Israeli's and Palestinians- Can a peace process be obtainable?

Currently there are hundreds of thousand IDF troops on the border of Gaza. There have been airstrikes, there is electricity, water and food cut off. The United Nations are citing that a ground war could be a 'humanitarian catastrophe'.

Israeli's are clearly furious due to the attack on civilians in recent days by Hama's and the taking of hostages.

The media have been reporting on the attack on Israel by Hamas. Then the response to this by Israel on Gaza. There are hostages held and threats and concern for their execution. There are people from various countries such as the USA and the UK that have also been killed in these attacks and many people missing. There are children and babies killed.

The attack by Hamas is the day after a surprise attack by Israel in 1973. The hundreds of thousands of troops of the IDF if they go into Gaza then there could be a massacre of mostly unarmed civilians, similar to the massacre of unarmed civilians which has just occurred. What's clearly evident to me is that the response, no matter the scale of this will then perpetuate a further response from people aligned to the Palestinians. 100's of thousands of troops going into Gaza could result in what can only be called genocide. What happen with Hamas going into Israel, the same. The attack by Hama's into Israel was not proportional, and yet the disproportionality of 100's of thousands of troops going into Gaza is such a disproportional step up, that it's impossible to know what the rest of the world would make of this. As people of faiths realise the Muslim world is a world of people that consider their connection to each other irrespective of country to be far more of a bond and a connection that the national borders that separate one country from the next. The same is true with Jewish people. So a massive ground war in Gaza could be perceived by the Christian influenced Western media to be a war between Israeli's and Palestinians, however that is almost certainly not how the Muslim world will consider this. They will likely perceive that this is a war of Jewish people against Muslims. There have already been protests in many other countries around the world and people of both Jewish and Palestinian connection calling for peace. In my opinion the leaders on both sides need to realise the implications of what could happen globally towards both Jewish and Muslim people before any further action is taken. Both sides need to look to their strongest of allies and that is President Erdogan of Turkiye.

President Erdogan has been the most vocal leader in the world standing up for the protection of Muslims and insisting on the respect of the Koran.

President Erdogan is also uniquely connected to Prime Minister Netanyahu specifically and to Israel. Both President Erdogan and Prime Minister Netanyahu both took the right choice in 2017 as leaders and allowed for the mediation by Russia to prevent what could otherwise have been the Battle of Armageddon in Syria. The mediation by both President Putin and Vice president Mike Pence in Syria was never fully and completely reported. The significance of that is known best by peace roadmap authors. Yet, when it came to making the very best choices for peace making both President Netanyahu and Prime Minister Erdogan made that best choice then.

So today all leaders should listen once again to Prime Minister Erdogan. Allow for a mediation. That mediation not obtained due to weakness, yet due to strength. The strength that Israel has in knowing that it could cause such harm to the people of Gaza and yet the strength of the Palestinians in knowing that they also have support worldwide. There was no justice in the killing of any of the people in Israel, there will be no justice in killing the people of Gaza. There is justice as well as continuity if there is a peace process that begins by the IDF standing down as a 'goodwill measure' and of Hamas releasing all hostages as a 'goodwill measure'. From there there then is a lose-lose gesture on both sides that then can begin the first steps towards a win-win for both sides by a complete reset of this situation which has the same source as the worst ever genocide against the Jewish people, from the second world war. The ineffective peace making and diplomacy by The League of Nations. The league of Nations was set up as a peace making organisation after the first world war. It did not stand up effectively for the people of Germany as a peace making organisation and in that place there was the Third Reich that filled that vacuum as a war making and genocide creating organisation. Neither the leadership of Israel or of Hamas had any part in the injustices that have happened since due to their being only a weak voice in the world for peace making. A fair voice considering the vital need for all people to be represented and when they are not then there are people, groups, countries which side with them. The level of injustice that it's possible for 100's of thousands of troops to inflict upon the mostly unarmed and completely innocent Palestinian people is potentially of a comparable level to the wrong doing inflicted upon the Jewish people, all of which are the victims of a peace making organisation that did not have the capacity one hundred years ago to produce really true and fair peace processes and to stand up to genocidal dictators.

The voice of peace making needs to be represented today to bring back the vision of The League of Nations for peace making though this time to do so in a way that is not influenced by the agendas of one country or another all people whether they are specifically linked to a country or to a faith have the right to live their lives without the risk of being murdered due to the incompetence's or weaknesses of Institutions and leadership in challenging all of the issues that lead to the oppression and harm done to any citizens in any part of the world. I have never heard of a Jewish person say I unreservedly forgive what happened in the 1930's. I never expect to hear that. Yet, I do not want to hear any people ever say that they can never forgive Jewish people for what could happen in Gaza if the 100's of thousand IDF troops go there.

The Jewish people are incredibly resilient, incredibly clever, wise, and unified as a people. They are also one of the most, if not the most consistently oppressed people in the world today and three thousand years ago and in so many ways and so many places ever since. There has been an abuse against the Jewish people, however, what has to be said is that 99.9999% of that has been perpetuated by people that are not in the world today. There are two ways to be able to deal and cope with trauma and abuse. Pass that trauma and abuse onto the next generation, perpetuate that or rise above that. Reach the pinnacle of truly mature adulthood and actually have a higher level of consciousness and reasoning that those that have oppressed you. Forgive them not due to the fact they deserve that, forgive them as you deserve that. The anger externalised by the acts of destructions, killing, murder come from within us. The Mastery of the human condition can be found in the Shaolin Monks of China. They do not allow the conditions on the outside to get in and affect the inside. A famous Holocaust survivor stated that there own way of thinking was something that nothing or nobody can ever take away. The way we think and express what we think is our expression against oppression. There are so many words in so many holy scriptures and so many of them have to do with the concept of choice. Our choice as people. The choices of individuals affect some, the choices of leaders affect all. The choices of the League of Nations taken then have caused the implications of today. There intentions then were good, and yet the outcome has been disastrous for decades affecting both Muslim and Jewish people.

