John Cronin::Wirral, UK, Eng, Virgo

Full Text

Squaring the Circle...

Can it really be beyond the compass of the human mind to at least regulate this constant cycle of conflict in the Middle East? Well, maybe it is - but here's a suggestion for closure where the expenditure involved would seem to comprise mainly that of a few brain cells, a commodity we all have in plentiful supply.

This is a dry, almost antiseptic solution, perhaps a bit 'clinical' in its approach to the subject. It's a formula-driven method which, somewhat perversely, derives an unexpected synergy from the very problem it seeks to address. Worked out by a German I met many years ago in Nurnburg. Very Germanic therefore, very direct - and, in its own fashion, arguably much more effective than many peace proposals floated in the past, proposals which have now long since sunk without trace.

Monitor events in the region, sample and evaluate those incidents involving violence and/or intolerance, even the quite minor ones. Place on record that which occurs and make a determination/estimation as to whether this side or that is deemed responsible. For instance, something happens; it was violent; it seemed deliberate; people were hurt; property was damaged - so on and so forth. This was judged at the time to be Israeli in origin - or it was Palestinian inspired. Can include a default option too - 'perpetrated by person or persons unknown' - if circumstances so dictate. Collate all this information and await the next sequence of bombs, bullets, whatever, that happens along. Do likewise with these and continue monitoring.

At some stage - a time limit, a points cut-off - the sampling process terminates and one of the entries thus catalogued is then randomly selected. Penalise the offending party here by conferring full ownership and title of some nominal area of land on its opposite number. One square kilometre should more than suffice, the transfer of which is formally recognised by the rest of the world - also acting as guarantor - even if only in the moral and legal sense. One of the much maligned UN resolutions perhaps?

The sampling process then re-engages and, assuming the violence continues unabated, a further parcel of land is thereby delineated and assigned to whoever. The area this covers would then be some 2 sq. km. Subsequent infractions might trigger another penalty; 4 sq. km. After that, it's 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256 sq. km. . . . . . . . A natural progression, it soon ramps up to some very serious real estate indeed.

The dynamic of the whole situation now changes markedly. Israelis, through violence and the like, would be seen to be promoting, even ratifying the Palestinian cause while, similarly, Palestinians might well be perceived as carrying forward and cementing the dream of a permanent Jewish homeland; prospects guaranteed to give even the most militant in either camp considerable pause for thought. 'He brought home the other sides' bacon for them' - quite possibly the least coveted obituary of martyr, soldier and politician alike. Very salutary though if a permanent end to these hostilities is ever to emerge from the present fog of contention.

Now, back there in Nurnburg, I felt that, as a theory, the concept had some small merit but little practical value. And I said as much to my German companion, detailing what I felt to be major obstacles in its path.

Question 1:  Too biased. The Israelis might go for it - the novelty alone makes it an idea worth exploring. Not so the Palestinians - and with some justification. Yes, this might lock down the violence - and appreciably so - but to what end? To preserve the status quo? To stifle any movement towards change or progress? Not entirely a welcome outcome where Palestinian interests are concerned.

Answer:  The answer, apparently, is to acknowledge the objection and offer to take the system 'off-line' for one or two months. In that time slot, the whole question might readily be referred back to the field of battle - if calmer counsels have not prevailed in the interval.

Question 2:  Too easily sabotaged. Disaffected elements in both groups could easily overload the process, manufacturing spurious claims and stage-managing acts of violence. A futile endeavour therefore and not worth the effort.

Answer:  Any halfway decent sampling technique should be more than adequate to discourage such activities. Those seeking to choreograph events could find their efforts ineffective, or worse still, embarrassingly counterproductive.

Question 3:  Wouldn't it be imperative to obtain at least tacit approval from both principals in this matter? Given the long-standing enmity between them, acceptance of so radical a departure from familiar norms and customs of warfare seems doubtful in the extreme.

Answer:  Curiously enough, agreement on the issue need not be a mandatory requirement here. In fact, both parties could initially ignore the whole procedure and continue on much as before. However, there comes a time when the areas of land so designated must reach something of a critical mass. At such a point, one side or the other might very well decide to go with what's on offer. Holding such clear and universal title to any major tract of this much disputed territory might prove progressively more and more difficult to resist. Thereafter, further violence becomes increasingly untenable. Fighting against a conventional enemy is all very well - but when that enemy is also a mathematical construct, the numbers themselves soon begin to outweigh all other considerations.

