One of the basic fallacies that bedevils modern societies and the governmental leaders of those societies is the rock fast assumption that human beings, governments and other social organizations behave in a rational, logical fashion that serves their own self-interest and welfare. In spite of all historical and experiential evidence, both ancient and current, to the contrary, this false axiom regarding human behavior continues to persist in all areas of international and interpersonal relations. All of the major wars and tragedies of the last century, from the Boer War that began the century till the Gulf War and the Yugoslavian wars that ended it, were the products of irrational and illogical decisions and behavior. In the end, England lost South Africa, all of the empires that participated in World War I were destroyed by it, Hitler's Germany was utterly crushed, Stalin's Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its terribly illogical and brutal government and economy, the United States was humiliated in Vietnam, Saddam Hussein lost much more than he could have gained in the Gulf War and so on. In hindsight we see that all of these murderous adventures were illogical, counterproductive to those who initiated them and tragically and completely unnecessary for the benefit of anyone.
As a corollary to this false axiom of human reasonableness is the idea that talking to one's enemies will inevitably lead to taming the tiger. Also central to this idea is the belief that the talkers from both sides will develop personal bonds between them that will somehow result in reasonable behavior between the parties they represent. The whole basis of Oslo was the trust Israel placed in the reasonableness and apparent obvious self-interest of Arafat and his cohorts in reaching a settlement with Israel. Many of the Israeli negotiators boasted in later media interviews how they had developed close personal ties with their Palestinian counterparts and how, in their opinion, this would guarantee the emergence of a mutually acceptable peace agreement between the parties. Sadly, events have proven this scenario to be an illusion. Chamberlain, after meeting Hitler at Munich, declared him to be a "reasonable man" who would help bring about "peace for our time." Roosevelt, at Yalta, stated that he "could do business with 'Uncle Joe' Stalin." It was the naivete of those who wish well for others and believe that their opponents are of the same mind, and who are convinced that their own personal charm can overcome psychopathic behavior in others, that has guided much of the foolishness of twentieth century history.
The other side of irrationality is the hatred and violence that it spawns. What is to be gained from the slaughter of innocent people by drive-by shootings on our roads? The cycle of violence that we are now enduring has no logical basis nor can it give any advantage to the killers. The Palestinians have lost far more by their ill-advised and bloody intifada than they can ever have hoped to gain by it. They are now reduced to claiming that the stationing of some sort of international monitoring committee on the West Bank, something which already operates so inefficiently and worthlessly in Lebanon and Hevron, is a "victory" for their cause. But what is that "victory" worth in comparison to the territory, sovereignty and independence that Barak offered them at Camp David and that Arafat irrationally refused to accept? Barak's offer will not be repeated easily again by any Israeli government in the foreseeable future, if ever. And, if the wanton murder of the members of the Tmiezi family is the work of crazed, wicked Jewish fanatics, what logical help can it bring to our cause? (As of this writing, the murderers have as yet not been identified.) But individual people and governmental leaders rarely act logically at all times and it is the emotional instability of humans that fuels mankind's woes. In making security decisions, we should be aware of this sad truth.
Our Minister of Defense, Ben-Eliezer, said a wise thing last week. He stated that all we can do now "is sit and wait." We will naturally do all in our power to protect ourselves while we are waiting, but there are no short-term solutions in prospect to our current "situation." Talks with Arafat, now as always, are useless and humiliating. On the other hand, a war with the whole Arab world, which a reconquest of "Palestine" could entail, is not a pleasant option that logical, rational, caring Jews should relish. So, the logic of the situation is to wait until some sort of rational fit overcomes the other side as well. Unfortunately, that is also not quite apparent on the horizon as of yet. But logic dictates that we nevertheless have to wait for such a moment and not give in to irrational, emotional, counterproductive national behavior ourselves.
Shabat Shalom.
Rabbi Berel Wein, noted author and lecturer, is founder of the Destiny Foundation, dedicated to educating Jews about their historical and ethical heritage (JewishDestiny.com ).
As a corollary to this false axiom of human reasonableness is the idea that talking to one's enemies will inevitably lead to taming the tiger. Also central to this idea is the belief that the talkers from both sides will develop personal bonds between them that will somehow result in reasonable behavior between the parties they represent. The whole basis of Oslo was the trust Israel placed in the reasonableness and apparent obvious self-interest of Arafat and his cohorts in reaching a settlement with Israel. Many of the Israeli negotiators boasted in later media interviews how they had developed close personal ties with their Palestinian counterparts and how, in their opinion, this would guarantee the emergence of a mutually acceptable peace agreement between the parties. Sadly, events have proven this scenario to be an illusion. Chamberlain, after meeting Hitler at Munich, declared him to be a "reasonable man" who would help bring about "peace for our time." Roosevelt, at Yalta, stated that he "could do business with 'Uncle Joe' Stalin." It was the naivete of those who wish well for others and believe that their opponents are of the same mind, and who are convinced that their own personal charm can overcome psychopathic behavior in others, that has guided much of the foolishness of twentieth century history.
The other side of irrationality is the hatred and violence that it spawns. What is to be gained from the slaughter of innocent people by drive-by shootings on our roads? The cycle of violence that we are now enduring has no logical basis nor can it give any advantage to the killers. The Palestinians have lost far more by their ill-advised and bloody intifada than they can ever have hoped to gain by it. They are now reduced to claiming that the stationing of some sort of international monitoring committee on the West Bank, something which already operates so inefficiently and worthlessly in Lebanon and Hevron, is a "victory" for their cause. But what is that "victory" worth in comparison to the territory, sovereignty and independence that Barak offered them at Camp David and that Arafat irrationally refused to accept? Barak's offer will not be repeated easily again by any Israeli government in the foreseeable future, if ever. And, if the wanton murder of the members of the Tmiezi family is the work of crazed, wicked Jewish fanatics, what logical help can it bring to our cause? (As of this writing, the murderers have as yet not been identified.) But individual people and governmental leaders rarely act logically at all times and it is the emotional instability of humans that fuels mankind's woes. In making security decisions, we should be aware of this sad truth.
Our Minister of Defense, Ben-Eliezer, said a wise thing last week. He stated that all we can do now "is sit and wait." We will naturally do all in our power to protect ourselves while we are waiting, but there are no short-term solutions in prospect to our current "situation." Talks with Arafat, now as always, are useless and humiliating. On the other hand, a war with the whole Arab world, which a reconquest of "Palestine" could entail, is not a pleasant option that logical, rational, caring Jews should relish. So, the logic of the situation is to wait until some sort of rational fit overcomes the other side as well. Unfortunately, that is also not quite apparent on the horizon as of yet. But logic dictates that we nevertheless have to wait for such a moment and not give in to irrational, emotional, counterproductive national behavior ourselves.
Shabat Shalom.
Rabbi Berel Wein, noted author and lecturer, is founder of the Destiny Foundation, dedicated to educating Jews about their historical and ethical heritage (JewishDestiny.com ).