The best action that President Netanyahu can take today is to stand down in strength and put his faith in a real answer. Both Jewish and the Palestinians that have both been affected by oppression and genocide. The best solution is working towards a win-win. It has to be, it's the only way to contain this. Too many both Muslim and Jewish people Internationally will be otherwise affected.

If there is a land invasion of Gaza and innocent people harmed then we are in the midst of an escalation that could be impossible to predict accurately and that could change everything.

The IDF on the border of Gaza can be as big as NATO was on the border of Russia and simply return.

Put the lights, food and water back on in Gaza and ask that the hostages are released as a humanitarian gesture and that from there a proper mediation can begin for the first time ever that produces a much fairer position for all.

Man has the capability of controlling so much and yet so frequently the hardest of organs to use is the brain and the heart connecting higher values and forgiving. This is forgiveness out of wisdom, knowing that the response to peace is more likely to be peace and yet the response to war is likely, almost certainly to be more war.

There is a need and a requirement to respect all other people to worship how they want and yet not to harm others. For prime minister Netanyaho to stand down an army of 100's of thousands of soldiers who obviously far out power the people of Gaza and all of the armed factions there. For him to do that puts him into the position of having the moral high ground in the situation and to be able to invite other to that moral high ground position and to mediate. If there is such a vast army going into that small area, then it's highly unlikely that all armed groups would surrender and in the response to that many innocent civilians will die. The other option would be asking the armed groups to surrender, this they are not going to do. Therefore, that again would result in IDF going in and what is in history defined as being an assault against innocent people will be what is remembered. What prime minister Netanyahu would do well to consider is that creating a situation where civilians are within an enclosed area unable to escape can cause more lasting political loss than any other action the leader of any country can take.

First cause of a change in the Jewel in Crown of the British Empire. (reference Wikipedia)

The Jallianwala Bagh massacre, also known as the Amritsar massacre, took place on 13 April 1919. A large, peaceful crowd had gathered at the Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar , Punjab, British India , to protest against the Rowlatt Act and the arrest of pro-independence activists Saifuddin Kitchlu and Satyapal . In response to the public gathering, the temporary brigadier general R. E. H. Dyer , surrounded the people with his Gurkha, Baloch and the 59th Scinde Rifles of the British Indian Army .[5] The Jallianwala Bagh could only be exited on one side, as its other three sides were enclosed by buildings. After blocking the exit with his troops, he ordered them to shoot at the crowd, continuing to fire even as the protestors tried to flee. The troops kept on firing until their ammunition was exhausted.[6] Estimates of those killed vary from 379 to 1,500 or more people[1] and over 1,200 other people were injured of whom 192 were seriously injured.[7] [8] Britain has never formally apologised for the massacre but expressed "deep regret" in 2019.

The massacre caused a re-evaluation by the British Army of its military role against civilians to "minimal force whenever possible...

The level of casual brutality, and lack of any accountability, stunned the entire nation,[11] resulting in a wrenching loss of faith of the general Indian public in the intentions of the United Kingdom.[12] The attack was condemned by the Secretary of State for War , Winston Churchill , as "unutterably monstrous", and in the UK House of Commons debate on 8 July 1920 Members of Parliament voted 247 to 37 against Dyer. The ineffective inquiry, together with the initial accolades for Dyer, fuelled great widespread anger against the British among the Indian populace, leading to the non-cooperation movement of 1920–22.[13] Some historians consider the episode a decisive step towards the end of British rule in India .'

What has to be considered is that the vast majority of people, the public, the civilians are innocent. By creating situations where civilians are targeted or become the victims of political issues due to their nation or their religious faith is not good leadership. The best leadership is the leadership that produces an answer and all past Israeli and Palestinian attempts at peace making have resulted in the current situation. The current situation could change within a few hours and the people of Gaza could be in the minds of the whole world. A world that is currently mourning for the Israeli people that were killed. There is the chance today for President Netanyahu to make the first step in being the best leader that the Holy Land has ever had by taking a position in the current situation that is above the differences of man and more aligned to making the best choices for HU man I ty.

HU- is a powerful word for God that can help you feel more centered, balanced, and joyful.

I - Information.

Ty- Making tea not war.

The higher goal of peace making can be achieved by thinking beyond the failed agreements and implications of those. To thinking more from an elevated perspective of different people's all wanting a good place in the world. The I, looking towards information, all information that can help mediate. Then sitting down looking at all the information and considering how to make that information work for all of the people now and in the future.

We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace.

Michael Franti.

What's clear is that 100's of thousands of troops on the border of Gaza will either make the situation from a Israeli perspective better, then worse, then better than worse, then better than worse like the past near one hundred years. Or from the Palestinian perspective make the situation worse, better, worse, better, worse better. The only way that the situation can become better for both sides is obtained by talking and mediation and not by intolerance and destruction. There is only one place where there is a real and true solution, and that is breaking the legacy that bad agreements of the past have had in affecting all people. What's clearly evident is that the resources of the Palestinian people are not only within the walls of Gaza. The resources of the Palestinian people are within every country in the world. There is no way to stop, halt, contain the capacity and the power of the Palestinian people, in the same way there was no way to stop, halt, contain the capacity and the power of the Jewish people.

If the IDF go into Gaza and harm the people of Gaza then Prime Minister Netanyahu will be seen as great by a few, for doing justice for some others, as a tyrant to others and to some he will be perceived in a way that the worst leaders in history are considered. If however, under these incredibly difficult conditions, where there is still the choice for an overtly calm response, yet with the full and clear message of military capacity behind him. There is then a real Olive branch that is being made and an acceptance that the past has been wrong for both peoples, and that the leadership of today can do better, much better than ever before in the past.

