shouldn't end the dialogue with the Israeli side. When the communication stops with the Israelis we won't be able to build any bridges for understanding. Therefore we are preparing for the next level of positive cooperation. This can be done only through meetings.

During my experience at the Hebrew University,17 as a Palestinian student from Jerusalem who did not know a word in Hebrew but learned the language and received a PhD, I started to understand who this enemy is. I used to think that the enemy was the soldier that checked my ID at the checkpoint.18 I used to think that the enemy was the settlers.19 I discovered that there is a civilian side to the Israelis that we might reach an understanding with. The time I spent at the university changed my view generally and my perception of the Israelis. We, as Palestinians, really don't know at all who the Israelis are. We know the Israelis as the soldiers at the checkpoints, we know them by the Hebrew words used in the streets, but do we know the Israeli civilian life? No. That was the motivation for building a comprehensive relationship among civilians.

Palestinians aren't inferior to Israelis in any way. Palestinians are capable of maintaining relations with Israel and the Western world, because they have achieved a very high intellectual level, higher than in any other Arab country. We have the ability to build a democracy that is stronger than in any other Arab country. We have the ability to build a civil society that is different from any other Arab country.

How would you explain why you do this work to someone who has no knowledge of the conflict?

I don't do this work for the benefit of Israelis or for peace. I do this for the benefit of Palestinians. The creation of a viable and democratic Palestinian State is a Palestinian interest and an Israeli interest at the same time. I work for the Palestinian interest. The Israeli interest doesn't concern me much. I am not concerned about loving the Israelis, embracing them and living with them in love and friendship. What concerns me is being able to play a part in achieving peace as a way of life. Nobody loves peace because he was born that way, or has romantic feelings towards peace.

According to the polls, most Palestinians, 70 to 80 percent,20 support peace despite the conflict, the bloodshed, the curfews, humiliation at the checkpoints and the hard economic situation. The Israelis support peace by about the same percentage, despite racist mentalities of separation, of aggression and state terrorism. Israelis believe in peace, but there is a difference between believing in something and realizing it. We don't seek peace as a romantic concept, we seek practical solutions that have benefits and build bridges for peace. This is mainly an internal Palestinian issue. We can't achieve peace without a strong civil society, a free economy, universities, research and normal life.

We and the Israelis are neighbors; one living in a posh villa with a swimming pool and guards, and the other living in a situation worthy of animals. The average annual income for an Israeli is about 15 thousand dollars, while a Palestinian earns no more than 17 hundred dollars.21 The poor neighbor will always try to steal from his rich neighbor. In this situation there can be no peace. If the Palestinians don't reach the same level as Israelis, there will be no peace. My work aims to strengthen the Palestinian side on all levels. When we started working in Jerusalem, we met people who felt inferior to Israelis. We have the feeling that the Israelis are subcontracting the Palestinians. The Israeli peace activists approach peace as a kind of mental therapy. They say “Ah, there is a good Palestinian.”

I believe that all Palestinians want peace, stability and security. At the same level I believe Israelis want peace. It is not an issue of good against evil. Today all Palestinians are accused of terrorism, including myself. When I go to a checkpoint I am treated as a terrorist. I am not treated as a person who wants peace. This situation must be changed. We try to look at the conflict from a different perspective. Not to deal with the ethno- national conflict as such, but to look at the urban fabric and the dynamics of life, which are related to the conflict. We try to focus less on the causes of the conflict and try to come up with futuristic ideas about how to deal with the obstacles, which can prevent achieving peace. Stopping these obstacles from taking control over the whole process is the crucial issue. Signing a political agreement doesn't mean achieving peace.

If you look at the whole spectrum and all aspects of peace, which include the economy, politics, society, and culture, and act and try to deal with these issues and come up with practical solutions, I think this will contribute positively to the building of peace. I differentiate between peace building and peace making. Peace making is an agreement with elites. Peace building is engaging the majorities on both sides to benefit from peace as a way of life, and as something that can contribute to them on a collective level and on an individual level.

