Lack of Trust in Peace Treaties - Truth or Dare

Submitted by M Tovey (United States), Sep 10, 2020 at 16:58

Lack of Trust in Peace Treaties
While desiring to engage in prospects of peace in the Middle East, what really seems to be missing is establishing a true desire for peace, rather than accommodating a cessation of hostilities for the tactical reasoning of better advantage. This was mused about when considering the motives of the UAE agreement with Israel and the possibilities that ulterior motives were in play by engaging friends of convenience in the face of antipathies of others.
As we are reminded by DNM:[ Hudna or هدنة means: An agreement to stop fighting or هدنة is a معاهدة or agreement to stop fighting for a period of time and it is not permanent peace by any means...], the circumstances of achieving some peace is not guaranteed since by contentious unwillingness of the other actors in the region, we have a clearer vision that there is division in the Muslim world which cannot be but a warning of deeper conflict for the lack of agreement.
A distinction that has been made in earlier discussions that forms around the issues of how the basis of Quranic translation does the traditional system of belief in Islam comport with its current existence in the world; that in the ancient form of Arabic or its modified contemporary understanding through recent non-Arabic apologetics do we find our answer? So does the recent agreement with the UAE comport with the Ancients understanding, or otherwise?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".