Where we are today, we need to be ruthlessly thorough in properly accounting for history, not allowing those that did so much wrong in the past to have any part in how we think today, we can do better than them then. We are an evolution on from where the people of the past are. We are much more connected to all the information and all the vast amounts of knowledge in the world we don't know.

if the goal is set to be better than those in the past then having a bit of humility enough to begin to see a crisis from the position of others, people in a differing position makes us able to compete not with the worst traits of the people of the past, but the best traits of ourselves.

The way in which Hamas communicated to Israel is wrong, yet it's the same type of wrong as the wrong that has been done to the Palestinian people in the past and not one of those people made the agreements that they became the victims of. A more complication better thought through peace process is a very real possibility today. Not any of the people that were involved in the peace processes of the past had the knowledge and the experience we have today, living in a world that prevented major wars various times. President Netanyahu Internationally is not known clearly for the effective and essential peace work that he did in Syria, by choosing the option of peace. This peace making is what he can remember and not the implications of what could happen if there is not a peace process that can be created today, when it's possible. A simple truce of stepping back without any conditions. The rave party where the massacre happened had a statue of Buddha. Buddhism is a philosophy. How would Buddha respond in this situation?

I respect the Buddha in you. The higher way of thinking, rather than the lower way of thinking. Scriptures are written down so that people remember and are reminded to aspire to higher values. There is the chance today to make either the worst out of the situation that happened and then produce more worse reactions or there is the chance to settle for the best. Do what President Trump did by putting peace making with North Korea as a higher option, a better option.

Stepping back from such a provocative event, is not easy for a leader to do that controls a hundreds of thousand strong army. However, if the tone from here is set to the highest position that it can be if there is a gesture towards peace there is every chance that that could be reciprocated.

If there is not a gesture of peace then there is no chance of a better gesture from the other side either.

There is no more effective response sometimes to a situation that actually saying what you did was wrong, but I cannot equal that I can only better than by doing something that is undeniably right. Stepping back in strength, a mock charge like the most powerful land animal in the world does, The Elephant is the strongest most powerful action that can be taken today it puts Israel into a position of genuinely saying We could not agree more, the agreement between our two people is not right. Let's talk, release the hostages, lets talk, Let's make a better deal than the weak deal of the League of Nations. This time lets make the peace deal bigger, broader and better for all in the Holy Land.

Having written peace roadmaps, some of success and some not. There is a common denominator of some roadmaps that have worked. That is considering of information that has not been previously considered as to what factors could have either caused the war or provide a means for some improved mediation perspective in order to exit the war.

I have written some into this document, I cannot really say that this is a peace roadmap. All previous peace roadmaps were produced in conditions very different from this and to be honest with more information and resources.

In the context of all other peace roadmaps I have looked with the consideration of seeking to find a peaceful mediatable path beyond the current position. Like with all others I have no real knowledge or insight as to where or not this is possible. I don't have all the answers nor even the facts. I have simply put notes together that can hopefully be of some use as past peace roadmaps have been.

Peace roadmap authoring to attempt to produce a theoretical path to peace amid some of the most complicated of issues in the world has been tested to have worked, yet has not consistently worked. Many wars are the result of decades or hundreds of years of unanswered and unresolved issues. The recent events in Gaza have been so sudden. I write this to hopefully help add and propel a peace process.

In my opinion, there is not enough conversation about peace processes, peace roadmaps in the press. If there is this more then there is the chance to be able to at least have better perspective of situations how they are today and yet also the history of how situations have emerged. The information I write here, is not represented nor considered in any other form of media in the world.

The world is different today. In recent days there has been flooding in New York and Beijing. The need for cooperation between humanity to regenerate desertified land to bring balance to the world is clearly evident. If there is more war, there is less cooperation possible, the climate affects everyone more. The combination of poverty and the rapidly accelerating issues of climate will affect the world more unless peace making becomes more obtainable, more frequently. The need for there to be more intelligent, more complete discussions in the press in terms of peace making is an essential component to the good future of all, yet especially the people in the most under developed countries. There have been up to 302 MPH winds recorded at Bridge Creek. Most of the most extreme climatic conditions in recent years. These conditions are enough to destabilize any city in the world, let alone the poorest of people. When its considered there are higher instances of flood, Earthquakes caused by melting ice, increased fires perpetuating more deforestation. The only possible way to be able to replant is with the use of semi dessert and dessert spaces creating separated areas so one area does not affect the other. Whilst the climate issue is a medium term issue. The immediate issue is the war and yet that issue links to the same issue which is ineffective agreements between people. This causing a failure in relations between peoples and a failure in relations between peoples and the essential requirements of the planet. With failures of both, one then perpetuates the other. Anyone that considers that the climate issues is irrelevant, there is the more immediate issue of the war needs to also consider that issues such as drought are making conditions for all worse and that this again makes what were ineffective agreements between people, more ineffective than they have been. Essentially all human development has been made possible by man adapting to what is actually required by the world, learned to use the plants, the gifts of the Earth and yet adapt to the conditions. The circumstances on the Earth are in the process of the biggest changes in many thousands of years all happening currently and for the remainder of this century. Man is either going to get better at making agreements between people, representing the needs of all better, discussing peace making past and present of there will be a vast diplomatic failure. The consideration and study of peace making is a part of a science that is required that then builds upon collective knowledge obtained worldwide in recent decades and seeks to enable this to become coherently applied into policies. The arms industry is one of the largest industries in the world, it's intention is to defend and yet the only real defence in a world of collapsing climate is the the vast reforestation of the world and the only way that can be obtained is by increased cooperation with all country, more so than previously. A lack of good intention, good wishes towards other peoples, shared goals, shared objectives and the relationship there is with the Earth is taking all countries into more and more of a dessertified and bleak, no mans land. The need to relate well to nature is written into all of the main religions in the world and yet the study of how to be able to do that within the context of the means and technology of today is largely not even considered

Wars, crimes and investigations.

Many more people have been dying in wars than in all crimes, yet much more time is spent investigating crimes, than possible answers to stop, prevent, exit mediate wars.

