First Steps to Peace in the Middle East

 

While confirmation alludes me, I recollect from memory reading a transcript of an interview involving Harry Browne, the Libertarian Party’s Year 2000 U.S. Presidential Nominee. When asked about the Middle East, Mr. Browne made a poignant observation, which can be summarized as follows:

“There will never be peace in the Middle East until all sides understand and value the concept of the separation between church and state.”

This observation goes to the root cause of perpetual violence within this region of the world. It is also the root cause for the near perpetual cycle of violence which bathed Europe in blood during the Dark Ages.

Religions, by their nature, reject reason in favor of faith. The degrees to which they do this vary among religions, but ultimately faith always triumphs over reason. How faith is validated also varies per religion, but fundamentally it is based on the subjective premise of feelings, which conveniently cannot be questioned or repudiated by any facts or logic, so long as the adherent ascribes such feeling as being from their deity. The greater the extent a religion rejects reason and embraces faith, the more prone their adherents are to blindly acting upon their feelings and whims, since such are to be considered revelations from their God, which must be obeyed.

Within countries which observe to some extent individual rights, actions based upon religious beliefs (including blind actions) are limited to the extent that other people adopt, sanction, or condone such actions of their own volition. In essence, such actions are protected to the extent that they do not initiate the use of force against others.

Countries which reject the concept of individual rights also, by extension, reject the concept of a society in which people are free to have and act on their own beliefs, since such beliefs may be against “the greater good” – a criteria established by the status quo which, quite often, is based in mysticism and religion (I would describe atheistic regimes, such as Communism, this way as well, since they replace a deity with a political party). This leads to the government using its powers to suppress any deviant beliefs, because such beliefs are “of the devil.”

When there is a complete merging of faith and whim, an individual finds the world to be a malevolent place (since his whims cannot make logical connections to understand it) and begins to have feelings and impulses which mirror this worldview. Because it is impossible for feelings to be wrong, the basis for his negativity must be ascribed to something else, such as “evil persons” who are controlled by a devil. It does not take long for such adherents to engage in acts of barbarism against “the enemy,” because it gives them an avenue to express, without equivocation, their absolute hatred for life and for the “demons” who they believe make it horrible for them.

During the Dark Ages, religious totalitarian states had a stranglehold in the Western World, violently imposing their religious creeds (e.g., Catholicism, Greek Orthodoxy, Islam, etc.) through feudalism or caliphates, torturing or executing “blasphemers” through inquisitions or annihilating them on the battlefield.

The world began to be a safer place when countries, most notably the United States, realized the dangers of combining church and state and instituted laws separating them. This permitted the freedom for individuals to act on their religious beliefs, so long as they did not force such beliefs on others. Lacking the power to impose, yet also guarantying the freedoms of expression, civilization moved from “my way or the highway” to “different strokes for different folks” and removed any excuse for religious violence.

This is not the case in the Middle East, as it is dominated by religious groups who impose their beliefs through forceful means. This includes religious totalitarian states (e.g., Iran), militant groups which are sponsored by state actors (e.g., Hamas and Hezbollah), insurgencies not directly backed by any state (e.g., ISIS), and other states which have more primitive structures (e.g., kingdoms, like Saudi Arabia). The results are, as Frank Herbert put it in his novel Dune:

“When religion and politics travel in the same cart, the whirlwind follows.”

This whirlwind reared itself in stark nakedness within Israel on October 7, 2023. While the sheer barbarism is shocking to most, it is not shocking when one remembers that the fundamental cause for action under religion is to act if it “feels right.” When indoctrinated with a creed that holds that a certain group (whether Jews or otherwise) are of the devil and that it is one’s sacred duty to destroy such group, such thoughts justify any whimsical, sadistic thought that enters one's head.

While Israel cannot be considered an ideal, perfect nation, even among Objectivists (e.g., over 80% of the country’s land is publicly owned, Jewish settlements are initiated and established by the Israeli government and not through free market mechanisms, etc.) and there is substantial blame which can be directed towards its policies, a false moral equivalency between inconsistent policies protecting individual rights and Hamas’ total lack of accepting such rights cannot be drawn. Israel has all the makings of a country where its citizens can peacefully change its government (a legislative assembly representing its citizens, an independent judiciary, freedom of peaceful, political expression, and multiple political parties representing multiple ideologies), Hamas – to the extent that it is a government in Gaza – does not. More importantly, Israel recognizes (albeit inconsistently) the value in a separation between church and state. Hamas believes they are one and the same.

It is for this reason that nations around the world, who value individual rights and peace, should be providing moral support to Israel and, where possible, economic and military aid through loans and the sales of military equipment. Failure to do so is to sanction religious totalitarianism and the violent barbarism which naturally follows; an abject failure by civilization to learn from its historical mistakes.

More importantly, if the people of the Middle East ever want to live a full life, without fear of themselves or their loved ones being killed by missiles, rockets, bullets, and knives (whether from Palestinians or from Israelis), they must embrace the lessons of history and demand that their political institutions separate church and state. Only then can the road to peace be paved.