Israel-Palestine: the illusion of “two states”

Politique Internationale — In the course of your career, which personalities have impressed you the most, especially in the Middle East?

Éric Danon – Not many, for the good reason that I'm not easily impressed! Thanks to my parents' upbringing, I'm quick to perceive the human comedy that lies behind the efforts of powerful personalities to seduce. To put it another way, I can instantly detect the social games and the clash of egos within leadership circles.

P. I. — So much for the people you’ve met. But what about the others?

É. D. — I'm sure I'd have been impressed by General de Gaulle if I'd met him. I'm very conscious of the difference between the many people who represent their country and the very few who embody it. De Gaulle embodied France. In the same way, Ben Gourion was the embodiment of Zionism: A way of thinking about the State of Israel, of helping to create it, and of leading it for many years by following a path laid down regardless of all odds. What’s more, de Gaulle and Ben Gourion had a lot of admiration for each other.

P. I. — And to whom would you award the prize for political courage in the Middle East?

É. D. — To all those who are capable of shaking hands with their adversary after the battle. To all those who have had the courage to say publicly, "We are not just representatives of our side. We are driven by a higher humanity, to which we acknowledge that the other also belongs.”  I would add: All those whose vision of man transcends the ideology that brought them to power. Unfortunately, in the Middle East, not everyone is de Gaulle or Adenauer...

P. I. — Who, in your opinion, best grasped the issues at stake in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? The one who was most lucid? The one whose proposals were closest to a positive outcome?

É. D. — There are many figures like Ben Gurion, Shimon Peres, Sadat, Rabin – or even Arafat when he declared that the PLO charter was obsolete – who were great fighters and who came to understand that the path of perpetual conflict was not the right one. However, in the complex realms of war and peace, there is no way to rank the vision of one as superior to that of the others.

P. I. — Do you think Trump will make a decisive contribution to peace between Israelis and Palestinians?

É. D. — No one knows. He would first have to remove all the obstacles that make peace seem impossible. If he doesn't tackle the fundamentals of the conflict, he'll be just another president trying to solve a local problem. But the problem is not local, it's almost civilizational.

Trump will no doubt try to impose peace by twisting everyone's arm. His strength lies in the way he destabilizes his opponents by relying on the economic and military power of the United States. …