Peace making is a type of science, that if successful enough can help all other sciences, progress well into the future.

There have been good mediations feasible in the past. There were more wars stopped from 2017 until 2021 than in any years this century. Perhaps more than in the last half of the previous century. This I do not know, yet what I do know is that there was a 'Universal interest' in peace making that was considered, used required in terms of peace making. There was a realisation for that brief moment in time that the modern world could turn a corner and before we know where we are there is a war that's it's seemingly impossible to escape from. There was a talking back from narratives of button sizes to mediation. There was a meeting of minds of the most contrasting political paradigms in the world. There was a so rare it's almost unknown break from the West and East rivalry being so close to war, and yet stepping back into peace making. How and why? The dots of the situation were joined up 'geopolitically. The implications mapped out in theoretical form, yes, yet backed up by pure common sense that said if this happens, then this will be the most likely reaction and then it that then happens then this will be the most likely reaction and what was clearly evident was that we were only a few steps away from the end of the stock market communications between West and East. So the truth is that there are two ways to avoid war one is to convince yourselves and your society that it's only happening over there, can never happen here. Another is to tell the facts, the most likely facts together with a map that maps out the implications. If the economic gain aspect, the control of more land, more resources aspect is taken out of the equation. If the implications are simply so great, then the cost of war becomes too much. So often war comes at the cost to people, the cost to a country, yet we have entered a time where war comes at the cost of every country not to a level of acceptable cost but complete cost. The cost of a war between West and East is the stockmarket, It is International trade.?

In terms of the geo-political position of all Muslim countries until a few days ago until the attack by Hama's into Israel, there has been the first time that I know off progress towards peace in all Muslim countries, a unity between Shia and Sunni. The actions of war are the result of failures in diplomacy. The failures in diplomacy between Israel and Palestinians is an issue that is unresolved due to tit for tat for decades. Which side is the side on the right and which is in the wrong? This is the usual quality of conversation. People in London protest and then other counter protest. However, to get beyond that paradigm of this side did this, and yet that side di that. There can only be an answer to that if there is a putting out in front of all information. From there a mediation that is attempted to be worked out. The Hamas attack and the Israeli reaction is how the media present this and yet if there were two scholars of either side that are first and foremost peace makers then there is the chance that they would certainly agree with each others perception of the situation. What's clearly evident is that the issues in Israel and in The Palestinian Territories is one conflict that I have not written about ever before. The reason for this is that to be able to produce an answers firstly requires a team with a lot of knowledge. What's required is both biased information to one side and the other and additionally unbiased information from both sides. Yet, there is more than that required as there are different groups within both of those sides. So effectively anyone attempting to produce an answer that could in fact theoretically be agreed cannot be produced in a document, it would require a series of meetings. A series of meetings to get all of the information that represents on a vast information board all of the issues and components of the conflict, all of the wishes, demands and needs. All of the restrictions, difficulties and issues in a present tense paradigm of reasoning.? From there trying to map out a way to be able to find out what is agreeable and in exchange for what and what is not agreeable. When there are some aspects of agreement produced on some issues there is then a position better than today. The situation in Israel today is totally unacceptable to Israelis, the situation in Gaza totally unacceptable to Palestinians. There is a template of a mediation success between Saudi Arabia and Iran. I have seen a media report wrongly 'referencing this successful peace mediation as being a possible 'cause of this'. Blaming a successful peace process for a current conflict is not credible at all. Peace perpetuates peace. Mediation, mediation. It's unresolved issues that create war. Peace making makes peace. There has been no reference made in any other media that I have seen, yet this type of mentality in media perpetuates an ignorant mindset. How many peace strategists were interviewed in terms of any of the successful mediations and peace processes of this century? The world needs an educated, realistic, voice of reason that is looking at issues internationally from a geo-political perspective. It's only by having that that there is any counter narrative to dangerously ridiculous paradigms of reasoning happening. So if we were to take that line of reasoning further that the successful mediation and peace making between Iran and Saudi Arabia resulted in this, then lets question who mediated that peace process? China, Ok and China is allied to BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, then of course there are the Muslim countries working towards peace, South America via Brazil and Africa via South Africa and Egypt. So in the? mind of this media why not just simply cite that this is the fault of every country? This of course is not what's required neither for the benefit of any Israeli or Palestinian people. What they require is a situation so that both people's not only feel safe, they are safe. In order to get to that position in my opinion requires looking at everything. Less so how the situation evolved into this today as to chart that requires going into the action and reaction mountain of past events. Yet, to clearly look at the full situation today not from the position of any particular side, but from every particular side and do that all at once with a room full of educated people from both sides and seek to find what can be agreed upon. The reality of this situation is that people will by their own thinking, paradigms be more 'loyal to one side or another' there will generally in such a long running problem be very set opinions based upon history. Whilst this is absolutely valid, it can be easier to consider that neither of the sides will ever perceive the situation from exactly the same position as the other, and yet of course within both sides there are various sides.?

If we are going to try to categorise wars to try and relate the situation between Israelis and Palestinians with any other conflict scenarios in the world, then we would have problems trying to do so. If I were to try and produce any, even slightly relevant comparisons jut simply to try and get some reference to the situation where there is a comparison then I would have to liken this to in some ways being like Syria. For the principle reason there were so many countries and groups with an interest and a position in that war. A significant part of the answer that helped progress that towards peace was the concept of a 'buffer zone' in the context of Syria there is also the aspect of the Kurds. A way of creating space between differing opposition countries was a factor. However, the most important factor in that was in fact the position that Turkey and Israel played in agreeing not to advance towards each other and in fact becoming mediators year later in terms of helping to mediate between Russia and Ukraine. So the peace making muscles are there. If I'm going to have a criticism of this situation it was really only the fact that the media did not represented fully the good peace making then that both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Erdogan did. the media presented the peace making more from the side of the West pulling out, and left out of the discussion the peace making that all sides did at that moment in time. This does further exemplify why it's important to be able to have the geo-political narrative fully represented in peace making. So no matter what is said Prime Minister Netanyahu has been not only a voice for peace making he has been a very effective peace maker for helping the whole world and in that context him and President Erdogan did a vast amount to help Europe. Yet, in the same breath as that the peace making that the Muslim world has done in recent years, especially in the context of Iran and Saudi Arabia, but at least if not more so in terms of Afghanistan. The Afghanistan of today is different from the past and it's different again not due to some Western media and their blame game narratives. but due more so to the mediation of both Russia and China with the Taliban. I have to add to this also that the UK and other countries did make a substantial financial contribution to help with the recovery of Afghanistan. However, more effort put into peace processes, peace making, the use and sharing of the best dessert regeneration information, knowledge and technologies is especially important to the dessert countries of the world. Saudi Arabia is achieving exceptional results in this. So too has Israel and yet for this to progress from here requires a better quality of mediation and agreement between countries today than ever before.

