Arabs and Jews: is there any light at the end of the tunnel for peace in the Middle East? Or is the Jewish-Arab war condemned to last forever?

The war between the Jews and the Arabs in former British Palestine has been going on for eighty-one years. In 1921, the first Arab explosion against the Zionist pioneers announced the beginning of the fray. Hatred and suspicion have undermined any successful resolution of the conflict.

After the Jewish War of Independence in 1948, the conflict became a war between the Jewish state and external Arab enemies. In that conflict, the Israelis were generally victorious. The Israeli triumph in 1967 crushed Gamal Abdel Nasser, the hero of Arab nationalism. But in 1987 the Palestinian Arabs chose a new kind of battle--internal rebellion. The infitada was born. And it has grown in fury ever since.

The foundation of the war is the power of nationalism. Jewish nationalism was born out of the defiance of the oppressed masses in czarist Russia. It was fed by racial anti-Semitism. Diaspora nationalism sought to liberate the Jews of eastern Europe and give them cultural autonomy. It was destroyed by native resistance and the Holocaust.

Zionist nationalism also saw itself as a national liberation movement. It naively proposed to solve anti-Semitism by returning the Jews to their ancient homeland. Reinforced by socialist idealism and the revival of Hebrew as a popular language, it led to the establishment of a Jewish settlement in Palestine. The closing of the doors to immigration in the United States, the support of the British government, and the rise of Adolf Hitler gave this nationalism the impetus that the slaughter of six million Jews was to make irresistible. Zionism became the most powerful movement to mobilize the Jewish masses in the twentieth century.

Arab nationalism was an import from the West and was cultivated initially by Christian Arabs as a way of countering their exclusion by Muslims. Propelled by Turkish oppression and by the humiliation of European conquest, the Arab nationalist movement was led by Westernized intellectuals who embraced secular values and placed nationhood above religion. Since the Arab world never fully experienced the secular revolution which had transformed European life, the Arab nationalism of the street had difficulty distinguishing between Arab loyalty and Muslim loyalty. Religion is inevitably part of the nationalist package in the Muslim world.

Since the Arab world is vast, divided by regional differences, cultural diversity, and the internal boundaries of twenty-two states created by colonial masters, the unification of the Arab nation hasn't been easy. Nasser tried and failed. He was defeated by both the Israelis and by the hostility of his political enemies and rivals within the Arab world.

The one issue that has the power to transcend the internal state boundaries of the Arab world and to mobilize the Arab masses is Zionism. Whether or not it deserves such designation, the Jewish state has become the symbol of Arab humiliation. Perceived as the last and most outrageous example of European colonialism, Israel is the object of almost universal Arab hate. The defeat of Israel has become the ultimate perceived means of restoring Arab honor. The hatred of Zionism is so intense that it is difficult for most Arabs to distinguish between their hostility to Israel and their hatred for Jews.

In fact, the suspicion and hatred between Arabs and Jews is so fierce that dialogue is condemned to failure. Most public and private encounters between conventional Arab and Jewish leaders degenerates into shouting matches. Each side insists on its rights. And, of course, both sides are "right." The Palestinian Arabs have been invaded, abused, and oppressed. The Israeli Jews are by now mainly native-born residents of the land they defend and the creators of a dynamic, modern, high-tech state; they have no place else to go.

From the Jewish point of view, the Arab hostility cannot easily be distinguished from anti-Semitism. The memories of the Holocaust hover over every response. Of course, the popular media in the Arab world reinforce this perception by aping the propaganda of European Jew hatred. From the perspective of the Arabs, Jewish voices are confused with the voices of Jewish extremists who advocate expulsion and deportation.

There is an abundance of extremists on both sides. The Arab and Palestinian nationalist and fundamentalist worlds feature many militant groups that advocate terrorism and call for the destruction of the Jewish state. The Jewish and Israeli extremists are equally militant in their refusal to recognize the right of a Palestinian state to exist (beyond suggesting that Jordan is already a Palestinian state). To the credit of the Israelis, Israel features a peace movement that has no counterpart in the Arab world.

Both sides see themselves as victims. Jews see Israel as a small beleaguered state in a vast and petroleum-rich Arab world that does nothing to rescue its Palestinian brothers and sisters from poverty. Arabs see Israel as the agent of American imperialism, supported by the wealth and military technology of the world's only superpower--a nation that is beholden to Jewish political power.

The failure of the Oslo peace process is as much the result of intense hatred and suspicion as it is the incompatibility of vested interests. The issues of boundaries, Jerusalem, and refugees are shrouded by such levels of distrust that the normal compromises that negotiations bring can never emerge. No arrangements can provide the security that most Israelis want. And no "deal" can yield the sense of honor and vindication that most Palestinians and Arabs seek.

In searching for alternatives to endless war, certain realities need to be confronted. This war is not only bad for the Israelis and the Palestinians but also for Jews and Arabs. For the Jews, the war has already spread to Europe, where Muslim militants assault synagogues and vulnerable Jews. For the Arabs, the war prevents any real confrontation with the political, economic, and social issues that affect their world. War continues to justify government by military dictators.

