Stakeholders: Who are they and who do they really help?

Many people have strong views about the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict and for various reasons they see themselves as stakeholders.

Here is the related terminology I like to use:
  • Direct Stakeholders: People who live now in Israel, Jerusalem, Gaza, the West Bank.
  • Indirect Stakeholders: All people who were residents of the British Mandate of Palestine in 1947 and their descendants, and all Jewish people who do not live in Israel now.
  • Presumptive Stakeholders: All who are neither Direct Stakeholders nor Indirect Stakeholders who try to contribute to or influence the resolution or continuation of the ongoing conflict between the Direct Stakeholders.

Note that a stakeholder in this case simply means a person or group who for their own reasons see themselves as stakeholders. Whether such people or groups really have a stake is not (conceptually) relevant.

First, please consider and comment on my stakeholder definitions. I will revise them if they are not reasonable.

Then please discuss: Who really are and should be the stakeholders, and what is their contribution to and responsibility for the conflict?

Views: 36

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Wow, you are fast Paul :)

Why distinguishing? any one feels a responsibility for an area\ nation\ people in a conflict to help them and make positive contributions for them is a stakeholder.

Is it all of us responsibility to make the world a better place for living?

But this responsibility and the kind of it varies according to where we live and how much we are involved and directly affected by the conflict.
Oh. Eva got under my skin a little. :-) OTOH the issue she raised is really worth discussing a little more sytematically.

I think that identfying and distinguishing between the various groups really is essential. Why?

The people who really suffer now are the Direct Stakeholders. They pay almost all of the price. Their needs and views must have top priorirty. You and Eva obviously are members of that group

Clearly, I see myself as an Indirect Stakeholder. Also, regardless of what I do or think, some who know that I am a Jew, simply consider me to responsible for some of what is happening in the Muddle East. That is a fact. So I too have no choice about being stakeholder, albiet the personal the price I pay is almost negligible.

By price I am sure you understand that I mean the total effect of the conflict on any one individual or groups of people.

I also think that the effect of the (too) many Presumptive Stakeholders has on balance been very negative. The (too) many Arab-Israeli wars are just one example of that.

To answer your other questions: I think that too many Presumptive Stakeholders are involved for reasons other than the welfare of the Direct Stakeholders. Also many people of goodwill and who really have good intentions just do not really understand the real complications; as a result they do more harm than good. .
Hi Daphna,

This discussion may well be needlessly complicated and possibly too theoretical but I don't think that it's bureaucratic. I started this partly to help clarify my related thinking, Selfish I know. Only those who want to play will.

I think that you are really proposing another topic. Some of that has implicitly and explicitly been discussed before.

Most here agree (I think) that discussions like this can only be useful for learning and community building. The only thing that really matters is practical actions that may result. One is the photography project Roni is working on. Another was visiting and delivering letters to Palestinian youth attacked by Jewish louts in Jerusalem recently.

Please start a discussion like that you proposed. If you are technically challenged, I or someone else here will start that for you.

Be well...

Please also see
Peace Cafe Discussions
The Photography course discussion
for some a discussion of practical initiatiives.
Paul, I want to say that I do enjoy your methodism to thought and planning. It may not be for everyone, but it resonates with me.

I am definitely a presumptive stakeholder. Heck, I was born in Idaho! I am culturally far away from the Middle East.

But I mourn constantly for the violence and suffering all over the world, and so I always want to help everywhere.

I think my personal responsibility at this exact moment is simply to continue to learn more. I don't know or understand enough to speak up or even act. There may be a few things that are clear cut that I could help with.

I also think my personal responsibility is to pass on what I know. I am a blogger, and I blog on peace and unity and similar things. I can continue to expand the possibilities of what I am teaching those who may come across my blog (my voice!).
I am glad this discussion is here because I feel very much as a "presumptive stakeholder", that I'm not sure what kind of support direct stakeholders are looking for, if at all. I read a lot of the discussions but don't feel suitably qualified with the intricacies of the region to really contribute in a theoretical way, but do feel I can put forward ideas to achieve some sort of tangible aim.

I would love to be able to add thoughts and ideas which others throughout the page with a more direct relationship to the problems really pick up on and run with....make them their own...if you will, because I feel only those who live with the day to day realities and pay the price of war / achieving peace really know what those aims are and what is realistically achievable in the region.
Hi Pete,

You ask: What should presumptive stakeholders do?

The simple answer is to try help in practical and peaceful ways that do not simply reinforce and perpetuate victimhood and a victim mentality. For example: don't just provide food; help and nurture the local production of food. You are doing just that, of course, by helping to select appropriate technology for the Peace Cafe.

Presumptive and other stakeholders who merely incite, just make things worse.

But you know all that, of course, Pete. Some others here though very obviosly (still) don't.

Be well...
Thanks for that, Frank. I agree that all humans are just equal stakeholders in humanity. In an ideal world we'd all live without friction in peace and harmony. In that context, all humans are just members of the human tribe. It is pity that for now there are to many factions (sub-tribes) of the one human tribe.
Frank wrote: "While I agree that your definition is reasonable at one level, I like to suggest that every human being is a stakeholder because wherever humans are killing humans, all humans are affected."

Whilst theoretically and ideally I agree Frank, that does not help to resolve the Muddle East conflict. The sheer numbers of people who see themselves as active indirect stakeholders and especially active presumptive stakeholders is (in my view) unlike any other conflict in the known history of humankind.



Latest Activity

Shefqet Avdush Emini updated their profile
10 hours ago
Mauricio San Miguel Llosa updated their profile
Oct 4
Amir Salameh updated their profile
Jun 25
Fredda Goldfarb updated their profile
Apr 15
Dr. David Leffler posted a blog post
Apr 9


"Like" us on Facebook

Promote MEPEACE online



© 2019   Created by Eyal Raviv. Supported by One Region, One Future.   ..

Feedback | Report an Issue  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service