Question 4:  But who could - or should - debate, decide, pronounce upon changes of such profound significance? Who would accept the awesome responsibility entailed in decisions of this magnitude?

Answer:  We are all, it seems, as ever, still our brother's keeper. It must fall to us, the world community - or representatives thereof - to perform the deed. And, with such godlike powers theirs to command, the expectation is that there would be no great shortage of volunteers.


Now whether all this has any relevance as to our view of the Middle East today is, of course, debatable. But it would be well to note that, in our various dealings with the Angel of Death, any increase in our choices here must certainly be welcomed. A template capable of ending once and for all, not just this business but also others of an equally intractable nature, would go a long way towards making some sense out of all that's happened - even if only as an intellectual exercise.

And if, for some reason, it didn't work out, some unforeseen flaw in the design perhaps, well then, we could at least console ourselves with the knowledge that, in the final analysis, .............. we can always blame the Germans.

In the story of the Laxian key, that elusive item was never found. The result was a planet-wide catastrophe. 

Fortunately, the 'Key' and its unstoppable companion were only fictional devices, nothing more than that.

The same cannot be said of other such situations. 

Jordan S 11.01.2020 06:39

Don't you think the sampling and evaluation process would become a major source of political conflicts? What could assure both sides of unbiased administration?

John cronin 11.01.2020 17:31

Those might be major bones of contention, Jordan. But if the process as a whole can bring an end to all such conflicts, I see very few objections being raised.

Nils Andreasson 03.01.2019 18:36

Some of my Christian fellowa are Messianics. My persuasion is that Christ is here and now for us to recognize Him. Nils

John Cronin 04.01.2019 07:37

Then let's all be Christ-like here and do the unconventional, that which can bring about a kind of salvation, both for ourselves and all our fellow human beings

Nils Andreasson 02.01.2019 18:12

The solution dear John is to recognize each others as equals with equal rights. In yididsh to be ein mensch.

John Cronin 03.01.2019 00:20

The answer, dear Nils, is to find a solution and then stick with it until the problem ceases to be one, its termination as described in the Laxiankey scenario.

Nils Andreasson 30.12.2018 14:00

Your level of abstractions passes the limit of my understanding. Maybe it is your way to desenibilze traumatic experiences of being betrayed of your innocense?

John 30.12.2018 21:18

Oh dear. Yet another person only able to offer a diagnosis but no solution. With so many people like these around, it's no wonder our world is in such a mess.

Abdul Kareem Methusaleh 23.10.2018 16:44

Obviously the laxian key was left not by foreigners but by the past, an ancestral thing. The answer is to prepare a similar machine for the next cycle. Duh

John Cronin 23.10.2018 23:53

Well, Abdul, I'm sure that all makes perfect sense to someone. But, regrettably, that someone isn't me.

Abe Lee Haney 22.11.2017 13:42

The world being mostly anti Israel would never implement it and moslems wanting to safeguard their "right" to kill, would ignite a worldwide murderous spree.

John Cronin 26.11.2017 10:33

If the KEY works, Abe,then everyone is a winner. If not, then we are faced with the prospect of no one winning here, much as has been the case for generations.

Abe Lee Haney 25.11.2017 19:19

To John Cronin.
Actually I agree with you(see my other comment further down). Israel would always win at that "game", an that would be "unfair" wouldn't it?

John Cronin 23.11.2017 02:11

Too many people in this world like you, Abe Lee Maney. All of them are afraid to think too far outside the box in case they lose their way and can never return.

Abe Lee Haney 22.11.2017 13:33

Interesting because I thought of this exact method many years ago, hoping to stop Arabs attacks against Israelis/Jews. If applied, today there would be no PA.

Tony 20.05.2016 12:26

As long as WE do not see HKBH as the hand behind EVERYTHING and that EVERYTHING IS A CAUSE FOR GOOD, we will continue to moan and groan!

John 21.04.2016 11:51

The KEY is now only theory, Moshe, but so many things were once just like that before being turned into reality by people refusing to be denied the prospect.

moshe 21.04.2016 10:12

"Laxian" applies to a theoretic world peopled by theoretic people.
understand hamas, hizballah, Iran, and ISRAEL, before proposing a real world solution ! !

tenyearsfrmnow 07.03.2016 07:32

nice try all, but this is where you fail every time. sometimes the 'bright' ones do't get the simple answers..Leave it to him to have a FREE page...

