As a cease-fire continues to hold the renewed conflict between Israel and Hamas at bay, many are reflecting on how the latest round of violence affects the constantly simmering tensions in the Middle East. One game-changing development was Israel’s remarkable Iron Dome missile shield, which made its major-combat debut and proved to be a technological wunderkind. Time reports that of the 300 Hamas-fired missiles that were deemed a threat by the tracking system, about 90% were effectively neutralized.
Iron Dome is just the latest – and flashiest – example of the Israeli dependence on science and technology: indeed, the nation’s isolation has required it to pursue technologically enabled self-sufficiency where less constrained nations might simply foster regional trade relationships. Today, military technology may be in the spotlight, but decades of research and development have led to important advances in other sectors, particularly water production and conservation. With geographical and political obstacles to fresh water acquisition, desalination has become increasingly important: the Ashkelon desalination plant, billed as the world’s largest reverse osmosis facility, produces 6 percent of Israel’s water. And Netafim, a $400 million-per-year company born and bred on the grounds of the Kibbutz Hatzerim, is a world leader in drip-irrigation products.
Daniel Zajfman, the President of the Weizmann Institute for Science, sees science as a critical bulwark against Israel’s challenging circumstances. “We’re in a noisy neighborhood,” he says understatedly, “so using technology to help solve some of our problems is important.”
Zajfman has become a leading voice in the attempt to connect science and society, and he made his case recently at the Falling Walls Conference in Berlin. “Over the last few centuries,” he contends, “slowly it became clear that science is for the benefit of humanity. There is nothing useful that’s been created that didn’t come at least in part from science.” At the Weizmann Institute, Zajfman believes that the broadest societal advances come from investing in people, not ideas. “We focus not on the science but on the scientist,” he says, “to give them the freedom to work and the freedom to think and determine what will most benefit society.”
But just as Israel’s scientific and technological might have afforded it self-sufficiency and protection, could it also help build political bridges? Could scientific engagement and the sharing of useful technologies – most of the Middle East must deal with water scarcity, after all – create a healthier dynamic, giving both sides a stake in stability and scientific progess?
Zajfman is skeptical, largely because of the gulf in scientific capacity between Israel and its neighbors. “Scientists are not politicians,” he contends; “they will only cooperate if there is a scientific advantage in it. And the first problem we have is that our neighbors have not yet developed a major platform to do scientific research that is comparable,” to Israel’s.
It’s not as though Israel is fundamentally opposed to sharing technology: the country’s Agency for International Development Cooperation has partnered with several African nations – from Ethiopia to Senegal – to introduce drip irrigation and improve crop yields in water-stressed areas.
And although an institutionalized partnership is still lacking between Israel and its Arab neighbors, “it’s something we’re trying to do,” according to Zajfman. There are localized, study-worthy aspects of the region – such as genetic diseases specific to certain tribes, or unique geological field sites – that could seed real and sustainable partnerships. “Getting scientists to meet is not the problem,” says Zajfman, “but getting them to work together longer term is the problem.”
Long-term partnerships between Israeli and neighboring scientists could be an extremely productive way to bridge ideological gaps through what Zajfman calls “the universal language of science.” And just as science and technology helped Israel neutralize the threat from the latest flare-up in attacks, science diplomacy and cooperation could be integral to a more lasting peace.
