Description: The Holocaust, Nasr says.

Question: What forces have shaped Israel?

Transcript: Well I talk not as a . . . sort of an expert on Israel, but as an outsider to this topic. But I do think the whole experience of the Holocaust, the discussion in Europe in the 19 . . . from the 1930s onward about the fact that Jews needed a homeland of their own in order to be safe; that only in a Jewish homeland would there be a level playing field and would maybe secure are extremely important. Particularly because at least for a very long period of time all the way ‘til the 1980s, a large number of Israeli leadership actually were born in Europe, had experienced the Holocaust. Their families had experienced the Holocaust. For them it was something very, very real. We are only now beginning to see the rise of a second generation of Israelis who, you know, regardless of knowledge of Holocaust, their personal experience may be quite different. Also for a good chunk of Israel’s early history it was a quite still insecure, vulnerable country. I think in reality a major turning point came with the war of 1967 when Israel was able to actually defeat the Arab armies, capture Jerusalem, feel much stronger. I think both of these sentiments, in my opinion, are there. I mean a sentiment of insecurity and vulnerability. But also underneath it there exists a certain degree of confidence, and sometimes maybe overconfidence on the side of Israel. I mean Israelis are aware of their weaknesses, but they’re also quite aware that they’ve beaten the Arabs every single time, particularly since ‘73 onwards. There is no Arab army to stand up to them. And I think there is a kind of, if you would, a paradox in Israel that the psyche of . . . the security and psyche of Israel is driven by simultaneous fear of the collapse of the sea of hostile Arabs, but also with confidence that Israel can take many, many different actions to protect itself. And that’s exactly why Iran creates such an anxiety. Because an Iranian nuclear program can take away some of Israel’s sense of confidence in being able to protect itself.

Question: Does Israeli confidence need to be checked?

Transcript: I wouldn’t say confidence. I think it’s a matter of power balance. I mean you know clearly when it comes to defense, Israel has anxieties against Hezbollah, Iran; the fact that it’s a small country in a sea of hostile Arab world. But when it comes to also negotiating with the Palestinians and the Arabs, the fact that Israel is a victor in a war . . . in consecutive wars does not really make for a great deal of incentive to be compromising on a host of issues. And that’s exactly why you have this paradox. It makes it very difficult to move forward. Anxiety on the one hand, but overconfidence and a sense of power in Israel on the other. I don’t think there is any single thing the United States can do. I mean there are things the U.S. can do as part of a resolution to give security guarantees to Israel as well as to the Arabs. But I think ultimately there is no silver bullet here. There is not one thing that United States can do that can resolve Israeli anxieties. Or there’s not one thing that the United States can do to change Arab attitudes towards Israel. Peace after 60 years is a function of gradually getting to know one another, trying it out, and building on it. I mean hostility right now is the attitude. A handshake is not gonna take it away. You have to spend time with one another. Memories of bad things have to fade, and memories of positive things have to . . . have to become stronger. There has to be cultural, social, people-to-people interactions before peace will become reasonable. And I think . . . And that’s why. The most important thing the United States can do is to keep the process going and to move it forward; and try to make this much more systematic and much more engaged. But that’s not easy either, and that’s why I’m not hopeful that in the next five to 10 years we necessarily are going to see a grand resolution. If we looked at Northern Ireland, even after the United States became wholeheartedly involved through Senator Mitchell, it took still 10 years of really, really difficult negotiations – 10 years of one track. I mean Oslo lasted a few years, then we were going to start something else. But it requires something like what happened in Northern Ireland for us to get past this

Recorded on: 12/3/07