Dialogue groups dissect Mideast
Since Israel was declared an independent state in 1948, constant tension between Israel and her numerous Arab neighbors has produced one of the world's most enduring conflicts. Every couple of years, it seems a new war has broken out or is looming on the horizon, and just as often, a new peace treaty appears to be on the verge of settling the issue once and for all. To the United States and its ideological allies, Israel is the one symbol of democracy in the middle of the Muslim world. To many in the Muslim world, Israel is an outgrowth of the West, which they believe has colonized and stolen Arab-Muslim lands and oppressed millions of Arabs and Muslims in the process.
These general trains of thought polarize foreign policy, public opinion and, of course, the sentiments of students here at Brandeis, where the Arab-Israeli conflict has created a great deal of social and intellectual tension. The issue is especially public here because of Israel's importance to the Jewish community, which makes up a majority of the University student body. The prevalence of the issue has been sublimated into a slew of cultural and political views on campus paralleling the polemic of the student body.
To Manar al-Fawakhry '06, an Israeli Arab from a village in the Galilee region of Israel, the Arab-Israeli conflict is particularly personal and difficult. "As an Israeli Arab, I see myself as an Israeli citizen ... but I also see another part of me carrying the Palestinian narrative." Fawakhry describes herself as "fortunate to be exposed to both narratives," while at the same time being in a position that "is not the easiest."
Because the campus has few Arab students and many Jewish ones, the Arab students sometimes feel outnumbered. "A lot of Arabs here are not politically vocal, but sometimes there is pressure on them to represent the Arab voice," said Ayham Bahnassi '05, whose parents immigrated to the United States from Syria twenty-two years ago and who serves as President of the Arab Culture Club.
"This is a big burden, though it also gives us strength," Bahnassi said
"The Jewish voice here is very diverse, and that is one of its strengths ... people here are really able to criticize themselves," Bahnassi said, adding that the intellectual openness was one of the reasons he chose Brandeis.
Reflecting this ideological heterogeneity, the University has three groups devoted to very different approaches to political activism on the topic of Israel: Zionists for Historical Veracity (ZaHaV), Brit Tzedek V'Shalom (which in Hebrew means "covenant of justice and peace"), and the Brandeis-Israel Public Affairs Committee (BIPAC). Brandeis also has the cultural-based Brandeis Zionist Association (BZA) and a religion-based group that hopes to be chartered by mid-November.
The Arab-Jewish Dialogue Group, though not directly aimed at Israel, often addresses the Arab-Israeli situation and how it affects students on the Brandeis campus. Each week the group invites two students, usually one Arab and one Jew, to plan and facilitate a discussion, and each year hosts a weekend retreat with professional dialogue leaders. According to co- coordinator Daniel Estrin, the Arab-Jewish Dialogue Group operates on one basic premise, and has one basic goal:
"You may be able to discount someone's facts or opinions, but you can't discount their feelings. . . feelings can't be disproved by any facts or evidence. We in the dialogue group strive to understand the emotions of each member." Fawakhry added that "having the patience to listen is the beginning of peace."
For Omar Haq '04, a native of Karachi, Pakistan and one of the founders of the India-Pakistani Dialogue Group, knowing what others think is more valuable than anything else. "There is no absolute right and wrong in conflict . . . I feel I learn more through dialogue than I ever could otherwise."
The point of dialogue groups, in his view, is to "recognize personal beliefs, cover up stereotypes, understand and educate campus" about important, often misunderstood issues.
Not everyone, however, shares the view that emotions are the most important aspect of conflict. ZaHaV President Mitchel Balsam '05 said, "the Peace and Coexistence Center and the Arab Jewish Dialogue Group should focus more on historical fact than on the plights of different sides . . . ZaHaV tries to establish an accurate historical narrative and accuracy does not mean sympathizing with any side," and added "I left the Arab Jewish Dialogue group because it does not allow real diversity of thought; if you did not believe in the peace process you were a radical, and if you did not apologize for your side you were an outsider."
Whether emotions or historical facts should be emphasized is up for debate, but that emotions can run high, especially on the subject of the Arab- Israeli conflict, is undeniable.
In the words of Haq, "It is definitely good to stand up for your side and for what you believe in, but you do have to know and understand the other side's view, and know why you disagree with them.
Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Justice.