So the paradigm of there being only good countries and good people and then bad countries and bad people, is a type of 'with us or against us' type of paradigm of the early years of this century. All countries, all people want a good way to progress. The limitations are caused by trying to win a more subjectively beneficial result in mediation rather than mutually beneficial result in mediations. So effectively it's the quality of imagination, creativity and a sense of mutual interest that is excluded from International mediation, or even effective representation of what could help viably answer issues. In the 17th,18th,19th, 20th Centuries putting own interest first was the norm, in the 21st Century putting the interests of all is what's required more for the interests of any. If we count up all the weapons in the world, there are more than enough to destroy everyone, all that is required are narratives that do not allow for peace making to be heard enough.

People have a similar need to want to live in a good accepted country in the world and they want to be able to make their own futures and to not be oppressed or fearful for their own security simply due to their birth place and ineffective policies by their governments.

I have never been to Israel or Palestine. Almost all of the information I have is from the News and the internet. What's absolutely clearly evident is that Israel and the Palestinian territories, shaped like a tear drop have seen so many wrongs for all the people there. How to get beyond that with my position and my resources I have to be honest. I don't have the answer for. However, do I believe that a better answer than there is today is unobtainable? No absolutely not. Can an answer be better for all people's? Yes, I believe it can be. Can that be achieved by there being totally unrealistic demands by either side? I don't think so. If there are influences by either or both sides that are unreasonable can progress be made? Yes, probably. If people are as unreasonable as they can be then no progress is a possibility, and yet I would say even then unlikely. The reason is that there will always be more creative content to be able to go into that can produce in some way some improvement of the situation, I believe.?

If we are going to consider another example where there can be again some references that fit to the current situation then I would also make reference to South Africa. As soon as I say that, people may well assume that the White's would relate to the Israeli's and the blacks to the Palestinians. I'd say it's more complicated than that and whilst I have met and spent time with both white and black South Africans that lived under apartheid. Recently I was at a talk with Mamphela Ramphele. She was a very close friend of Nelson Mandela and the ability to be able to bring the past issues into the present and to produce a better answer for all people has been essential in peace making and therefore the stability of much of Africa and much of the world.

In 2003 I worked for someone employed by Nelson Mandela to establish the Peace park extension to Kruger Park. During that time I offered consultancy and concepts to help with that extraordinarily beneficial venture.

I have spoken to both black and white South Africans and they told me how negatively affected they were during the times of apartheid. Fear and needing to cope, was an everyday part of their lives and they were effectively in prison in their own homes with twenty five foot barbed wire fence and a BBQ outside with a gun in the middle of the table. I said to my friend, this is true. that is a cigarette lighter I assume. He looked at me and said dryly, 'I certainly would not advise you to try and light a cigarette with that.'

I visited Nelson Mandela's former residence in Soweto and saw the bullet holes outside on the wall of his house. I was told that he and Winnie Mandela used to regularly have to dive onto the floor to be protected by the low brick wall to the front of his house.

I heard from my friend who is South African that everyone lived in fear. So when I make a link and connection to the issues in Israelis and with the Palestinians if I ask myself the question here. Who are the victims in the situation there I have to say, it's both people's. From here I make another comparison. Again, it's not fully accurate however, there is something I believe that relates to the situation in The Holy Land and has done so for thousands of years. The Scriptures are all written within the context of people's that were affected by the control of countries of the time within the wider world that affected all the people of the entire Middle East.

In order to be able to consider more the dynamics of peace making and resistance to ineffective and unfair agreements between peoples which again produces a negative affect for all.

In the last years of slavery in South America, North America and the Caribbean. There was a sense of resistance and revolt in people who wanted out of slavery. In order to obtain that there were the well known aspects such as 'The Underground Railroad'. This was a network of safe houses that went from the Southern states of the USA to Canada. There were well known rebellions and these have been depicted in many Hollywood films. Yet, there was a more subtle form of disruption which included being a bit late for work, breaking tools, making minor errors, putting ground up glass into food and many more aspects of this.

In the later years there was so much concern and fear amongst those enslaving others that again both people's were born into a situation where they all lived in fear. The oppression of one people, resulted in the inevitable response which was to push back against this. This then resulted in negatives for all.

