Reflexive postliberal peace: a cultural paradigm shift in Israel’s peacebuilding

ABSTRACT To what extent does postliberal peace represent a substantive cultural paradigm shift relative to the liberal peace paradigm? We offer an empirical examination of the question through the Israeli case. An analysis of sixteen peace associations shows that peace activism has changed in the last twenty years in Israel in terms of organization, orientation, and action. Such change is clearly based on reflexivity, i.e. on the attempt by the activists to overcome the weakness of the liberal peace approach that has failed repeatedly in the Israeli-Palestinian context. The Israeli case reveals a cultural change that is creating a new, concrete, micro-level, “bottom-up” model of peacebuilding grounded, first and foremost, in everyday life. It is based on creating bridges on the social and cultural levels through practices, meetings, and networks. Although the peace process is not visible in the near future in Israel, and precisely because of that, the article presents the formation of a new cultural perception, which might be useful, and even necessary in time.

liberal peace instances, such as that of South Sudan for example, Vitalis also claimed that the international organisations had become so dominant that local key stakeholders were often excluded from important deliberations. 8n many cases, the critics continued, top-down external imposition actually reinforced illiberal forces within society, and quickly led to the resumption of violence, often against the foreign interveners themselves.The critics even questioned the liberal assumption that economy and the 'spirit of commerce' create sufficient incentives for states and elites to promote peace.After all, violence and war can also offer handsome profits. 9n general, any reduction of questions of peace and war to economic determinism is problematic, and indeed, it gradually became clear that 'universal' Western values that prioritise utility, and especially material utility, are not appreciated in many cases.No wonder that the critics described the liberal peacebuilding project as 'hegemonic', a form of 'Western imperialism' or 'colonial', noting that this project does not usually enjoy wide support from most of the population beyond the elites. 10ome liberal peace critics, such as Richmond and Mac Ginty, presented 'the local' as the basis for an alternative path for what they termed a 'postliberal peace'. 11This type of peace is based on 'bottom-up' practices that facilitate the effective and legitimate advancement of peace by diverse domestic actors whose rights, priorities, sensitivities, local history, and specific culture are taken into consideration.The difference between a liberal-type peace and a postliberal one has indeed been made clear.However, the new argumentation also raised some criticisms.Some observers, such as Finkenbusch, have questioned whether it is accurate to present the local as a substitute for the international, or for the state, since it cannot stand as a real alternative to them in regards to human rights, democratisation, marketisation, and the organisational ability to create a sustainable peace. 12nother problem that critics have raised is that the postliberal arguments are not empirically based.That in many cases it presented a desired image of a 'good society', rather than a reliable image of reality. 13At this point, we want to intervene in the debate surrounding the meaning and importance of the liberal/postliberal peace and to do it through an empirical examination of one case study, that of Israel.Our argument is that peacebuilding in Israel, mainly from 2000 onwards, represents not only a 'bottom-up' attempt to bring about political change but also an innovative grassroots approach that indicates a significant cultural change.Moreover, this changing approach, so we claim, is clearly based on reflexivity, that is, on a conscious effort, in our case by the Israeli peace activists, to overcome the weaknesses and the failed attempts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through the principles of liberal peace.
We follow Archer's definition of reflexivity as an act of self-reference, where action 'bends back on', refers to, and affects the entity instigating the action. 14If proven, the Israeli case will demonstrate that postliberal peace does not represent just one side in a philosophical or academic debate, but a substantive and reflexive perspective to deal with the concrete problem of peace and war through a new cultural prism.
The manuscript is based upon a review we conducted encompassing most of the current Israeli peace associations and NGOs.Sixteen of them have operated in Israel from 2000 onward (see Table 1).Some associations were established a few years earlier, but, as we already mentioned, they later imitated the others' organisation and action.All these new associations and NGOs have published data supporting their narratives, as well as reports, testimonies, documentation, and accounts regarding their activities.Moreover, all these associations allow researchers to participate in their activities and to be interviewed by them.
Methodologically, the research is based on the so-called qualitative 'grounded theory', which is an inductive method based on the idea of developing theories that are empirically derived from real-world situations, and the 'lived experience' of those who live it and create meaning from it. 15Practically, we encoded the large quantity of data that we collected and divided it into concepts (sometimes called norms) according to our research question.Later on, we regrouped the concepts into larger categories (sometimes called values).These are broader groups of similar concepts that succinctly present the more comprehensive meaning of the concepts.In qualitative interpretive analysis, the first task is to create the building blocks or key points of the phenomenon.The second is to regroup them together in a way that allows us to identify any novel elements in the investigated phenomenon, and to assess whether the norms offer some basic and new values.If novel aspects are identified, these can serve as an important step in constructing a theorya collection of categories that detail the subject of the research. 16In this way, both the concepts and the categories we constructed allow us to examine the new Israeli peace activity and to assess whether it embodies any cultural novelty, within the specific historical and political context, and whether it has any influence on the conflict.
The manuscript is divided into three sections.The first presents the 'rise and fall' of the liberal peace within the Israeli-Palestinian context.The second examines in detail the concepts, practices, and norms of the new generation of Israeli peace associations, while the third considers whether these norms and practices expose values and categories that indicate cultural innovation.

