12 | DECEMBER 3 • 2020 

VIEWS

essay
Do We Dare to Hope? 

W

hat did it for me 
was the killing 
of Muhammad 
al-Durrah on the Gaza Strip 
in September 2000. He was a 
12-year-old Palestinian boy 
who hid behind 
his father as they 
were caught 
in the cross-
fire between 
Palestinian secu-
rity forces and 
the IDF. 
 The world 
watched as the boy cried in ter-
ror, then was struck by a bullet. 
I was managing editor for the 
Jewish Telegraphic Agency at 
the time. Shortly after this inci-
dent, which was the beginning 
of the larger Palestinian upris-
ing that became known as the 
Second Intifada, I resigned my 
job at JTA, moved from New 
York City back to my old home 
in Metro Detroit, and quit 
writing about Jewish issues for 
the next 16 years. 
This was not what I had 
signed up for.
I was among the Oslo Peace 
Process hopefuls. I was con-
vinced that at JTA, I was going 
to help lead coverage of a 
new era in Israeli-Palestinian 
relations, a time when I could 
write about, and think about, 
what it means to be a Jew 
without a constant reminder 
of Mideast conflict. I never 
wanted antisemitism, or the 
Middle East, to define the way 
I write about Judaism. Today, 
this is unavoidable and now 
that I am writing again about 
Jewish issues, I am faced with 
the same frustration.

We can argue forever over 
what put that father and son 
in that position, and how and 
why the IDF was exchanging 
gunfire with a Palestinian secu-
rity force that was supposed to 
have been their peace partners. 
I was angry at the circumstanc-
es that put that boy in harm’s 
way. It was just after Israeli 
Prime Minister Ehud Barak 
and Palestinian President 
Yasser Arafat had broken off 
peace talks. Or, I should say, 
Arafat refused a Palestinian 
state and chose, instead, anoth-
er generation of bloodshed. It 
was egged on by Ariel Sharon’s 
visit to the Temple Mount, 
which unnecessarily height-
ened tensions, but it was failure 
of Palestinian leadership and 
vision that created the Second 
Intifada and placed that poor 
boy in the line of fire.
I’m bringing this up today 
because I don’t want to fall into 
the same trap of unwarranted 
optimism, then sudden dejec-
tion, in light of the so-called 
“
Abraham Accords” between 
Israel and some of her Arab 
neighbors (see story, pg. 28).
What many forget is that 
the 1993 Oslo Accords were 
made possible, in part, by the 
coalition the United States 
put together against Saddam 
Hussein in the First Gulf War 
in 1991. Today, an Arab coa-
lition against Iran can create 
another window of opportu-
nity to tackle peace between 
Israel and the Palestinians. 
I have confidence that the 
opportunity will present itself, 
but I am not confident the 
Palestinians will avail them-

selves of it.
In July 2000, I was still hope-
ful, writing that Barak was 
swinging for the bleachers. He 
felt he had a mandate, and he 
probably just barely did at the 
time. I quoted Barak as saying, 
“The fall of the Soviet Union 
and the victory over Iraq in the 
1991 Persian Gulf War … gave 
Israel a window of opportunity 
to make peace with its neigh-
bors.”
By November 2000, I was 
back in Michigan, interviewing 
Arabs in Dearborn during the 
election. Surprisingly, they 
mostly went for George W
. 
Bush. The top concern for 
Arab Americans in this pre-
911 time was the perception 
that President Clinton has not 
been a fair mediator in the 
peace process.
Shortly thereafter, I quit 
Jewish journalism and helped 
launch a science and technol-
ogy magazine in Ann Arbor. 
I did not return to writing 
about Jewish issues until 
Charlottesville, when I was 
moved to speak at an anti-Nazi 
vigil in Traverse City. 

ANGER AT LEADERSHIP
Today, the Palestinians appear 
to be going down the same 
road as before. Yet, there is a 
detectable difference between 
the words of the P.A. and 
Hamas leadership, and the 
words of Palestinians them-
selves. 
There is a revolt among 
average Palestinians against 
hardline Hamas rule. Average 
Palestinians are actually 

bypassing official channels 
and talking to Israelis. So, this 
time, I don’t think there will 
be a “third intifada” to distract 
from the failure of Palestinian 
leadership. There is just as 
much anger with Hamas as 
there is with Israelis. I’m seeing 
some cracks appear that the 
U.S. and Israel could exploit 
to relaunch talks with the 
Palestinians.
To me, it doesn’t feel like the 
hopeful ’90s all over again, and 
I don’t think I’ll ever go back 
to that level of optimism unless 
an actual permanent-status 
deal is signed. But I think the 
momentum of normalization 
with Arab states could be 
used as an opportunity for 
Palestinians to end their 
permanent refugee status ... or 
they can deepen their alliance 
with Iran, through Hamas, and 
lose another opportunity for 
peace.
As for previously hostile 
states making peace with Israel 
in the Abraham Accords, well, 
governments change. And 
they can change in a heartbeat. 
Look at Turkey.
So, long story short: History 
says peace can bring with it 
its own momentum. But so 
can unrest, and the horrible 
specter, for me, of the death of 
Muhammad al-Durrah, can 
easily emerge again. Yet, the 
Palestinians can be masters of 
their own fate if they choose. 

Howard Lovy is an editor and writer 
based in Traverse City. He is the 
former managing editor of the Jewish 
Telegraphic Agency.

Howard Lovy
Contributing 
Writer

Standing guard during the 

Second Infitada

The Abraham Accords could meet 
the same dead end as Oslo.

IDF