The common denominator of the last years of slavery, Apartheid in South Africa, as well as the war in Syria is that in all three of these scenarios all the people in one way or another irrespective of what side they were on all were the victims of the situation that they were born into. The situation that they inherited. What I'm not trying to do here is to try and either justify any of this. Nor to try and present the idea that those people that oppress other people in any way are the 'victims' from a moral perspective, no but what I am saying is that from a human perspective, from a logistical perspective. A human experience perspective that is how the role of master and servant has played out throughout history, where there is in fact an increasingly blurred line in terms of there really being one group of people over another group of people that actual dynamics in practice go both ways. The same considerations a true with the Roman Empire, the slave revolts depicted in the film Spartacus yet those events together with a pandemic and over expansion of the Roman Empire are all significant factors that caused the downfall of the ancient romans. In the context of today, the outward expansion of all countries is again 'weakening' the centre, increasingly caused by similar factors, rights issues, pandemic, war, yet also climate. The climatic issue appears to be the least important of these to some or even many today, yet in the next ten, twenty, thirty years this unless better answered today will become more of a pressure than any of the other factors, and yet in reality be part of and perpetuate the others. All of this again linking to the differences between effective and non effective agreements both between countries and yet within countries between peoples as well. There has been a tendency to believe that 'peoples can be contained and controlled' throughout the ages. There has always tended to be an over estimation of this by those seeking to control and then resistance to this in ways that those seeking to control never considered possible. The human mind is so extraordinary and yet the human will and determination combined with that creates an overall paradigm of experience in the world where seeking cooperation rather than competition plays out in practice as being better, long term. Yet, in

So the events in Israel and Gaza today are a tragedy that is shared between all of the people there, whichever side they are on. All people have more fear, a worse lifestyle, a greater reason for being traumatised as human beings as a result of what's happening there today. No Israeli will go to a music event in future without them having in their own minds a representation of the traumatic event that happened. Equally, there is nobody in Gaza that is sleeping tonight without that same sort of fear. What's absolutely clearly evident is that the vast majority of Israelis and the vast majority of Palestinians have found themselves in this position of wake up tomorrow feeling fear, not due to their own choices, yet due to the circumstances that they were born into. So if we are to really look for the unreasonable aspects to the entire situation, the trauma of the situation, this does in fact affect all people in the same way. All are equally concerned for their own wellbeing and that of those that are their loved ones. The question of who started all this how and why is not a consideration to those that are affected in the immediacy of the war. Yet, there is more to this. The outer rings of the situations. The outer ring of slavery in South, Central and North America resulted in the birth of the labour movement in the UK. The first ever petition in the Uk was produced by the mill workers of the North of England to lobby Parliament. The implications of this caused the largest ever social divide between women and men and this was throughout all classes. There was an expression that originated from that time 'Does the lady take sugar'? This was asked to men in the most exclusive tea rooms and really equated to the question being asked, Is she a part of the boycott against sugar for the abolition. The social implications of the Apartheid movement which in the UK came very much from Labour and not from the Conservatives, produced the first major contradiction to Thatcher, that then increased with the mining strikes. The moral argument of all of this was actually only fully completed with a statue of Nelson Mandela outside of Parliament. The contrasting position Margaret Thatcher initially took was largely forgotten. In terms of Syria, the peace brokering between sides never got fully enough considered in my opinion and if it did then I believe that there is something certainly very important to say for Prime Minister Netanyaho as being at that time one of the most important of peace brokers in the world. How he responds to what has since happened in Israel in recent days is realistically not unpredictable. Why this has happened is due to the real cause of the second world war. That was a bad deal between the allies of the first world war and Germany. Germany used that bad deal as a way to enable Hitler to get into power and we know where the tragedy of all of that went too. Who were the victims of world war two. That was everyone other than the German's. No, not at all. The victims of world war two became everyone in Europe and many in most other areas of the world. So the reality of all the above situations is that a deal that does not work for one group of people, a deal that effectively harms the interests of one people, then causes the same level or a similar level of trauma pain suffering to all involved in the situation. The reality is if we forget for a moment the history of which side did what first why that was worse than what the other side did and how that was in response to something else. If all of that is put to the side for just one moment and there is the quest for finding a common problem and a common best possible answer. then the common problem is that in fact all suffer on all sides from an ineffective arrangement between two peoples firstly. Secondly, the only way to get beyond that is by blaming the arrangement, the deal more than the people on either side.?

Whilst that can sound all okay in theory. In practice it's incredibly difficult if not impossible for some people to be able to get over the immediacy of the trauma, the pain, the loss, the death. As I have written in various peace roadmaps a single death affects a family for one hundred years. That can be thirty people affected for the whole of their lives and passing that trauma onto their children from one statistic on a news channel that is read out one day and by most forgotten the next day. The trauma of loss in war is unlike anything else.

So we are not going to do the blame game in all this, yet just to say all the problems in this area are the result of there never having been an agreement of a reasonable deal for all. The populating of this area is a result in part of the terrible arrangement, which I don't like to even use that term in this way, yet the traumatic, the terrible situation in Europe for Jewish people due to the second world war. This caused by an agreement that even after the first world war people in 10 Downing Street said then was so unfair to Germany would cause problems down the line. If Germany had obtained anything near a fair deal after WW1 then the ideas of the Third Reich would have remained a side act in the beer halls of Germany. His philosophy did not actually make sense by anyone with a modern education.? Arian is a word that originates from Sanskrit, from the Indus valley of India and Pakistan.? The tactics he used were straight out of the first psychology work of Sigmund Freud, Vast amounts of people were manipulated into paradigms of reasoning that could not be questioned with free speech into being a part of a destruction machine that almost cost all of Europeans their freedom and rights. The most affected in this were the Jewish people and the truth is that not only did he have Jewish ancestry himself but he played into an old narrative which was the oppression of the Jewish people that had happened in a great many countries previously. It was the arrangement, the deal of WW1 that has bene a very substantial, a pivotal issue of how and why the situation in Israel is as it is today. If the Jewish people want to really go in contrast to the wrongs of the past they need to do exactly the complete opposite of what gave power to The Third Reich. They need to escape from not from Egypt, and the bad deal they had there, not escape from anywhere due to a bad deal resulting in their suffering, the longest suffering of any ethnic group in the world when properly considered. They need to do the exact complete opposite of all the bad deals given to them in the past which has effectively caused the oppression of the Jewish people for many thousands of years. They today would do the best thing by producing a very, very good deal for the Palestinians. In the world of today any people's in the world given a bad deal immediately results in countries and entire people's taking the oppressed people's perspective. This you are not with us, you are with them is bringing about chaos that is equally matched at least. The situation between Russia and Ukraine is one West and East contrast. I have seen in the same Western media an article trying to relate what's happened in Israel to Russia. Please. Western journalists learn the truth about your own modern history, please. Russia mediated with Israel for calm in Syria. Russia helped Israel, that is why Israel were so appreciative of this both Prime Minister Bennet and Netanyahu have been so very much on the side of mediation. That is also why Russia immediately, called for calm and a ceasefire in the current situation.?