The rise and fall of Israel's liberal peace
Israel experienced a Golden Age" of a yearning for peace that expressed itself in vigorous and vibrant activism that was carried by various peace movements mainly in the 1980s.'Peace Now' in the second half of the 1970s pressured PM Menachem Begin to make peace with Egypt, and called for the withdrawal of Israel from the Occupied Territories.In many respects, Peace Now resembled other peace movements around the world, for example, in its capacity to organise mass demonstrations, some drawing almost 100,000 participants, which were intended to pressure the decision makers to sign the agreement. 17Other peace movements have emerged when Israel waged a war in Lebanon in 1982.These movements were much more radical and militant than Peace Now, supporting the conscientious objection of soldiers and regarding the war as a 'choice war'. 18In 1987, Israel's suppression of the Palestinians violent uprising, 15 Jullianne Okatay, S. Grounded Theory (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). 16 named as the First Intifada, led as well to the emergence of new peace movements, the most famous perhaps was Women in Black. 19Close to 30 such groups were operating in these years.They were titled the 'peace camp' and succeeded in advancing a new discourse that saw peace as a realistic option for Israel, together with the idea that public political pressure on the government, especially when carried by women, could be effective. 20In many respects, the Israeli movements resembled other peace movements that existed in the modern era around the world.Common themes included a critique of the status quo and readiness to engage in protest; organisational forms designed to facilitate rank-and-file mobilisation; an attempt to challenge the decisions of those in power and put pressure on them, and a choice of preferred methods of action to achieve influence. 21he disappearance of the Israeli peace movements around the Oslo Agreements was grounded on the assumption that the Agreements between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority can serve as a substitute for the peace movements activities.This assumption was partly based on the opposition of the Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin to the involvement of peace movements in the peace process, due to his concern that the support of these 'lefties' would harm the global support in the process, especially of the US, and would weaken support among the Israeli liberal middle-class.Interestingly, the movements themselves accepted this assumption, thus actually supporting the liberal peace on which the process was based.
Indeed, the idea of a liberal peace stood at the centre.This concept emerged in the spirit of the post-Cold War era, a spirit that was disseminated by the US.The liberal approach was epitomised in the 1991 Madrid Conference, a peace conference hosted by Spain and cosponsored by the U.S. and the Soviet Union, with the participation of many Arab states, and of course Israel and the Palestinians, in an attempt to revive the Israeli -Palestinian peace process.The talks failed, but the idea of a liberal peace persisted.It was manifested in talks in London between PLO representatives and representatives of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which were later moved to Oslo under the auspices of the Norwegian government.Talks were also held in the US, but the main international and superpower dimension of the process came when both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Agreements were signed in Washington DC, underscoring their international legitimacy.The agreement inaugurated at the White House in September 1993, for example, was signed not only by the US president and secretary of state, but also by the Russian Foreign Minister.
The creation of a Palestinian Authority as a substitute for the PLO, with many statelike characteristics, was also typical of the liberal emphasis on the importance of statebuilding and creating a strong and stable political body capable of implementing any agreement.Democracy was also part of the agreement.It included an emphasis on the creation of a Council for the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that was supposed to be elected by the people, but again, 'under agreed supervision and international observation'.As for the material aspects, the agreements were based on an Israeli-Palestinian cooperation in economic fields, and economic projects, together with a possible participation of Jordan and Egypt.And if this was not enough, not only the regional, but the global context appeared as well, with the idea that the two sides would accept development programmes initiated by the G-7, and would even request the G-7 to seek the participation in these programmes of other interested states and members from the private sector. 22he liberal peacebuilding, however, created strong objection on both sides, manifested itself in Israel in the forms of civil uprisings on the part of the Israeli right and the settlers, culminated in the assassination of Rabin in 1995, and on the other side, in Hamas terrorist attacks in Israeli cities in 1994 and again in 1996. 23t is not possible to list here all the reasons for the failure of the Oslo Agreements, but undoubtedly a significant factor was the lack of trust between the political bodies.The Israelis continued expropriating land, establishing settlements, and declaring that a Palestinian state would not be established, while the Palestinian leadership did not curb terrorism.
The parties believed that trust between the two nations would be built as the process progressed.This is a central tenet of the liberal peace approach.But the opposite happened, as none of the parties made any significant effort to mobilise support for the process among their respective populations.As Uri Sabir, director general of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the time and one of the architects of the Oslo accords, remarked years later: 'The populations were not involved in the process and therefore could not embark together on a journey of reconciliation and cooperation'. 24he Americans continued in their efforts to establish liberal peace in the region.This was evident in the Wye Memorandum signed in Maryland in 1998.Following the agreement, Israel was supposed to withdraw from more Palestinian territories, but PM Netanyahu refused to implement the decision.Another climax of the liberal peace attempts was the Camp David Summit in July 2000.The Israelis came with a plan for a final solution, but the Palestinian leadership did not accept it, and refused to offer an alternative one, despite President Clinton's pleas. 25he failed talks led to the Al-Aqsa Intifada. 26The new war lasted for more than four years, taking the life of more than 1,000 Israelis and 4,000 Palestinians.Meanwhile, the Americans continued their efforts to make a change with the 'Road Map', a typical liberal peace procedural and timetable plan proposed by the Quartet on the Middle East: the US, the EU, Russia, and the UN.The plan was based, first, on the belief that leaders play a crucial role in any peace process; second, that the Americans have the right to choose who the Palestinian leader will be; and third, that they can decide in what way and under what terms this leader should achieve independence for his people.
The Roadmap was not realised, but efforts to establish a liberal peace in the region continued in 2007 at Annapolis, again without any success. 27In the meantime, and as a result of these failed attempts to secure liberal peace, a political vacuum was created, the reality on the ground became increasingly bloody, and Israeli settlers constantly strove to establish facts on the ground in order to prevent any future partition of the land.Against this background, a new approach has emerged in Israel regarding the nature of possible peacebuilding.

