Comparing what you've seen in other places, what kind of shared understandings do you think have to be in place for a reconciliation process to work? | Just Vision דילוג לתוכן העיקרי

Comparing what you've seen in other places, what kind of shared understandings do you think have to be in place for a reconciliation process to work?

You have to admit that you've done some things that shouldn't have been done. That's the only thing, and that's something that I believe is not only important to the oppressor, it's the thing that the victim wants more than anything else. In some feminist theories, you get the notion of feminist law and chauvinist law, and especially in rape trials you see how the law is all about punishing the oppressor and not thinking about the woman who was raped. In many instances the woman who was raped wants first of all the acknowledgment that there was an atrocity, something that shouldn't have been done. She wants her narrative to be acknowledged as the truth. That's even more important when you have to realize that there won't be pure justice. Ofer Shinar 28 Vision

Comparing what you've seen in other places, what kind of shared understandings do you think have to be in place for a reconciliation process to work?

That's a big question. I think reconciliation depends on the joint and mutual understanding of our ability to reshape our thinking about the past. People should really try to view the past as not an ominous creature that lurks in the dark, that if we negotiate it we'll end up in jail. Both sides have done horrendous things. So the thing that allows people to continue the violence is the understanding that is really prevalent in both societies right now, that there is no way to negotiate what we've done with the past, that we are all criminals, so the best way is to continue being a criminal. Reconciliation is the magic key, it's the ability to say, you are going to take care of your past, nobody is going to get hurt, or almost nobody. But you have to admit that you've done some things that shouldn't have been done. That's the only thing, and that's something that I believe is not only important to the oppressor, it's the thing that the victim wants more than anything else. In some feminist theories, you get the notion of feminist law and chauvinist law, and especially in rape trials you see how the law is all about punishing the oppressor and not thinking about the woman who was raped. In many instances the woman who was raped wants first of all the acknowledgment that there was an atrocity, something that shouldn't have been done. She wants her narrative to be acknowledged as the truth. That's even more important when you have to realize that there won't be pure justice. Reconciliation is not the way to achieve the kind of justice in which all those who have done wrong will get such and such jail sentences. There's no way it will happen. So it's a weak kind of justice. Perhaps the justice will be weak, but both societies will be much stronger. So we have to really think whether we want justice to be pure and perfect, or whether we have actual people on the ground that we want to live, and even if they've done wrong, we want them to live to be able to forgive themselves and we want others to forgive them.