What I say here in no uncertain terms is that the real enemy to the Jewish people is the same enemy for thousands upon thousands of years, This going all the way back to Egypt, it's the same enemy in Neo-Babylonia, Romans, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Germany, England, Russia, Ireland. The enemy is 'the biased' arrangement? within countries. Reading the history of Judaism begins with friendship between Muslims. Yet, the 'biased'? agreement from others to them has always been the same. A consistent all the way up until the time of Israel. A bias against Jewish people. It's perhaps impossible to find any other group of people in the world that were oppressed consistently with a bias set of laws against them almost where every they went than the Jews. What's evident though is that since the formation of Mandatory Palestine and the Balfour Declaration there has never been an amicable, 'non biased' deal that the Palestinians, the Arabs agreed with. So in other words from more than many thousands of years ago right up until the 1922 there had never, ever been an agreement that was consistently non-biased towards the Jewish people. Yet, from 1922 there was this and yet this was put forward by The League of Nations, which was founded for the right reasons, ie for world peace yet as an organisation failed at that with the start of World war two, again caused by a biased agreement. So WW2 biased agreement, slavery and apartheid biased agreement, problems in Israel today the result of as unbiased agreement as possible. The way in which world wars were prevented was due to improved mediation being found to be possible. The way in which was have been the most consistently created is 'biased agreements'. The bias in not representing peace roadmaps and peace processes properly and correctly, has created fear, insecurity in countries such as Russia that then invaded Ukraine. All of that is really to do with an ineffective a 'biased agreement' towards Russia since the and of the cold war it can be argued with Russia unable to join either NATO or the EU. So what I believe today is that there could be an escalation in the war between Israel and Hamas,? I have heard the statement made by Mahmoud Al-Zahar, A Hamas Commander and his statement says this, so too does the statement made by Prime Minister Netanyahu. If they are both right, escalation inevitable then this will inevitably play out with losses to both sides. However, the consideration can also be acknowledged that there has never been even a good arrangement between Israeli's and Palestinians and that is in more than one hundred years. If there was a negotiation towards that a good deal for both, a negotiation that begins from a completely different position than ever before previously. A position to want to have an answer that works for not only both people, but all people then there is the chance that better mediation, a better plan a first ever 'unbiased plan' could be spoken of and some elements of that producing a potentially vast improvement to the current situation. In the past there have been positions taken by both sides in mediation, there has not been a position taken by both sides, plus strategists not mediators. mediators try to gain agreement derived from the content provided by both sides in terms of the problem. Strategist do that, and yet in addition to that can produce and add new content that may potentially add in new concepts, that can then produce better answers, more complete answers than at first considered for all sides.

What's clearly evident is that a long war is predictably a war that is bad for all. A new chance on mediation for a new, better deal at least provides another option than that. Both sides having a cease fire now. That benefits both sides. That is a first goodwill measure that can bring in the chance for an interjection which is a mediation, and the chance for proposals of a peace roadmap and a process of using and adapting that once there is mediation.

Both the EU and the USA are being put into a position with this situation of having to make decisions and yet neither of these want war. So I would suggest with all factor considered. That there is today a choice to actually totally disagree on all that has happened in recent days. Yet, at least an honest realisation that the Jewish people in their entire history have never, ever once been involved in a political agreement that lasted that was in fact un-biased. In almost every single situation the bias was in contrast to the Jewish people. Today with all factors considered there are reasons for both sides to have animosity towards the other side that is beyond measure. Yet, with all of that considered, there is no other group of people in history that have been as a affected as the Jewish people by agreements that were always on a win-lose basis from since before the Jewish people escaped from slavery in Egypt. Producing or even seeking to produce? the first even non-biased agreement is an opportunity for today that the Jewish people have never had.?

I make one more comparison. In 2016 there was a conflict between India and Pakistan. This was the first time ever in history that two nuclear powers were actually in military conflict with each other. I wrote a peace roadmap for that situation then. I cited that the problems between India and Pakistan were all 'inherited problems' from past colonialism, then reactions to that, then concepts proposed and instigated derived from trying to exit from a problem position, rather than actually seeking to produce a really good answer that works for all. Rushed unconsidered reactive decisions can result in a situation that works for no party, yet if there is enough time, effort, representation of new concepts, new proposals, new ideas then there can be a chance for better answers produced than were better than ever before. Whilst in the context of India and Pakistan, this area of the world had produced more effective peace practices and exported this around the world. The actual issues that the two countries were involved in were inherited problems. The same is true between the Israeli and Palestinian people. The consideration that the agreement is the problem much more so than the other people who are also in their own ways victims of the ineffective deal. If that paradigm of reasoning is at least considered and worked on then maybe it can be true that a better proposal than ever before can be produced, discussed, formulated and provided. Yet, what's required is a preparedness on many sides to want a better answer to be at least attempted.

The issues they have today are the result of the choices made by an organisation, The League of Nations that does not even exist today. The attempts made may have been made then with the best intentions and yet it's only the history since then that has produced the evidence there is today that that proposal and plan made then did not work. For both the Israelis and the Palestinians to have their own modern history so affected by the policies of an organisation that no longer exists, without being able to perceive the structure to this crisis originating from 'inherited' conditions is not a position of real strength. What would be however, is Israel stating they did not start the war, but they will end the war. Do so by overtly trying to produce a peace deal that really works. A peace deal that breaks 3,000 or more years of tradition of the Jewish people never having had a win-win deal with any group or country.