Norms and practices of a new kind
The first significant indication of the new phenomenon in Israel with regard to peacebuilding appeared in organisational change.The new activism took the form of NGOs; while some of the associations maintained a format of social movements, typical elements of NGOs were woven into their organisation and activities.Sociological approaches to NGOs, as Martens indicated, are mainly defined by referring to what NGOs are not.They are non-governmental, non-profit making, non-uninational, and non-violent.They are characterised by a minimal organisational structure, including a headquarters and a permanent paid staff. 28In recent decades, NGOs have shown a tendency to growing professionalism, and the activists or employees often have specific abilities relevant to their work.Most of the NGOs are independent and funded primarily through membership fees and private donations.Unlike the classical peace movements of the past, peace NGOs are not built around the idea of mobilising as many people as possible.They see a greater advantage and ability to act as small organisations, attempting to influence the public through the electronic media.Moreover, in peace movements, the concept of peace has often been abstract -a symbol or idea that the movement raises around a given conflict, without necessarily offering concrete, detailed, and practical solutions.Interestingly, even the name of the first Israeli peace movement reflected this approach through its unrealistic demand for 'Peace Now!' The new peace associations, on the other hand, tended to propose specific peacebuilding packages: ongoing programmes intended to address exact problems, based on expertise, experience, and personal knowledge from the activists on the ground. 29ll the Israeli peace associations maintain websites whose homepages feature a logo and typical slogans and symbols.They also have a clear legal status, and they are inspected by the Registrar of Associations and the Registrar of Dedications, respectively.An examination of the homepages of these associations reveals a relatively fixed pattern.Information is provided in three languages (Hebrew, Arabic, and English), including details about the organisation, its staff, board, and members, and a room for answers to questions such as 'who we are', 'what is our purpose', and 'how we operate'.The homepage often presents the narratives of the organisation through documents: testimonies, personal stories, and reports.All the homepages highlight the connections between the organisation and new media: videos, TV programmes, radios, newspapers, press conferences, etc.The homepages are built in a simple and unpretentious way, since the idea is to allow accessibility, identification, and participation, and to encourage the reader to make donations.Israel's peace movements in the past did not have websites, as they flourished prior to the information age.The differences, however, between past and present go far beyond the technical level.In the following, we present the concepts or norms that were discovered through our data processing of the new peace activities.We present each concept with some concrete examples from the associations' activities.