What are your next activities as an organization?

Our next activities try to look at the issue of youth as bearers of change. There are three generations among Palestinian society. One generation is the traditional nationalistic generation of leaders. This generation still has the revolutionary culture; it is not able to build the civil culture that will help us as Palestinians to build our society, economy and democracy. The second generation is the one that lived under the Israeli occupation. This generation is aware of democratic values but is still influenced by the traditional leadership, because there is no political solution. They are reluctant, in a way. They can't move forward because there is no solution to the political dispute. This causes them not to move from the revolutionary mentality to the more civil mentality. They are stuck in between the national movement and state building. This generation sometimes uses violence in order to provide legitimacy to their leadership. Because there is a struggle and occupation, fighting the occupation is a legitimate act by the Palestinians. This approach belongs to the revolutionary mentality.22 There is a third generation that I am afraid will follow the first and the second. I am afraid they will not be able to think about the future, and will use the same methods as the first and second generations. We have to avoid this. We have to provide this generation with the tools to use their energies in a positive way, not a negative one. We can fight and kill the Israelis, they can also kill us, but this will not contribute to our state building and social democracy building.

What we are trying to do now, as the IPPC, is to engage them in learning by a process in which they are aware of their role and contribution to the social, economic and political mobility. We try to empower them to be democrats, because democracy can't be taught. If you are an architect you should know how to use architecture to create change. If you come from the field of communications and media, you should know how to use your profession as a tool for change. The same is true for all the other professions. We are trying to bring all the young Palestinians together in order for them to establish their own agenda for change. Reforms will not come only from initiatives, because initiatives often have interests to national community partners like the initiative of the greater Middle East,23 for example, which is important. Those who are going to carry out changes are the people themselves. Without establishing the capacities to bring change, nothing will happen. At the same time we use professional scientific methods like scenario building in order to determine the best and worst case scenarios. According to this we try to develop strategies of intervention.

If we want to change the Palestinians’ situation, we should rethink what peace contributes to the Palestinian cause. We should reconsider the whole behavior of our leadership. The second and third generations I mentioned should be more critical. We should not attack the leaders, but we should have a say about bringing in new ideas and concepts and bringing in fresh ideas that should come from inside Palestinian society and not be imposed by outsiders.

We mostly focus on Jerusalem and planning strategies for the city. We are also starting dialogue with Israelis who are not left-wingers but are more from the mainstream about how to make Jerusalem a capital for two countries. It should be a city without a wall separating it into two cities. Jerusalem can never have the international importance without the Palestinian existence. The more positive relationships we can establish between the two sides, the more effective the international role will be because this city is of importance for all Christians, Muslims and Jews, the Western world and the world as a whole.

The other thing we are working on now is the role of media in contributing to the image of the other. How can media play a positive role in implementing change? It is about the public agenda for the Palestinians because the conflict turned us into a society that is incapable of organizing its agenda or priorities. Sometimes we just blame it all on occupation, but we should also work on our internal agenda. Occupation does play a role, but that's not all-- this is what we are trying to highlight through media.

We are also studying the image that we have of the West, Israel and anyone that falls under the title of “the other.” Working on conflict resolution means we have to acknowledge that the conflict is not only political, but also social, economic and educational, regional and local. We need to figure out how to deal with all these conflicts within a single framework. Political conflict could be solved but the educational, intellectual, conflict will continue to exist, so the region should be in synch to be able to work it out. The civil society is one of our biggest concerns; we work with a lot of NGOs24 inside Palestinian society in order to clear the Palestinians' vision and figure out the different scenarios to implement change.

We keep thinking about occupation and its consequences, but we don't think about the ways that we can change it. For example, if Sharon25 got crazy one day and decided he was going to give us the West Bank26 and Jerusalem back, what would we do with it? This is our main concern: what is our role as Palestinians once occupation is over and how can we be prepared.

