Opinions

Dialogue key to Israeli-Palestinian cooperation

In print | February 4, 2010

The deeper I sank into the morass of literature on the Israeli-Arab conflict, the more I realized it is impossible to truly know anything about it.

After a while, I developed the only kind of “balanced opinion” one can have on such a contentious subject: an amalgamation of polarizing tidbits. It became an assortment of equally-weighted opposing blurbs, dictated by two different national narratives. My conversations became quite ambivalent, often starting with “Well, it’s clear that…” soon to be followed by “But, on the other hand…”

The truth is, there are enough facts, figures and well thought-out arguments on all sides that you can believe whatever you want to believe. There is no “getting to the bottom of it.” Anyone who tries to convince you otherwise is selling something. Sage advice for the real world, Swatties: Beware the zealots who pass out leaflets on the sidewalk. There will be many.

Since coming back from Israel, I’ve learned to embrace my peculiarly cosmopolitonationalist, tempered emotional connection to the Jewish State that balances like a see-saw on the narrow fulcrum of bias. Full disclosure: I’m Jewish, and I studied abroad in Haifa, Israel, in the spring of 2009. But let me be perfectly clear, because I know where your suspicions must lie: I am in full support of the free State of Palestine, without qualifications or reservations.

So here’s something that will step on a few toes: I am against campus activism on the Conflict.
I’ll be explicit. I am vehemently against any sort of political activism either on behalf of or against any of the parties to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Activism includes the small reading groups, the campaigns, the discussions and the biased speakers thinly veiled as academic presenters.

So that I am not guilty of the all-too-oft-indulged liberal arts student’s habit of tearing down an edifice without positing a solution, I’ll offer my own: dialogue and cooperation. True dialogue that promotes non-violence, political negotiations, coexistence and the bridging of ideological differences. Activism to fund Israeli and Palestinian peace initiatives that are actually local to the region.

Why am I against campus activism in its current incarnation? Because I think an interesting process is taking place at America’s colleges: The conflict flies over here from the Middle East, permeates the student body and is perpetuated back out to the tired land from whence it came in the form of emotional and moral support. It is an ideological battle as much as a physical one; the battle pervades the consciousness of students and causes friction and fisticuffs at larger schools and psychological stress and hurt feelings at smaller ones.

That is not to say that Swarthmore has caused the bulk of my complaint; on the contrary, the groups here have tended to precariously teeter on the careful side of the fulcrum. That doesn’t change the fact that I am against the concept.

Anywhere besides Israel and Palestine, activism and political lobbying on the conflict all rests on the faulty assumption that one party (pick your poison) is mostly to blame for the conflict, and that if the United States could just see the truth, the offending party could be restrained.

Seriously? Let’s not pretend that this is simply about balancing the scales. There are enough “underdogs” on either side who are willing to stand with rhetorical spears leveled at another group’s throat. But I think it’s time that we all gave up the precious crutches of our persecution complexes.
My point, exactly: Whenever anyone offers you some advice on Israel and Palestine, ask what their ideal solution is. If it deviates too far from a balanced, down-the-middle-of-claims split, they’re passing you something smelly in a leaflet. Anyone who can ignore the actual consequences of a solution, rationalizing it to themselves on the basis of justice, is committing criminal negligence. Kofi Annan said it himself on Dec. 15, 2006, in his last official speech on the matter: “Perhaps the greatest irony in this sad story is that there is no serious question about the broad outline of a final settlement.”

Yet extremism lives on. Behind every Hamas militant, behind every Israeli fighter pilot about to drop a bomb, there is a college-educated intellectual massaging the fighter’s wounded psyche, writing an article that tells him he is doing the right thing. Today, the elite cloak their biases and baser instincts in pretty words, enabling the warriors just as much as if they were to pick up the sword themselves. Are we, the new generation who will write the new literature, going to perpetuate the ills of our predecessors?

How much time are we willing to waste spurring hatred and spinning justifications for feelings so ancient that they need no reasoned arguments, only rationalizations? I, for one, am not willing to waste another second. Not when I could spend it doing good. Or doing nothing, which is better by far than doing harm.

Lest you think that I am attacking the Palestinian side of activism, because that is the most salient at Swarthmore, recall that in the rest of the country there is a thriving activist camp for the Israelis that I equally repudiate. Please do me one favor, though: Don’t discount that fact. It is not a trivial thing to take gross exception with one’s own “side,” and the costs are real.

An ideological change did come over me in Israel. I now have too many friends on each side to take a side. I know too many Palestinians and too many Jews whom the proposed solutions would affect. It has become real to me.

Yet I see how unreal each side’s grander visions are. Let’s not fuel that fire; rather, let’s encourage cooperation. There are so many local movements in Israel and Palestine that are dedicated to enhancing constructive dialogue and building friendships. However, every time we succumb to the temptation to bicker we starve them of their funding and vitality. They could use our support.

Kofi said it himself: It’s possible to be a “true friend and supporter of both sides.” He sees himself as one. I see myself as one. Don’t talk to me about sides; I’m not interested in hearing it. Just talk to me about peace.

Jessa is a senior. She can be reached at jdeutsc1@swarthmore.edu.