Monitoring
Most Israeli peace movements of the past did not engage in any form of monitoring.They were usually involved in specific activities that were regarded as a contribution to the reduce of specific violence or to the end of a war.Such were the Four Mother Movements, for example, whose members successfully pressured the government in 2000 to end the war in Lebanon and to withdraw Israeli soldiers from the country.After the IDF left, the movement was dissolved. 30ost of the current peace associations are involved in monitoring and regard this means as an effective tool for protecting Palestinian human rights.Machsom Watch (Checkpoint Watch, established in 2001) is an association comprised of Israeli women who take part in three to four-hour shifts in small groups at checkpoints throughout the West Bank.The women observe on the daily basis the interaction between the Israeli soldiers or Border Police and the Palestinians.The activists, mostly middle-aged women, document their monitoring through reports, photographs, and videos.As they wrote, 'Thousands . . .testimonies [which] provide independent, reliable accounts of the repression suffered by Palestinians living under Israeli occupation'. 31The monitoring of the Machsom Watch has often been found to be effective.The women succeeded many times in influencing commanders, at the local, non-formal level, to allow passage and access, especially in cases involving elderly men, women, and children.Still, the meaning of their activities was to make public a crucial aspect of the occupation, that of repression and the way it appears at the checkpoints.It is no wonder that their activities have met with opposition not only from the government but also from movements that represent Israel's uncivil, militaristic, and religious society, of those who hope that the occupied territories will forever remain in Israel's hands. 32or example, Nadia Matar, the chairperson of a movement called Women in Green (as a contrast to Women in Black), wrote a letter to the chief of staff saying that the Machsom Watch women disturb soldiers' work at checkpoints and 'humiliate our soldiers in front of the Arabs'.33

Advocacy
The new peace associations often seek to improve the situation of the occupied population through litigation.Many times, the Isreali associations go to court since Palestinian victims prefer not to file complaints against the settlers or against the Israeli soldiers.Yesh Din ('There is a Law', established in 2005), is an association that combines monitoring and advocacy actions around human rights violations against the Palestinians in the occupied territories.In 2019, the organisation's field researchers collected testimonies regarding 28 separate incidents of settler violence, divided into five categories: seven cases of settler personal violence; 20 cases of damage to property, including 16 cases of olive theft; four cases of tree vandalism; and one case of agricultural trespassing.Complaints were filed with the police in six of these cases.In addition, following a series of incidents involving attempts by Israeli soldiers to deny the Palestinian access to their agricultural lands, Yesh Din filed an urgent petition to the High Court of Justice, in a classical act of advocacy. 34Even though Yesh Din describes itself on its homepage as 'volunteers for human rights', it cleary indicates that 'human rights' do not stand by themselves.They are means to protect the Palestinians "living under Israeli armed forces' occupation".Moreover, as they say: 'We view the occupation as a main source of the violation of human rights and therefore seek to end it'. 35

Humanitarian help
In June 2002, the Israeli cabinet decided to construct a Separation Barrier, following a long string of attacks perpetrated by Palestinians against Israelis.The declared objective was to prevent Palestinians without permits from entering Israel from the West Bank.However, the establishment of the barrier has also permitted the de facto annexation of Palestinian lands (85% of the barrier runs inside the West Bank), and to transfer most of it to the Jewish settlements.The barrier also violated Palestinians right of movement, and many associations, such as Ta'ayush ('living together' in Arabic), which was established in 2000, actively opposed the plans. 36Another active movement was Anarchists against Walls (established in 2002).The Israeli members of the association attempted, in full cooperation with both the Palestinian Authority's representatives, and with Palestinians from villages along the barrier, to prevent the works around the fence.They did not resort to the use of violent means that included throwing stones, illegal demonstrations, and sabotaging the bulldozers.In an age where everything is televised and immediately transmitted all over the world, it was difficult for the army and police to deal with these popular demonstrations, especially as not only Palestinians but also Israelis participated. 37What stood behind the support for the Palestinian villagers was not only a humanitarian principle of helping those whose land was stolen.There was also and above all a clear political issue: to prevent a situation in which a future Palestinian state would be reduced to the territory of the new demarcation rather than extending to the Green Line. 38umanitarian help to Palestinians in the Occupied Territories is a central motive in the Road to Recovery (established in 1996), which is an organisation of thousands of Israeli volunteers who drive Palestinians requiring medical treatment from the occupied territories to hospitals in Israel.In 2019, for example, the association organised over 10,000 such transportations, serving some 20,000 Palestinian patients, mostly children. 39n an interview, one of the main activists in the organisation told me that a benevolent philanthropist had offered to buy minibuses for the organisation.Rather than Israeli volunteers transporting the Palestinian patients in their private cars, minibuses with professional drivers would do so in a more efficient way with his financing.The association refused, since alongside helping the patients, their wider purpose is to create daily encounters, forging of ties and conveying the message to the Palestinians that there are 'good Israelis one can make peace with'. 40Undoubtedly, such thinking represents an attempt at a new, reflexive postliberal peacebuilding.

