Young people have such capacity for initiation and beginning processes of change. Yet in observing my society during and after the last operation in Gaza, I felt that this capacity was not employed at all, and found the public discussion and behavior unbearably cyclical. Despite the vast potential that young people possess in creating change, with their energy level and natural tendency to rebel against the previous generation's values, opinions among them regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remain static. However, if the potential is there, it is merely a question of channeling this natural tendency in different directions and broadening it to other realms. One way to expand this potential to the realm of the conflict is through nurturing the notion of doubt. Developing the notion of doubt increases the capacity to think in new directions and then to translate these ideas into innovative actions that can change the political reality of the region.

Enhancing doubt in both societies can be achieved by creating an online Israeli-Palestinian Doubt Forum. Doubt should be developed particularly pertaining to three concepts: fact, collective identity and personal responsibility. Stimulating doubt among young people regarding these three concepts could allow them the freedom they need to make a change.

Firstly, a concept that is important to doubt is that of the facts that serve as a framework for discussion on the conflict. In both the educational and social structures, the discussion is most often based on sets of facts and widely accepted terminology, which we are not encouraged to question. Many of these "facts" have become part of our collective consciousness in such a way that they have been converted into the "background" to the debate, instead of constituting a debate. The frame of the debate should be changed from a discussion of the interpretation of facts to one of the facts themselves. A fact-based, as opposed to narrative-based, examination of the conflict greatly restricts the ability to think about it in new ways and come up with new ideas.

In a Doubt Forum, participants could post articles, pictures and their own opinions and feelings, as well as ask each other questions. Such personal first-hand exposure to a diversity of contradicting facts, opinions and information posted by a variety of people from both sides, would help to give perspective, and increase doubt and questioning. This new kind of online interaction would call into question the notion of fact, leading to a more open-minded and less self-assured and self-righteous approach to the political debate. It could lead people to call not only historical fact into question, but the current "truths" and other things they "know" about the other side, their actions, thoughts, values and what they would be willing to compromise for peace. In this way the Doubt Forum would create a new freedom for a broader, deeper and more original discussion to take place that could stimulate resolution.

Secondly, the concept of collective identity should be called into question. The conflict is deeply personal to many people and, yet, often the emotions regarding it are experienced as a community or even nation. In both societies there is a lack of confidence and sense of security, easily leading to a feeling that nationalism and collective identity is what keeps alive the state or the ongoing struggle.

Another problem is that, when collective identity plays such a central role, separating individuals from their acts or from their larger communities becomes harder to do, while passing judgment and possessing prejudice becomes easier. Moreover, over-identification with one's society or government does not enable a critical examination of its actions because it becomes too personally and emotionally loaded. The constant strengthening of the collective identity forces the debate on the conflict into narrower, more simplistic definitions. This shallower outlook on the conflict prevents people from formulating sophisticated ideas and resolutions on how to move forward.

The Doubt Forum would help people to break down societies and nations into the individuals they are made up of. It would not be governments and other such distant entities, but rather common individuals discussing their reality and future together. This would also be helpful in distinguishing between governments and individuals, so that it becomes possible to criticize one's government without feeling that one is criticizing oneself. Enhancing the individual identity would create a larger common denominator than collective identities allow for - a common denominator of human experience and emotions. Finding this common denominator naturally helps people to empathize with one another and creates a solid enough shared base on top of which they can debate their differences effectively.

And, finally, the concepts of personal responsibility and the capacity to make a difference should be examined. Despite the experience of the conflict feeling very personal to most Israelis and Palestinians, many still consider their personal actions removed from it. They perceive it as affecting them as opposed to them affecting it. They are often not fully aware of their influence on it, whether active or passive, and so do not feel responsible for its outcome and impact on others' lives. It is not only a physical distance but also a strange perception of personal responsibility that creates this sense of detachment. Young people on both sides have developed a cynicism towards their ability to affect the world around them. While many are even actively involved in the conflict, they still feel removed and do not pause to doubt before they carry out acts that seem natural or inconsequential in their respective societies, but may have severe implications for the conflict.

A Doubt Forum would, at the outset, connect people to their sense of personal responsibility and impact on others by exposing them to personal experiences and stories. These conflict-related personal stories from the other side would inevitably involve an individual from one's own side. Through identification and drawing on their own analogous experiences, people may realize that they have, in some way, taken part in the conflict without being fully aware or considering the implications. Some of them may realize they still take part in it, even if only passively. Through this realization, people can understand that they have an impact on other humans and the world around them. Through the Doubt Forum, they could share 16.2 21 experiences in their realms of action, consult each other and, maybe, even initiate together. Whatever political stand will be the outcome of the internal processes the Doubt Forum will have initiated in them, the participants will feel empowered to act upon their vision for the region, believing that they have the power to realize it.

Creating a joint Israeli-Palestinian Doubt Forum would provide a way for Palestinians and Israelis to directly interact with each other before they reach the opposite sides of a checkpoint or a wall. The Doubt Forum would call into question the notions of fact, collective identity and personal responsibility. This, in turn, would refresh the framework of the political debate and allow more freedom to think differently and come up with original solutions. The plurality of voices within both societies expressed in such a Doubt Forum would help question facts and break down the two clusters of peoples into individuals. By doing so, the Forum would strengthen personal identity and empower young people to take initiative and make a change in the world. With a heightened consciousness, new perspectives and ideas and a belief that they can, young people could make peace possible.