This war is bad for the United States and the rest of the world. The Palestinian issue has provided the fuel whereby Muslim militants have won the allegiance of millions of Arabs and Muslims in their desire to wage war against the United States and Western culture. A war between the West and Islam is a world war. It is different from a war against Muslim fundamentalist terrorism; such a conflict would enjoy the support of most Muslim governments. The success of the United States' response to the attacks of September 11, 2001, lies in the ability to make such a distinction.

Jews and Arabs, Israelis and Palestinians by themselves cannot achieve peace--or even an effective truce--by relying on negotiations alone; the cycle of vengeance has its own logic. Every terrorist action incites retaliation; every retaliation incites counter-retaliation. No antagonist can allow itself to be seen as weak. Revenge is a necessary tactic in maintaining credibility. The cycle cannot stop itself without outside intervention.

The proposed Palestinian state is no more than 3,000 square miles in size--hardly a formula for viability. It is presently a series of urban "doughnut holes" within Israeli-occupied territory. The presence of the Israeli army is justified not only by the argument for security but also by the necessity to defend small Jewish settlements which have been established in the West Bank and Gaza by religious Jewish settlers laying claim to the land. These settlements prevent peace, add nothing to the security of Israel, and provide more provocation to Arabs to kill more Jews.

Jerusalem is already divided. Jewish Jerusalem (about two-thirds of the expanded city) has no Arabs, while Arab Jerusalem (the eastern sector) has no Jews. While some Arabs work in Jewish Jerusalem, almost no Jews even penetrate Arab Jerusalem unless they are on military duty. A unified city is more desirable than a divided city, but the division already exists.

A binational Israeli-Palestinian state--a dream of many peaceniks--is not politically viable even though it would be economically desirable. Jewish and Arab nationalism are realities; they cannot be wished away. Mutual hatred and suspicion are realities; they cannot be dismissed. Arguing against nationalism may work a hundred years from now but it doesn't fly today. A Jewish state--in which Jewish national culture is the dominant culture and most people speak Hebrew--is no more racist than would be an Arab state whose dominant culture and language reflected its people. Three million Palestinian refugees cannot return to the Jewish state without destroying the Jewish national character of the Jewish state.

Because outside intervention is required, the only superpower capable of orchestrating it successfully is the United States. Since September 11, George W. Bush has mobilized an effective coalition of world powers, including Europe, Russia, China, and India--as well as many allies in the Muslim world. The war between the Israelis and the Palestinians has begun to undermine the coalition, especially with Bush's perceived support of the Ariel Sharon government in Israel. Joint intervention with the approval of the United Nations and with the support of moderate Muslim powers could restore the coalition. This intervention is no different from the intervention that the United States initiated in Bosnia and Kosovo.

What would be the elements such an intervention? The United States controls the process. The Israelis don't trust the United Nations and won't cooperate with an effort managed by the hostile nations of the developing world.

The United States acts as a neutral "parent." It doesn't always praise one side and condemn the other; it creates a setting for negotiations, with the presence of major members of the coalition. The format of such negotiations is only a pretense. In the "back room" the United States dictates the settlement and everybody knows that the United States has imposed the settlement. Both antagonists protest, but they yield because they have no choice. The imposition gives the leaders of both sides an excuse, a way to save face, and a scapegoat. They can justify their "surrender" to their constituencies by pleading helplessness. They may even shake hands reluctantly. Whether Ararat will still be representing the Palestinians is the question.

All that can realistically be achieved at this time is an effective truce. Peace will have to await a reduction in the fury of hatred and suspicion. For now, an imposed settlement should include the following:

` the removal of all Jewish settlements from the West Bank and Gaza, except those settlements which function as contiguous communities for Tel Aviv and Jerusalem

* the digging of a ditch and construction of a fence between the Jews and Arabs along the adjusted 1967 boundaries

* the policing of this fence by the United States and its European allies

* the granting of Arab East Jerusalem to the Palestinians as their national capital

* the demilitarization of the new Palestinian state, with periodic inspections by the United States and its coalition partners

* compensation for Palestinian refugees who cannot return.

Such compensation may cost over $30 billion and would be covered by the United States, Japan, and European allies. If the compensation helps to bring about an effective truce, it would be worth the investment. Rescuing the global economy for peace justifies the expense.

Israel needs to be compensated for its "willingness" to shrink and to confront the wrath of its right-wing extremists. Since it won't in the foreseeable future be accepted by the Arab and Muslim worlds, it needs to be regarded as the European power it is. Israel's high-tech economy needs the European market, just as its European culture needs a European support system. The price that Europe pays for this necessary peace is that it accepts Israel as a member of the European Union. Such acceptance is no different than acceptance of Cyprus or Turkey, and Israelis will be better off trading in euros than shekels.

After this settlement is imposed, terrorist violence will likely continue. The war against Muslim fundamentalist terrorists will also continue. For the extremists in the Arab and Muslim world--and even in the Jewish world--hatred is a way of life. For moderates, an effective truce will enable them to join the forces of peace.

The ball is in Bush's court if he would only lead the way. The leaders of the Defense Department and the religious right will likely oppose this kind of proposal, but only such action can provide any light at the end of the tunnel that is the Middle East.

Rabbi Sherwin Wine is the founder of the Humanist Institute, the Society for Humanistic Judaism, and the International Association of Humanist Educators, Counselors, and Leaders. He currently co-chairs the International Institute for Secular Humanistic Judaism and has authored several books and numerous articles.