Professional attitude
The practical perspective of the peace associations is expressed in different ways, one of which is professionalism.Bimkom (literally, 'instead', established in 1999) was formed as a group of professional planners and architects whose purpose is to protect the weakest sectors of society (including Palestinians in the Occupied Territories) in the field of spatial planning and housing policies.The group deals a lot with problems of Palestinians in the territories.The tools the architects and engineers of the organisation use in their struggle against the occupation are research and reports, community planning assistance, and complaints against the planning authorities.Bimkom tackles issues ranging from home demolitions and lack of planning to the provision of vital infrastructure and affordable housing. 41lthough the group defines its goals in general as helping disadvantaged groups, in practice and in the context of Israeli political culture, the willingness of an Israeli movement to help Palestinians in the territories against the Israeli authorities leaves no doubt about the political significance of this help.For example, in an article that appears on their homepage, they oppose the use of the term 'Firing Zone' by the state, the army, and the courts in order to legitimise the expropriation of territories from the Palestinians, in this case in the south of Mount Hebron, and their transfer to Israeli settlers.42

Projects and campaigns
Since it is difficult for social movements to be active over time and their activities know ups and downs, the new Israeli peace associations often announce campaigns and decide on special projects, which serve to raise public awareness and recruit activists for their cause.For example, when the IDF continued to destroy Palestinian homes as an act of punishment against those termed terrorists, ICAHD, the Israeli Committee Against House Demolition (established in 1997) decided to rebuild these houses the day after they were demolished.Israel uses house demolition both as a means of deterrence and as a punishment.It is, undoubtedly, a step of severe collective punishment that hurts innocent people such as the wives and children, and sometimes the extended family of the suspected.Another formal reason for demolishing houses is the absence of a building permit.The problem is that the Israeli authorities pursue a deliberate policy of refusing to grant Palestinians permits to build homes, especially in and around Jerusalem, in accordance with the idea of a Judaized Jerusalem.One ICAHD campaign in 2007 came following the destruction of a house in the village of A-Tur in East Jerusalem.The house was demolished even though the family who lived in it tried to obtain a building permit.The campaign continued and brought to the construction of 30 more houses. 43Along the years, ICHAD continued to struggle against house demolitions, organising every year cycles of people, usually come from abroad in the summer, to take part in rebuilding Palestinian homes. 44CHAD clearly regarded these activities as part of an overall vision of changing the face of the region towards one egalitarian state, from the Jordan River to the sea.As it appears on their homepage: 'When ICHAD was first established in 1997, we spoke of ending the Occupation . . .Now we refer to ending Israel's apartheid policies and the settler colonial goal that the state of Israel has towards the Palestinian people'.45

Storytelling and testimonies
Storytelling and testimonies appear in the publications and websites of many of the Israeli peace associations.The Parents Circle -Families Forum (PCFF, established in 1995) is an organisation of families, both Palestinian and Israeli, who have lost a member to the ongoing conflict.The members of the organisation have reached the conclusion that they must share with the public the pain and suffering that are not the reserve of one side only.The organisation uses various methods, such as public meetings and educational seminars.They also present the voices of the bereaved families, both Israelis and Palestinians, on the homepage of their website.One may find there many details about the victims and about the arbitrary way they died.The texts also highlight the profound mourning their families experienced, the sense of helplessness and the desire for revenge that erupted, and then the gradual understanding that both sides suffer, that there is no sense in killing each other, and the conclusion that led them to join the association. 46reaking the Silence is another example.It was formed by demobilised Israeli soldiers who had served in the Occupied Territories during the Second Intifada.The association was launched through an exhibition of photographs, which is a manner of storytelling of the reality in the occupied city of Hebron.The exhibition, based on soldiers' testimonies, attracted significant attention since most Israelis do not know (and many of them do not want to know) what that is going on 'out there' in the territories. 47One may find some resemblance between Breaking the Silence and the Winter Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, an event held in 2008 in which American veterans spoke about the brutality of the soldiers as 'the true nature' of military occupation. 48

