In the immediate, visceral aftermath of the October 7, 2023, attacks, the distance between an Israeli and a Palestinian is often measured in blood and grief. For Maoz Inon, that distance was an ocean of sorrow; he had just lost his parents and several childhood friends to the Hamas-led assault. For Aziz Abu Sarah, a Palestinian peace activist, the distance was a lifelong scar—the memory of his brother, Tayseer, who died at 19 after being arrested and tortured in an Israeli prison.
While the world watched the region slide into a war of unprecedented scale, Inon and Abu Sarah chose to build a bridge. Their partnership, born from a simple outreach of condolences just three days after the October 7 attacks, has evolved into a shared mission to prove that Israelis and Palestinians working together is not a utopian fantasy, but a historical necessity. Their journey is now chronicled in their new book, The Future Is Peace: A Shared Journey Across the Holy Land.
The bond between the two men is rooted in a refusal to let personal tragedy fuel a cycle of revenge. Inon’s initial reaction to his loss was captured in a public post that would eventually draw Abu Sarah to him, signaling a willingness to look beyond his own grief toward the wider suffering of the region. This shared commitment to humanity over nationalism has led them from the ruins of kibbutzim and the streets of Gaza to the halls of the Vatican.
A Partnership Forged in Shared Grief
The catalyst for their collaboration was an act of empathy that defied the prevailing narrative of “Israelis versus Palestinians.” Abu Sarah recalls that when he reached out to Inon, he did not see a political opponent, but a fellow human being in pain. He noted that those killed on October 7 were “my people, too,” rejecting the calculation of nationality in the face of mass casualty.
For Inon, Abu Sarah’s outreach was a lifeline. He described himself as “drowning in an ocean of sorrow” when the message arrived. This connection was further solidified by Inon’s public declaration that he was not crying only for his parents, but for all those who would lose their lives in the ensuing war. This perspective—stepping out of one’s own pain to acknowledge the pain of the “other”—became the cornerstone of their joint operate.
Their collaboration is not merely theoretical; We see an active documentation of shared suffering. In their work, they highlight the parallel tragedies of individuals like Batya Segev, an Israeli who lost her daughter, son-in-law, and two grandchildren, and Abdul Rahim in Gaza, who suffered similar devastating family losses. By placing these stories side-by-side, Inon and Abu Sarah aim to dismantle the idea that peace is impossible due to the depth of the trauma.
Lessons from Global Conflict Resolution
Abu Sarah bases his optimism for a peaceful future on a comparative study of global conflicts. Having worked in regions such as Northern Ireland, South Africa, and Colombia, he argues that no matter how “horrible a moment” is, conflicts eventually end. He posits that the dismantling of systems of oppression in those regions provides a blueprint for the Holy Land.
When discussing the end of the occupation, Abu Sarah suggests that the specific political framework—whether a one-state solution, a two-state solution, or a confederation—is less critical than the values upon which that solution is built. He asserts that any agreement lacking equality, dignity, and safety for all will inevitably fail, citing the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine as an example of why formal statehood alone does not guarantee peace.
Inon echoes this sentiment by pointing to the flexibility of public opinion. He cites the 1977 visit of Egyptian President Anwar el-Sadat to Israel as a pivotal moment where the discourse shifted almost overnight from a refusal to negotiate to a path toward peace. He argues that civil society and political leaders have the agency to shift the current discourse toward a similar breakthrough.
Faith and Diplomacy at the Vatican
The duo’s message has reached the highest levels of religious authority. They have met with both Pope Francis and the newly appointed Pope Leo, utilizing the shared linguistic roots of peace—Salam in Arabic and Shalom in Hebrew—to bridge the divide. During their meeting with Pope Francis at the Arena di Pace in Rome, the Pope described them as “brothers,” emphasizing that while disagreements are inevitable, they can be solved through diplomacy and dialogue.
Their recent interactions with Pope Leo have further highlighted the intersection of faith and peacemaking. They have observed the Pope’s prioritization of peace in the face of geopolitical tensions and criticisms from U.S. Political figures, reinforcing their belief that the “peacemakers” mentioned in biblical texts are essential for the region’s survival.
The Role of International Influence
A central point of their shared advocacy is the responsibility of the international community, specifically the United States. Inon has been candid about the role of U.S. Military and diplomatic support in sustaining the current conflict, citing the provision of weapons and the Iron Dome system as factors that impact the trajectory of the war.
However, Inon views the American public as a potential catalyst for change. He argues that the agency to bring peace to the Holy Land lies not only with political leaders in Congress but with “common people” who can pressure their governments to shift from supporting military escalation to supporting a sustainable peace process.
Summary of Shared Perspectives
| Focus Area | Aziz Abu Sarah’s Perspective | Maoz Inon’s Perspective |
|---|---|---|
| Path to Peace | Rooted in equality, dignity, and global precedents. | Rooted in shifting public discourse and human connection. |
| View on Conflict | Believes all conflicts eventually end; focuses on dismantling oppression. | Believes in the agency of individuals to change the future. |
| Key Driver | Comparative justice (South Africa, Northern Ireland). | Personal empathy and shared grief. |
As the conflict continues, Inon and Abu Sarah continue to advocate for a future where the identity of the victim does not dictate the validity of their grief. Their work suggests that the first step toward a political solution is the recognition of a shared humanity—a journey that begins with a single message of condolence across a divide.
The next phase of their advocacy involves promoting the themes of The Future Is Peace to wider audiences in the U.S. And Europe, seeking to expand the network of Israelis and Palestinians committed to a non-violent resolution.
We invite you to share your thoughts on the possibility of shared peace initiatives in the comments below.
Related reading