By saying and believing now it's possible to take full control of the situation and to nurture a better outcome than would be readily perceived by so many others. There is the slightest chance that this attempt at goodwill, as peace brokering in the name of the best future for all could make much more sense than trying to find justice in any way from such a tragedy by simply repeating that. However, it's chosen to define Hamas, that does not distract from the fact that a better answer is required here and that best answer can be and has to be? a 'non biased' plan, something that can work for all. A plan that is the first ever geo-political win-win plan to seek to answer debatably one of the very most complicated of geo-political issues in the world. I do not know all the answers of how to make a non biased deal, a deal that is absolutely peace making. This can only be achieved via direct mediation if it can be achieved at all.?

It pains the world seeing such an important place going into a war scenario whilst there would still be a way through to peace making.?

Beyond the century of selflessness.

My peace roadmap work has often considered the gestures of kindness, acts of goodwill to be a part of peace making. A first step into diplomacy. Is that possible now? Do the benefits of peace outweigh the continuity of a war?

The first quarter of the 21th Century has almost all been taken up from one day to the next of wars, conflict, human tragedy. If the second quarter has the same then humanity is on a trajectory towards destruction. whilst humanity wrangles over our problems between each other the Earth will increasingly cooperate less than ever before.

The 20th Century was the century of self, the 21st Century needs to go one step further to self-lessness and do so expediently to maintain anything resembling a world 'as normal' as it's been until today! I do not have all the answers to all the problems in the world, yet I do have an answer of how to adapt systems much more in alignment towards that. My peace roadmap work prevented wars since 2017. My work became a resource for the world that few knew about, too few people of influence really listening then or now. Politicians took my findings, to help their careers. As a consequence, there was zero complete truth in any media. Whilst today people prepare for the busy weekend, Russia prepares nuclear drills, I wonder if anyone of influence in the politics or media in the West will realise the importance of peace roadmaps, and peace processes fast enough, completely enough. There are universal needs in the world, and thinking and resources. We live in an imperfect world, and therefore when there are answers obtained that help all progress, these need to be known.

There are trillions spent of weapons designed to harm people. There has been exactly $0 spent on research, development and funding the most viable and effective, tried, tested, proven diplomatic mediation methods used this century. There is incomplete and incorrect representation of 7 peace processes this century! When obtaining peace has been obtained then how and why this was feasible should be considered a media priority. The truth is the 'modern world' would have stopped in 2017, had it not been for peace roadmaps and peace processes.

These included diplomacy and altering positions by up to ten countries, yet only a few countries were considered. If peace roadmaps, and the peace processes produced are not fully helped then for many the 'good times' in the world are at risk of fading. Relations between West and East have changed. Contemplation and consideration of how stability can be brought back to more 'normality' on an International level is vital.

Kindness on a level between ordinary people is seemingly consistently greater than the kindness showed by many 'successful people'. Success by 20th Century definitions has to consistently represent and connect to 'goodwill' on more levels! We need smart discussion on past peace making, and if the media do not discuss peace making more, then it requires philanthropists to buy advertising to tell people the truth. Gestures of kindness are a minimum required in a world of more want, more need.

More complete media of peace processes past and present can help influence the narrative of peace making to become clearer. An increased neural pathway. West and East diplomacy and peace making is a pre-requisite to all trade.

What concerns me the most, is that every facet of human progress, capacity, comfort and most technologies are reliant upon government diplomacy. Government diplomacy today is only as good as it is due to the fact that peace processes were viable in the past and peace roadmaps were used.

There has been incomplete representation of 7 of the most important peace processes of this century. The study and practice of how to use hands to obtain food and to put this into our mouths is a requirement of humanity. Today as essential is the correct study and representation of recent peace processes and roadmaps. This is a requirement in maintaining civilisation as it's been for hundreds of years until today. In 2017 a 'multi-polar' agreement, of some 11 countries in Asia and the USA prevented war and the end of modern civilisation by using a peace roadmap method acceptable to the East and the West. Countries acted for the global interest before national interest for the first time. This truth has not been told in the press. This is why there was increased world peace from 2017-2021, yet progress lost, more risks today than before.

In this document I have explored a few areas for consideration. There is incomplete data that I have to reference. There are simply ideas for consideration, however for nations to get good at peace making I consider to be of the greatest importance. Cooperation between countries and groups that did not agree previously could by way of an new attempt to mediate, using new information, new knowledge and opportunities could potentially be the answer to begin good peace making from good deals for the first time. The non Muslim world in my opinion needs to acknowledge the fact that there have been far too many wars in Muslim countries firstly. Secondly, the world has a vast resource that's required for the whole world that mostly Muslim countries have and that is a resource for having some of the most vitally important land for being able to balance the climate for all. A new sense of seriousness in terms of relations with all countries to properly answer the issues of agreements that are today ineffective for large groups of people is of vital importance. By being able to acknowledge the fact that the past history has not been good for either side in The Holy Land, then at least creates a first starting position of one agreement. The second position could be a ceasefire. The third position is going not into negotiation but into information sharing. What are the issues of each and every faction involved in this situation. Put all of that information together on a board and then to look at study all of that information and then to be able to see if there are ways from this to be able to go to a third forth, fifth agreement. If there can be twenty new incremental agreements on aspects of the problem, then from there it's possible at least in theory to put together a whole new workable plan for the Holy Land. The fact is where we are today, you can take any decade of the past one hundred years and write a very long list of reasons why the situation during that decade was not working effectively for either side. In my opinion, it's best to go back to the beginning, put all the issues and problems into one place and have new thinking about this drawing from the strength and capacity of recent successful peace processes. The world has a situation where there is a war today, built upon a slightly different war of a month ago, upon another slightly different war of a a year before that, a decade before that many decades before that and thousand year history of ineffective agreements before that. In my opinion, the people, the leaders of today can potentially do better than has ever been done previously if there is effort put into this and there not being simply the action and reaction to both sides when the agreements and the position has never been ideal for either side when all factors are considered.