Educational tours
Another means of exposing unknown information regarding the conflict, the oppression, the gradual and informal annexation of the territories by Israel are educational tours.The tours organised by the peace associations are varied in character and spread over different geographical areas, but all of them are meant to expose the everyday life of the Palestinians under occupation to Israeli eyes.For example, Ir Amim ('City of Nations', established in 2000) focuses on Jerusalem, promoting the idea that the city belongs to all its residents and not to Jews only.It leads study tours that introduce the complexity of the city: socioeconomic disparities between Jews and Arabs; the political and humanitarian consequences of the Separation Barrier that divides the city; the Jewish presence and settlements in mainly Arab areas of East Jerusalem, etc. 49 Combatants for Peace and Machsom Watch also organise tours, sometimes with an open discussion at the end of the day between Israelis and Palestinians. 50As for Combatants for Peace, soldiers carry a special value in combatant societies.They are considered as heroes who have proved their patriotism, and accordingly their voice is legitimate and sometimes even influential.Combatants for Peace represent a rare and special cooperation between soldiers from the two nations, who decided that they no longer want to be enemies and fight each other.
The main purpose of the educational tours is to contribute to the struggle over collective memory.Zochrot (the feminine plural form of the verb 'remembering', established in 2002) is another association that offers educational tours addressing the struggle over meaning, especially with regard to the 1948 Nakba.The activists, mostly Israeli women, both Jews and Arabs, organise tours to destroyed Palestinian localities, some of which have became Israeli towns and villages.They seek to encourage a recognition of past wrong, the correction of injustice, and the incorporation of collective traumas into Israel's national identity.They see this cultural transformation as a necessary starting point for a future change in the relations between the nations. 51

Crossing borders and symmetric relations
Israeli peace movements of the past never sought any form of Israeli-Palestinian partnership.At most, they met with Arab leaders for short meetings and posed for photos with them.Some peace associations, however, did not refrain from taking a step further, and decided to cross borders and to construct peace associations, which includes both Palestinians and Israelis on an equal basis.One such organisation is the Families Forum, mentioned above.Gawerc examined the way these line-crossing associations create solidarity and a shared sense of we-ness in mutually hostile societies.Their solution, she wrote, is to develop through the organisation's activity an alternative identity rooted in trust. 52rust is self-evidently a missing characteristic in the relations between Israelis and Palestinians.Combatants for Peace and the Families Forum organise an annual Israeli-Palestinian memorial ceremony for those who died in the conflict.The ceremony is held on the same day when mainstream Israel convenes to mark the Memorial Day for its fallen soldiers. 53The ceremony is a testimony to the common denominator between the Israeli peace associations that often cooperate with each other.But of course, there is much more to it than that.The fact that the common ceremony commemorates those who died on both sides creates extreme anger among many Israelis, who see the Palestinian casualties not as freedom fighters but as enemies and terrorists.Nevertheless, the alternative ceremony reduces the 'denial of victim' that exists in Israel, illustrating that death does not differentiate between peoples.Every year, the 'alternative ceremony' receives extensive coverage in the media, including a focus on militants who violently oppose it. 54rossing borders reflects an attempt to create symmetric relations, which is not an easy attempt after so many years of occupation based on relations of superiors and inferiors.Even humanitarian help, which forms part of the associations' activities, is usually based on asymmetric relations, as the strong side helps the weaker one.The Israeli activists are well aware of the problem of patronage embedded in such relations, and they seek to avoid this pitfall, for example, by creating symmetric relations in the way each side regards the other's narrative.The Families Forum calls this 'the parallel narrative experience', explaining that 'we don't seek to cancel or approve any specific narrative, but rather to create a journey through the personal and national history of each side, through meaningful dialogue, respect and understanding that each personal and national narrative holds a truth in it'. 55

Peace at home
Both the Oslo Accords and their failure were traumatic in Israel, not least because they exposed the deep ideological cleavage within Israeli society.Religious Israeli Jews experienced trauma due to the possibility that Israel would withdraw from what they see as biblical and historical Israel.Members of the militaristic society feared that a withdrawal would endanger Israel's security and will threaten its existence.On the other hand, the failure of the agreements and the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin created trauma in the hearts of the members of the civil society and the peace activists who understood how difficult it is to make peace in the Middle East.
The lesson some peace associations drew from the failure of the liberal peace was that in order to make peace with the Palestinians based on reconciliation, it is essential first to make reconciliation and peace at home.Such perspective is advocated, for example, by the peace movement called Women Wage Peace (or the Mothers' Alliance, established in 2014).The women argue that in order to make peace it is vital to create positive public opinion based on equal dialogue with as many segments of the Israeli society as possible.Moreover, in order to permit such successful dialogue, the movement does not have to try to change the basic beliefs of these Israelis, as the liberal architects of the Oslo Agreements hoped to do.Instead, it has to convince the audiences that peace is possible without obstructing their ways of life. 56umming up, based on our qualitative 'grounded theory', we presented the practices or norms that we found within the Israeli peace associations: monitoring, advocacy, humanitarian help, professional attitude, projects and campaigns, storytelling and testimonies, educational tours, crossing borders, the creation of symmetric relations, and the idea of peace at home.Such perspective on peace is innovative in Israel's political culture.Its importance, however, lies not only in its innovation, but in the fact that the associations consciously try to compensate for the weaknesses of the liberal peace, which has failed in the past.The question is still asked, what is the value and what is the importance of this innovative way?

