88 Days to Go
Can We Change Our Minds?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

88 days from today will see the opening of the United Nations General Assembly’s 2011 session in New York with the scheduled vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood.

Over the past months many people have voiced their opinions as to what Israel should do about this issue, what needs to be done to bring the parties to a meaningful negotiation, what might happen the day after the vote and whether there should even be any concern about the vote, to name a few of the items being discussed. In the course of these months, some people actually have positions today which differ from what their positions might have been a month, two months or even a year ago. This writer falls into that category as well.

As a result, the public tends to immediately climb all over the columnists and commentators for being wishy-washy in their approach, for waffling in their opinions or for not being consistent in what they advise. So, for example, in the op-ed piece by Tom Friedman that I referenced in yesterday’s blog, some analysts chided him because he urged Israel to sit down with the Palestinian Arab representatives even if those representatives included members of Hamas, whereas some months ago he indicated that it was folly for Israel to even consider meeting with any group committed to the country’s destruction as a Jewish state.

But politics, like life, is fluid and situations change from one day to the next, so it is quite understandable that people’s opinions might also shift. William Seward, the 12th Governor of New York State and US Secretary of State under former presidents Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson once said: “The circumstances of the world are so variable that an irrevocable purpose or opinion is almost synonymous with a foolish one.”

Therefore, people’s positions on critical issues of the day must change to reflect current realities because politics is neither seen as a science (in spite of the name of the course many of us have taken called “Political Science”) nor accorded the status of religion which is generally controlled by dogma. Rather facts change, realities become altered, hardened positions soften, and sometimes people even begin to realize the incredibly negative ramifications of certain approaches which they once thought were inviolate. And for all of that I say thank the Lord that this is the case because it is only the ability to alter our thinking about any particular issue that makes it possible for us to contemplate a brighter future.

In the Middle East, where an excess of political dogma has so greatly contributed to the strife with which we deal every day, for us to move forward people must be capable of changing their minds and not fear being criticized for doing so that we can ensure survival and growth.

There are those who would say I’m a dreamer, an idealist detached from reality, or even someone who does not understand all the nuances of diplomacy. But I would disagree. The easiest thing in the world is to take a position and maintain that position without wavering even in the face of reality and then cover it with the words “this I believe.” What is difficult is to be willing to constantly examine one’s position on a subject and engage in multiple iterations which have the potential to lead us to a solution. Sadly I fear that the political leadership on both sides of the line (green or otherwise) have simply lost their ability to transition to new positions which may, indeed, have the potential to provide a secure and rewarding life for those of us who have chosen to live in this troubled area of the world. And we, who have little control over the outcome of this myopic vision, will pay the price.