What are the biggest challenges you face?

The biggest challenges are daily mobility and facing the occupier. It is hard for me to face the Occupation every day and see the power of the Occupation. This situation raises an important question for me: why am I doing this when a 19-year-old soldier can close a checkpoint and punish hundreds of people? The reality of the Occupation is the toughest thing I am facing on a daily basis.

Did you ever have doubts about your work or doubts about doing the right thing?

I didn't have doubts about my work itself; I had doubts about the timing. Sometimes I have a feeling that we are not prepared, as Palestinians and Israelis, for a historical compromise. Each side, especially the Israelis, has its interests as terms of reference before reaching an agreement. They are scared of demography,27 they want to keep occupying the land and that's why they want to pull out of Gaza,28 not because they want a real peace process. With this mentality of building walls and eliminating a threat, we will not have peace. They consider us a demographic and terrorist threat. They accuse us of not belonging to the area. Their solution is to build a wall.

This doesn't mean that our principles are not relevant. Our point of view is still relevant, we should invest more effort into making sure that what we need happens. We have no other choice as Palestinians. Either we build our viable and democratic state on the areas occupied on the 4th of June 1967,29 or we will continue fighting and killing each other for another hundred or two hundred years.

Did your involvement in this work come as a surprise to you?

No, it was a continuous process. I was in charge of the Israeli relations at Orient House30 and I was an advisor for Faisal Husseini31 on Israeli affairs for many years. I became close to Israeli decision makers, social activists, NGOs and to people in the field of civil society. This is part of what I did since I graduated from the Hebrew University, therefore my work is part of a cumulative process. I am not here because I have no other choices. I have many choices. I perform my work because I believe in what I do. My main work is with the Palestinian parliament, with Abu Ala.32 I am the director of the Jerusalem department.

Was your involvement with Israelis surprising for your family and friends and what does your community think of it?

I think this is a silly question because if you are part of a community you serve the community. I am not doing my work as a stranger to the community. Your question was structured as if what I was doing is a crime and not accepted by the community. The whole point of view of your question is unacceptable for me as a Palestinian. The way the question is formulated is already a judgment. I am involved in hundreds of things. I am involved first of all with my people and not with Israelis. We have interaction with the Israelis and the international community. We have many international partners from the US, Europe, NGOs and political organizations-- therefore it is a wide partnership in which the main thing is not the Israelis. Peace will not only depend on the Israeli side. It will depend a lot on the international community.

How has your involvement in your work changed your life?

It did not change much. I am still a Palestinian. I feel that I am more patriotic as a Palestinian. I have a message to deliver to the Israelis, and I have a message to deliver to my people also.. I am not confused about my work. The problem of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that we talk internally and externally to the other side in two different languages. This creates even more problems. People who are engaged in dealing with the Israelis are more extremist when it comes to internal issues. I don't like this. Either you believe in what you are doing, or you don't do it.

Is it rare in your community to be involved in the conflict in this way?

I think we should deal with the conflict based on a cost benefit approach, and to assess how we are dealing with the conflict and the resolution of the conflict. We consider our interests as Palestinians, which don't contradict the Israeli interests. Our interests are according to our needs as Palestinians, not according to the needs of the Israelis. Peace should be based on the real interests of the Israelis and the Palestinians. Until now the only agenda for peace was the Israeli one. Oslo was based on Israel subcontracting security. Oslo was a double bureaucracy; when you went to a border crossing, you gave your passport to the Palestinian police whose only authority is to give it to the Israeli authorities behind the scenes who made the decision as to whether you could pass or not. This is not peace. We should be able to make our own decisions about our political identity, and not do the job of the Israeli occupation. The result is that the Palestinian Authority33 today, during the whole reoccupation of the Palestinian territories, did not force Israel to take responsibility for services for the people. It has become a free occupation. They enter the Palestinian cities, occupy and kill, but they do not take responsibility for providing anything! They leave it up to the Palestinian Authority to pay for health, education and all the services while we are under occupation. This is an open occupation and is the result of Oslo.

