For those of you who may have followed the publication of Stephen Hessel's pamphlet 'Indignez-vous' which calls in some ways for a mini-revolution against social injustices, some clarification may be necessary on the subject of Israeli politics.

In particular, on the subject of Gaza and the West Bank. As far as I can see, Hessel is opposed on humanitarian grounds to the occupation of Gaza, the construction of the wall and the general treatment of the Palestinian people. This should not be confused with opposition to the existence of the state of Israel, quite a different matter.

Certain people may be tempted to use the issue of Gaza and the publication of this widely-read pamphlet in support of Syria or Iran's opposition to Israel. Indeed, whether you consider the State of Israel legitimate or not, there are many who do and for good reason, none the least the suffering of Jews during the war or the claims to the historical holy land.

While it is more than unfortunate that Israel has followed the political path of segregation and separation, far too akin in form to the very concentration camps from which the Jewish people fled, the relations with countries surrounding Israel has been far from peaceful and the peace process founders even today.

The Wall is symbolic of this, as was the Berlin Wall symbolic of the mistrust between East and West. At a time when Russia's president is to visit Palestinian representatives in Gaza this week, what hopes are there for rekindling this peace process and for finding a solution for deep and lasting peace? And what prospect is there for peace when already more than 2b$ has been spent on a wall that would have to be brought down as part of a peaceful solution?

Indeed one wonders even how it has been possible to build such a wall while at the same time negotiating for peace. The Arab-Israeli conflict, as it used to be known, goes back certainly to 1967, the six day war and 1948, the very creation of the state of Israel, but it is too easy to fall into the 'traditional' conflict pattern between two peoples, since Peace is possible.

Harmony and 'living together' is possible. Not perhaps, while Israel maintains its current policies, but neither in a situation claiming the extinction of the Israeli nation. Peace can only be found in harmony and equilibrium and this equilibrium has not been found as yet. Israelis may feel that the meagre land they have is under threat and the Palestinian claim their rights to land from which they were displaced.

The solution lies in the balance between these two claims but despite the intervention of a multitude of presidents and nations since Jimmy Carter, the long term solution has not yet been found. Why not? What is the fundamental blocking point? What fundamental problem have the world's diplomats not been able to solve: the coexistence of two peoples.

Where is the model? What guidelines and advice, what rules and 'cadre' has been given in the rules of engagement? What social framework has been established? What society has been created or otherwise in this region, based on mutual understanding and cooperation? What lessons indeed can these peoples learn from the Irish Conflict, one hopes now over?

The worst lesson possible is that terrorist conflict can last for over a generation, but the best is that by negotiation, exchange, talking, patience, perseverance and a fundamental desire, that peace can be found. Peace for the benefit of all: this is the hope for Israeli and Palestinian peoples.purchase viagra no rx