The values of postliberal peace
While Israeli peace movements until the 1990s did not challenge the very existence of governmental and state authority, and merely appealed to exert direct pressure on the decision makers in order to make peace, the current peace practices introduced new values according to which peacebuilding must be made by human beings, their needs and emotions, by societies and even by peoples, and not by governments, states, international superpowers and INGOs, and professional politicians.
As we said, the new practices mentioned above appeared with either overt or covert intention of correcting the weakness of the liberal peace approach.An important example is the issue of human rights.The Oslo Agreements and the Camp David Summit paid no more than lip service to this issue.Together with other elements, such as reconciliation and cooperation, it was regarded as something that will 'naturally' follow the agreements.The new peace associations did not accept this hypothesis, claiming that the opposite was true.Reconciliation, creating trust, and struggling for rights for the Palestinians have to come first, and formal peace agreements later on.In this sense, and even if the two societies are still hostile to each other, it can be said that the peace associations have nevertheless made a substantial step.This is evidenced by the fierce, and sometimes violent attacks against them that come from the Israeli right wing and religious circles.
As for the issue of human rights, the Israeli peace activists are well-aware to the possibility that their way of emphasising human rights, reconciliation, or cooperation with the other side may sterilises political discourse and will be used by the authorities a 'fig leaf' that will allow the continuation of the occupation.When such fear became real, both the women of Machsom Watch and the activists of the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights B'Tselem ('In the Image Of', established in 1989), decided in 2016 to suspend any cooperation with the Israeli army, and to refrain from providing the military with information regarding 'irregular' incidents.This step was intended to indicate that the army was using such cooperation to 'whitewash' the occupation by creating an illusion that it interrogates itself in instances involving unjustified harm to Palestinians.The refusal of cooperation raised the message that an occupation army cannot be humane, and that the solution to this is the end of the cooperation. 57imilarly, liberal peace adherents also assumed that an agreement would later on create symmetry between the two peoples.The new peace activists believed that since the Israelis are the occupiers, they must work to reduce the asymmetry in advance, by decreasing inequality and discrimination, as a necessary part of the peace process.This idea contrasted with PM Netanyahu motto after the Wye Memorandum: 'if they [the Palestinians] give, they will receive; if they don't give, they won't receive' -a liberal mantra of pseudo-fairness that led to nothing.
The liberal initiators believed that it was best for the peace process to put society aside, for the present at least, and to strengthen the 'weak state'.The new Israeli peace associations did not accept this approach, claiming that politicians and state leaders pay little regard to the societal complexities, to the emotional elements, and to the particularistic cultural sensitivities.One example of this perspective appeared, for example, on March 2019, when the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute organised a conference under the title of 'Different Voices, Different Visions: Broadening the Ways to Imagine Peace'.The basic thesis behind the conference was that the failed peace efforts of the past were based on the political assumptions of liberal universalism, which reflected the basic values of the elites (the Israelis who were secular, liberal or 'leftist', global, and Ashkenazi Jews who immigrated to Israel from Europe), and ignored feelings and identities of many other Israelis and Palestinians whose emotional attachment to the territories held as sacred, and therefore, they do not accept any idea of partition. 58n line with this perception that does not reject the emotional in the face of the rational, the association called One Homeland (established in 2016) shaped a creative solution to the conflict, based on the idea that neither the two-state solution nor a singleunified state are good options.The way forward, they suggest, is to combine the two options in a single plan.If, on the one hand, the modern political and universalistic notion of self-determination is highly important to both Israelis and Palestinians, why then abandon it by denying a reality of two distinct states?On the other hand, partition, the backbone of any liberal peace, leaves both nations completely unsatisfied, since they are emotionally and historically attached to the same land.The solution is thus 'living together separately', meaning two states in one homeland in which both Jews and Palestinians can live anywhere they want, according to their sentiments and will, and their citizenship -of either Israel or Palestine -will be determined accordingly. 59The basic values presented by One Homeland, although not necessarily the solution it offered, was in fact common to most of the Israeli peace NGOs.Each side has its own narrative, history, and even 'truth' that must be respected.Thus, an important part of any peacebuilding process is not only to know the other's truth but to try to find a solution that takes both truths into consideration.Some might suggest that the Israeli case describes a fragmented and small-scale peace activism whose comprehensive meaning and importance are problematic, given the fact that a peace process between the Israelis and the Palestinians does not exist at all nowadays, and it is not possible to even hint at any progress on this issue, let alone attribute such progress to the new peace associations.Realistically, this is indeed the case.However, it is still impossible to ignore what the manuscript tried to demonstrate in detail.A new orientation created not as a replacement for the liberal peace, but as a substitute to the basic assumptions and values that underpin the liberal peace.This new orientation is not accompanied by formal announcements and official ceremonies, it is not praised by international PR experts, and it exists under violent conditions of conflict and new wars, and a significant refusal to peace.Nevertheless, even if the train has not left yet the station, it seems that alternative tracks to the existing ones have already been laid. 60he change of cultural orientation among peace activism in Israel occurred gradually within parts of Israeli civil society around the year 2000 (see Table 1 below).Even though we have no indications to say when and how a peace process between the two nations will develop, we can assume that when the conditions for a formal peace agreement mature within the international or the interstate spheres, the cultural infrastructure at the level of society will already be in place, at least to a certain extent and among certain circles, as a factor no government can ignore.And if this orientation is ignored, the parties, it seems, will repeat the mistakes they made in Oslo and Camp David, through the adoption of the liberal peace principles, and the peace process will fail again.