John Cronin 07.03.2016 09:18

Wow! There's a simple answer. Then why hasn't it been applied well before now so that we can all direct our thoughts and energies to other matters and crises?

Peace no War 27.01.2016 09:46

I think that the best way to solve this situation is to divide the land equaly
50% to jews and 50% to pals. U cant think that one side is best than the other

John 27.01.2016 23:04

The sort of division that not even an eternity of time could fix. There would always be some unsatisfied with what might seem a very fair arrangement but isn't.

pneale 09.01.2016 16:26

There is no un-biased arbiter. There are irrational barbarians who make their own rules. Your youthful idealistic notions (however refreshing) are not relevant.

John 09.01.2016 19:22

The KEY is specifically designed to be unbiased. That is its great strength and the force that will ensure its adoption and success in such a venture.

pneale 09.01.2016 16:17

What makes you think people who hate you are going to cooperate? Escalation is more likely. Remove the evil from among you.

John 09.01.2016 19:29

There is the whole of humanity to consider here; people who will support any option that will benefit them the most. And a world with no conflicts will do that.

idiocy 25.10.2015 11:07

So the Pals and Israelis will drop all existing territorial claims and cooperate on arbitrary collective displacement of their populations? Idiot.

John 28.10.2015 09:56

Remember that this will be a three-sided affair, the rest of the world will have a big stake in the outcome. And it's the big battalions that win out in the end

idiot 28.10.2015 08:37

Which pal or isr gonna trust the other side to play fair and agree on punishments. If arbitrary collective punishment is fair. Why u convinced of own genius?

John 25.10.2015 11:56

Of course not, Idiocy, they'll be mad as hell if they lose territorial legitimacy. But the point is - at whom will they be mad? Answer: Only at themselves!

Tamara 22.10.2015 00:49

That Israel inhabits her land and remains protected in it. You'll see!! God Himself, will protect Israel.

Tamara 22.10.2015 00:47

The God who made heaven and earth gave Israel to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and their descendants (NOT ESAU!!). He calls Israel his firstborn son. He will see

Abagail 21.10.2015 20:02

Just add this bullarky to the pile of negotiators that went before you.
Save your energy. Israel ain't goin nowhere... read the Tenach. or if you must,

John 21.10.2015 21:04

As for Israel not going anywhere, Abagail, hasn't that been more or less the main problem from the start? Where is it going and does it know how to get there?

Abagail 21.10.2015 19:58

REMEMBER The Hashemite Kingdom of TransJordan IS THE PALESTINIAN STATE. The land and the nation of ISRAEL is a SOVREIGN STATE. arabs already have a pal state.

John 21.10.2015 21:01

Well, Abagail, there are quite a few who don't see it that way. Hence all the fuss and bother that's been around for 67+ years and with no one able to stop it.

Idiocy 19.10.2015 23:00

Tell me, whose children will go to impose this ridiculous concept in a foreign land? The natives would kill them like the Vietnamese and USA. This is childish.

idiocy 25.10.2015 11:16

Statehood and sovereignty are essentially millitary concepts, not mathematical. Law is the figleaf used to hide this fact. No army -> ur opinion doesn't count.

idiocy 25.10.2015 11:12

Which pal or isr gonna trust the other side to play fair and agree on punishments. If arbitrary collective punishment is fair. Idiot.

idiocy 25.10.2015 11:09

'self imposed solution- so isr and pal have to.cooperate to.impose it. Which isn't gonna happen. Idiocy.

John 20.10.2015 10:42

The concept is self-imposed. Idiocy. EVERYONE comes to realise it's the only way to resolve the situation: there is also a massive inducement/bribe involved.

Jon 07.10.2015 02:15

John, I mentioned nothing about fair. But if the options are relying on random sampling of violence and then some "jury" deciding who was at fault for the viole

John 07.10.2015 15:12

That 'loss' of land is the other side's gain, Jon. And, in the global village that exists today, how long do you think such losses will be allowed to continue?

Jon 07.10.2015 14:40

Except that you don't scare crazies who strap themselves with bombs with a threat of loss of land, just as the settlement movement hasn't.