Why did you choose to do this work and not trust the leadership to take care of the situation?

The leadership is not able to think of creative ideas about how to make a just peace. They know what to demand but they do not know how to build systems to achieve peace. Part of my duty is to think of the system. Peace is a whole system. Everything should work together in an integrative way. Economy, education, democracy, culture, trade, infrastructure, etc., should work together smoothly as a part of a peace agreement. The leaders are responsible for signing the agreements and we should find ways to implement them. Peace agreements will not tell us how to do it, rather what piece of land we will get. I assume that if we get all that we demand, we will ask the question, “What are we going to do with what we achieved?” I want to answer this question, irrespective of when the Israelis are going to leave us to establish our state in all the areas occupied in 1967.

What is the personal price you pay for doing this kind of work?

I think none. Even under very difficult circumstances like suicide bombings none of the meetings with the Israelis were canceled. In the same way, when the Hebron massacre34 took place I was sitting in a conference that we organized with Israelis about the wasted opportunity of western tourism to the Holy Land. We didn't cancel the meeting. We are doing our work under very tough conditions, and we are aware of this. No single incident will affect me because otherwise I wouldn't believe in what I am doing.

What do you consider a small success?

When I talk openly and Israelis hear my voice. This is a small success for me.

Have you met people during your work that you wouldn't have met otherwise?

No, I had a chance to meet the Israelis before I started doing this job. I meet people from the whole of the Israeli political spectrum from the right wing, through the middle to the left so I know and meet everyone. I don't like to work with a certain group that is marginalized by their society. I would like to hear the voice of the majority of the Israelis whether I like what they are saying or not.

Can you tell us more about that period when you worked at the Orient House?

I have mixed feelings about that period. The PA was strong but the issue of Jerusalem started to deteriorate, and it became obvious that it would be taken care of last. After the election of Netanyahu35 in 1996 the Palestinian activities in Jerusalem were restricted and the Israeli forces surrounded Orient House. All the activities related to the PLO36 in Jerusalem were prohibited. The Israelis consolidated their control over Jerusalem by investing in police stations in East Jerusalem.37 The Israeli agenda was forced on the Palestinian part of the city.38

Another main issue during that period was the issue of the settlements. Despite all the appeals, the Abu Gnaim settlement was founded.39 In 2000 big roads were constructed that divided the city.40 For example, Road Number One, Road Number Four and the tunnel road. There wasn't only domination and control of the Territories; the Israelis started to use the road system as a means of control. This reduced the possibility of reaching a solution in which Jerusalem is the Palestinian capital. I think we neglected to try to understand the Israelis.

Understanding them doesn't mean we have to love them. I don't want to love the Israelis or for them to love us, but there are interests. If we are strong as a society and as an economy, we can be part of the equation, if we are not strong we can't. Therefore what attracted me was how to learn from the Israelis how to build myself, how to enhance our collective intellect and qualifications and how to deal with issues not only based on sentimental considerations. Their return to this land was not based only on sentimental values; they had a complete agenda. Regardless of how this agenda affected me and of the tragedy it caused the Palestinians, it was an effective program. If we want to deal with the Israelis as equal counterparts we can't do it without absolute knowledge of the Israeli side. I am a Palestinian that had the chance to study at the Hebrew University and to deal with Israelis. I am informed about the economic political and social dynamics of the Israeli society. I felt I had to present the situation to the Palestinian leaders and politicians.