Summary
With the failure of liberal peace, Israel saw the emergence of peace associations whose organisation, orientation, networks, and practices differed from those of the peace movements of the past.We examined 16 peace associations that were established from the year 2000 with the idea of challenging the Israeli hegemony and status quo by looking for a new orientation that may serve as a crucial backbone in any future peace process.A new orientation that has created a microlevel model for the possibility of a future comprehensive peace.All these associations fully aware to the failure of the liberal peace within the Israeli/Palestinian context, and they all believe that in order to bring a final peace, there is a need to reverse the sequencing.Rather than assuming that all the maladies of the occupation will disappear with a political agreement, peace work should start with creating the conditions that can overcome these maladies beforehand.
The new peace orientation does not put its trust in a process that is managed from the outside by international parties or conducted by state authorities or elites.Neither is it an orientation that places economic relations at the centre or seeks compromises based on political deals and pressure on politicians and rulers.It is an orientation which is based on meetings and networks that build bridges between the two peoples, break down mental and cultural borders, based on trust, reconciliation, recognition, and cooperation, and horizontal relations.
As we have shown, the importance of this process lies precisely in the fact that it is built gradually, at the micro and societal level of small-scale activism, through countless initiatives that combine to offer a new type of relationship that permeates and influenced people's everyday lives.In this regard, unlike the liberal peace initiatives that Israel experienced in the past, this time, when and if the peace process begins, it won't be an 'external' or 'state' peace that erupts like thunder on a clear day.
The contribution of the Israeli case study to the understanding of peacebuilding in general does not stem only from the presentation of an empirical orientation that helps in the dispute between the liberal and post-liberal approaches to peace.Nor is it due to the fact that peace activism in general can be nourished by the clear understanding that technical and 'rational' solutions that ignore cultural peculiarities and sentiments are doomed to fail, while an alternative approach to creating bridges between peoples through new practices and new networks can succeed.After all, even the Israeli-Palestinian case does not approve such hypothesis.The most important contribution of the Israeli case lies in the simple fact that the historical lesson of the peace failure in both Oslo and Camp David has been learned by the peace activists.Moreover those conditions of hostility on the domestic level (between Israeli supporters and Israeli opponents of peace) and conditions of violent conflict and wars on the external level (between Palestinian organisations and Israelis) may hinder peace between states and leaders, but at the same time, they can serve as a fertile ground for another peace orientation that stems from below.
Such conclusion teaches us how important it is to move beyond the conventional thinking that characterised the modern era, according to which peace is made between states, under the auspices of great powers, and with international support, on the basis of mutual concessions between political bodies by dividing the 'pie' in a rational way so that no party gets everything it wanted.In this way, the new Israeli postliberal peace orientation and activism join other cultural examples, which represent a new definition of what peace is, and how it can be approached.
An Israeli NGO working to defend cultural heritage rights and to protect ancient sites as public assets that belong to members of all communities, faiths and peoples.2014WomenMakePeaceA grassroots movement, Jews and Arabs, religious and secular, united in the demand for a mutually binding non-violent agreement between Israelis and Palestinian, involving women in the process.2015StandingTogether'We must choose to be partners.If we want to build a future here in the region without fear, a future comprised of security, freedom, and peace, we must create a true Arab-Jewish partnership'.To support the peace process as an essential component of Israel's natal security.An agreement can only be reached in exchange for a territorial compromise and the establishment of a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem alongside the State of Israel.2016 Two States, One Homeland 'There is a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and it is right here in front of us.Do you choose to "live by your sword"?Or can you put your fears aside?' Anselm Strauss and Corbin Julliet, 'Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview', in Handbook of Qualitative Research,