It seems that the word peace has become something of a buzzword, especially in the last few years and particularly after the atrocities of October 7. The world, led largely by its Western allies, calls for peace almost hourly. The real question is what peace actually means for Western society and what it means when a country like Israel, which is a democracy that shares Western values, is expected to conform to that definition. Israel does believe in many of those values. At the same time, Western pressure combined with the regional reality has proven to be a dangerous mix.

The Western idea of peace often follows what Johan Galtung called positive peace, which implies trust, empathy, and structural justice. These are worthy goals in places where both sides accept reciprocity and coexistence. Israel, the only democratic country in the Middle East, is nonetheless held to these same standards in an environment that does not reflect those assumptions.¹

By contrast, Galtung also described negative peace, which simply means the guns are silent. I argue that Israel must embrace this concept. Most attempts to achieve positive peace have failed, as seen through the Oslo Accords, the Camp David Summit, and the withdrawal from Gaza. If Israel wants to protect itself in the long term, it must prioritize security over appeasement.

It is important to define terms clearly. Western peace generally places reconciliation, mutual recognition, and liberal norms at the center. Eastern peace in much of the region is closer to stability through power. In practice, that means order, control, and the use of force to manage conflict rather than to resolve it through shared norms. Serious research notes that many authoritarian systems in the region........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)