Our view of the Israelis is not always accurate. We sometimes view the bombings inside Israel as part of the liberation of Palestine. The Israelis don't see it that way. The Israelis view a bombing in Tel Aviv not as an operation to liberate Jerusalem or Ramallah,41 but as a threat to their existence. It is important that we understand the Israeli fears, mentality and interests. It is important that we understand the Israeli considerations while making decisions, so that we can deal with these decisions in a better way and not base our reactions on sentimental motives that lead to nothing. The biggest change I experienced is the understanding of the other side. The Israeli society isn't a sealed fortress; it is like any human society in the world. It may have internal debates and different streams, but it is a society that succeeded in building itself in record time and putting itself on the regional map in an incredible way. We should learn from the Israelis how to build a society, a state and an economy. The Israeli economy is valued at $120 billion.42 This is more than the economy of all the Arab countries combined!43 We can use the conflict as a means of strengthening ourselves.

How can the conflict be a source of strength?

There is an ongoing conflict, and we need to establish ourselves as strong people economically and socially. We can't build a national movement without institutions. The existing Palestinian institutions don't have a connection to the people. The PA or the government is totally separated from what is happening on the ground. We didn't manage to build something that unites the Palestinians. Our economy has collapsed in the last ten years. We didn't manage to build our economy and focus on how to strengthen ourselves. We focused on how to deal with Israel through negotiations. Without being strong politically, economically and socially there is no hope for a Palestinian State.

Many people are interested in being involved in work related to peace. Sometimes they don't know who to talk to, where to start or who to work with. What is your opinion?

This is another example of the lack of understanding of the other side. The balance of power on both sides should be obvious. Both Palestinians and Israelis make mistakes in choosing the right people to work with from the other side. The mainstreams on both sides are the base. There is no alternative to relations between the two mainstreams. I can have relations with a nice Israeli academic who speaks well, but that will not change anything. You need to work with the two mainstreams, and the mainstreams on both sides are totally not involved. This is a problem. Therefore the change will have to happen to the majority.

How can one start?

You should start with knowledge. There are three interconnected equations. Knowledge changes attitudes. Attitudes change images. Knowledge about the other side changes the image of the other side. It is very important to strengthen this equation. We sometimes draw conclusions about ourselves without having sufficient knowledge required. We sometimes create attitudes that limit us because we don't have sufficient knowledge. This is true also about the Israeli side that treats us as an enemy. The Israelis should value knowledge. Today most of Israelis who have knowledge of the Palestinians are associated with the peace camp. A major part of the Israeli peace camp is based on Israeli interests. They still believe in their cultural, intellectual and technological supremacy. Every person should acquire knowledge about the other regardless of his agreements or disagreements with him. Peace, in the end, is a political issue that is tied to a political solution. There was equality in the Oslo agreement but it was partial. The reason for this is that the agreement was achieved between small political elites from the two sides. Did this have a positive effect on the Palestinians or the Israelis? The answer is no. Peace is a way of life. You are committed to peace according to the effect peace has on your life. On the personal level people should acquire knowledge about the other side in order to promote peace. On the collective level it is hard to progress without a political solution.

What are your expectations for the next five or ten years?

I don't want to be pessimistic but I think there won't be a big change in the next five years. Peace still depends on the interest of the Israelis and has no relation to the Palestinians' interest. The Israelis control the situation and their interests are the motives behind all their actions, like the withdrawal from Gaza. The Israeli interests also determine their policies concerning the control of Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Jordan valley.44 We have no relation to the equation, therefore I am not very optimistic. If Israelis don't reach an understanding that peace should be built according to the interests of the two sides, the only progress will be the unilateral actions taken by Sharon and his successors. There might be a withdrawal from Gaza or a part of the West Bank, but is this the solution? Of course it's not.

What are some learning curves you encountered with your work that others can learn from?

I can't mention anything specific. One of the mistakes may be that we should have worked more with the ordinary and simple people. These people won't read the books and the reports about our visions and so on. We should approach them with something they can relate to. We should work more on involving the community.

Is that a special project you are referring to?

What are ways of involving the people?

We should build hope. The people should start dreaming about what they want.

End.