John 07.10.2015 02:42

The KEY is not about who is at fault. It's the worst-case scenario for both sides, a scare tactic to exit a 67 year-old conflict having no other end in sight.

Jon 07.10.2015 02:17

enemy kill Jews in the hopes that statistics ends up giving them more of the land. No thanks!

JOn 07.10.2015 02:16

ence, I'll take the status quo where we do our utmost to protect Jewish lives, because Jewish (and Israeli) lives matter. Your method incentivises letting the

Jon 04.10.2015 21:41

Who decides who the aggressor is? Here you have a murderer who is shot by police officers, and the PA blames Israel! World opinion is not much more favorable.

John 05.10.2015 06:21

If you are expect life to be fair, Jon, you will always be disappointed. It's not fair for anyone, not this side of eternity anyway. We just do the best we can.

Jon 04.10.2015 23:36

Yeah, that's what I thought. I'd take my chances with the current situation. Bias against the Jewish people far outways bias for, so I'd say it's still unfair.

John Cronin 04.10.2015 23:00

Who decides, Jon? All done by a jury if things ever get to that stage, a jury of say 500 randomly selected individuals. This eliminates bias and jury tampering.

Ethan Cohen 19.09.2015 23:17

And what is to be done with the inhabitants of the land so transferred?

John 20.09.2015 01:17

No inhabitants are transferred because no one, no side would be stupid enough to risk tempting fate by continuing the conflict. No conflict, no transfer problem

John 20.09.2015 01:09

You miss the whole point of the KEY, Ethan, although the questions you raise are valid enough. The KEY's purpose is not to penalise. It's an escape mechanism.

Ethan Cohen 19.09.2015 23:20

If they are to leave, and they resist, their side will quickly lose all title to the land and any incentive not to fight.

Ethan Cohen 19.09.2015 23:18

If they are to remain, say that you support a one-state solution and have done with the gimmick.

Dave Roberts 12.06.2015 19:29

Unfortunately, all human beings have been affected with a disease. The Bible calls it the knowledge of good and evil. It's incurable, but for the Messiah ...

John Cronin 13.06.2015 01:07

A neutral observer isn't needed for the KEY to work well.
As long as a random element is present, the LAXiANKEY can still function, even with biased inputs.

Dave Roberts 12.06.2015 23:21

John, what I mean is that it isn't possible to obtain a neutral observer for the process to work. Or is it?

John Cronin 12.06.2015 22:57

As the saying has it, Dave, 'the Lord helps those who help themselves.' And that's how it should be if we have any claim at all to be members of the human race.

Tertius 20.05.2015 16:04

There will be peace in the Middle East when the oil wells are empty or alternative energy sources are developed that decreases the demand of oil drastically.

John Cronin 20.05.2015 21:23

Then, Tertius, we may have quite a while to wait before that happens. And so the conflict goes on, people die and all the oil in the world won't bring them back

Keith B. 20.08.2014 23:20

Haven't you more or less described how Israel was formed ?
6 Million plus Jews were murdered in the death camps, Europe felt guilty (?),
and gave them land.

Peace no War 27.01.2016 09:41

all jews in Europe in that time was about 1 million
from where you got 6 millions??

John cronin 22.08.2014 09:55

if I have described it that way, Keith, it's news to me. I can't see where I've done that but, if so, I can assure you it was quite unintentional.

martin 23.03.2014 04:33

I'm happy you are pleased with your views. So am I with mine. I just happen to think of an explanation forthe conflict that makes it all clear, to me.

john cronin 23.03.2014 17:31

Martin, my contact e-mail is temporarily at
original e-mail address has some problems at the moment.
Feel free to send comments/critiques etc

John Cronin 23.03.2014 04:55

An explanation is a very good place to start. But a better one to end would be with a solution.

Martin Kessler 22.03.2014 19:16

This solution is simlistic even rediculous. Email me I'll tell you why.

Martin Kessler,

John Cronin 23.03.2014 04:08

Please tell me why, Martin. There used to be a part of me that wanted to be proved wrong. But not any more. Because being right sits so much better with me now.

Latest comments

24.10 | 00:42

They were also given a prison. And, as in most prisons, it is gen...

23.10 | 02:22

Yes well they were given Gaza. They promised to make it into ano...

03.04 | 08:27

Are you implying that mankind should stick with a formula that's 2...

03.04 | 00:17

UN has done that repeatedly. Israel will have to be driven out by force of ...