Compared to the world peace euphoria into which the Oslo Accord was born, the centennial plan to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was born into a troubled world reality. In European countries as well, in the United States, the familiar social and political order is in crisis, and question marks cast a shadow of uncertainty on future trends. In the absence of ability to regulate bloody conflict zones from Afghanistan to Ukraine, in the absence of hope for the reconstruction of Syria, Iraq and Libya. End of conflict and peace arrangements precisely for the small land between the Jordan and the sea?

This question raises doubts not only about the starting assumptions at the basis of the Centennial Plan, but also about the perceptual infrastructure that emerges in the totality of the discussion of the plan. Despite a changing world reality that has long been rooted in the phenomena of the 21st century, the conceptual system for describing reality and its judgment is still firmly enshrined in its logic and expectations, in the concepts of the last century. The gap is first and foremost the expectation of a consensual, final and stable solution to a lasting peace. At the end of the last century, after the collapse of the USSR, in the atmosphere of the Pokéma philosopher's "end of history", such expectations were seemingly still in place. Security is undermined and an unknown future is holding on to the stability of the states today, and yet the prophets of peace continue to believe and preach that if we think positively, the reality will be positive, too. If that doesn't happen, we probably didn't really want to.

The Israeli discourse in the discussion of the program also expresses fixed thinking patterns for the concepts of the last century. For example, on the issue of the Palestinian state: On the right, it is difficult to accept the commitment to recognize a Palestinian state, and on the left they claim that the plan "does not offer the Palestinians a state by any reasonable definition" (Raviv Drucker, Haaretz, 3 February 20). However, in the mid-21st century, what happened to the family phenomenon also happened to the state. Who will tell a single mother that she does not meet a reasonable family definition? The same is true of countries as a phenomenon more complex than a family: in the new age, there is more than one standard way to exist as a state. That's the heart of failure: Thinking modernly in a reality that in significant practical dimensions has long since become postmodern.

National dreams are not negotiated. A demonstration in Baqa al-Gharbiya // Photo: Michelle Dot Com

The concept of the plan as an outline for action must also be understood in terms appropriate to the complexity of the new age. President Trump's line is very significant in defining a new direction. As such, it should be interpreted as pushing energy into a nascent system in anticipation of desecration of a new way. In the definitive discourse of last-century concepts, the 180-page plan is treated as if it were a detailed work plan for managing a production line. The emergence as a complex phenomenon, in the transition from planning to execution, is not fully controlled. This is familiar to every businessman. Ask Rami Levy if he had a detailed business plan for development from a booth in Camp Yehuda, up to the retail chains he currently owns.

It is interesting to discover that already in the middle of the last century, in the controversy over the partition plan, Ben-Gurion thought and acted in the consciousness dynamics. For example, he explained: "A Jewish state in a part of the country is not an end but a beginning." The establishment of the state "will serve as a powerful lever in our historic efforts to redeem the land in its entirety."

Underlying the difference between conduct in modern, mechanical, and closed thinking, and conduct in complex thinking is open to formation, lies the key to the proper and effective implementation of the Trump program. While modern thinking has not given up the belief that every problem must have a solution, complex thinking recognizes problems that basically have no solution. Temporary solutions can be requested, provided that they do not give up a timeless vision. National and religious dreams do not negotiate, this is true for Palestinians and not least for Israelis.