Two-Part Report on Reconciliation and Israel-Palestinian Peace

Reconciliation: Lessons for Peace and Justice in Palestine (Part One)
Palestine Center Brief No. 181 (18 August 2009)

Information Brief

By Hania Bekdash*

This is part one of a two part information brief. This brief explores recent reconciliation processes in history in the context of transitional justice in post-conflict societies. It argues that the traditional track for negotiated conflict settlement in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict must incorporate formal mechanisms of reconciliation. It offers examples and lessons that could apply to Israel and Palestine in order to guarantee that peace will be sustainable.

Click here to view and print this brief online.

Grassroots Reconciliation in Palestine and Israel (Part Two)
Palestine Center Brief No. 181 (18 August 2009)

Information Brief

By Hania Bekdash*

This is part two of a two part information brief. This brief examines the grassroots reconciliation practices that are currently taking place in Israel and Palestine. It attempts to discern which practices have worked in the past, which have failed and what more can be done. It maintains the overarching belief that a sustainable peace to this conflict cannot be achieved through negotiated agreements alone, but instead, reconciliation practices are effective and necessary.

Click here to view and print this brief online.

*This information brief was written by Palestine Center intern Hania Bekdash, a student at the Fletcher School at Tufts University, as culmination of her research during the Summer 2009 Internship Program. The views expressed within are her own and do not necessarily reflect those of The Jerusalem Fund or its educational program, The Palestine Center. This brief may be used without permission if credit is given to the Center.

read more...

Announcement: Palestine Night

A Benefit for The Jerusalem Fund Celebrating Palestinian Culture

The Palestine Center will host a Palestinian cultural night to benefit the Jerusalem Fund. The event will be held at Busboys and Poets, at 14th and V Streets, NW, from 9-11 p.m. on Thursday, August 6, 2009. There is a $10 suggested donation at the door. For more information, please visit www.thejerusalemfund.org or the Facebook event page. No RSVP is required, but please direct any questions to palestinecenterinterns@gmail.com.

The following performers will appear:

Huda Asfour Singer and 'Aud

Nadim Khoury Buzuq

Tala Abu-Rahmeh Poet

Sabreena Da Witch Hip-Hop and R&B

read more...

Announcement: 2009 Lecture Series Lineup

The Palestine Center’s Summer Lecture Series to Begin in July

The Palestine Center is pleased to announce the lineup for the 2009 Summer Intern Lecture Series The Quest for Peace within Shifting Dynamics. In its 10th year, the lecture series provides interns, young professionals and D.C. area residents with the opportunity to hear from leading scholars, journalists and practitioners about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The lectures seek to assess the continuing challenges of Palestinian national reconciliation, the effects of the war on Gaza on public opinion, and the influence of political leadership on the current prospects for peace. This lecture series gives participants the opportunity to critically analyze both positive developments and sobering realities inherent to resolving the conflict while evaluating the chances for a bold, new approach to peace in the Middle East.

Lectures and speakers include:

“Moving Forward: Palestinian Political Parties and Reconciliation”

Ms. Nadia Bilbassy-Charters
Senior News Correspondent, Middle East Broadcasting Corporation
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
To RSVP, click here.





This lecture is designed to discuss the current efforts by Fateh, Hamas and other Palestinian parties to reach a national reconciliation and possible unity government by highlighting the major points of contention and disagreement and the prospects for success.

Nadia Bilbassy-Charters is the chief news correspondent for Middle East Broadcasting Center (MBC) in Washington, D.C. She is the former Washington Bureau senior diplomatic correspondent for Al Arabiya Satellite TV Channel where she covered the White House and the State Department.


“The War on Gaza and Public Opinion”

Ms. Nadia Hijab
Senior Fellow, Institute of Palestine Studies
Thursday, July 9, 2009
To RSVP, click here.



This lecture will focus on the impact of Israel’s war on Gaza, analyzing it in terms of its effect on international public opinion and state policy. It will seek to trace what factors influence public opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and address issues of media biases.

Nadia Hijab is senior fellow at the Institute for Palestine Studies, an independent non-profit research organization and a leading resource on the Arab-Israeli conflict. She is a frequent public speaker and media commentator on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.


“Clashing Visions and Competing Interests:
American, Israeli and Arab Approaches to Peace”


Mr. Amjad Atallah (American Approach)
Co-Director, Middle East Task Force at the New American Foundation






Mr. Daniel Levy (Israeli approach)
Senior Fellow and Co-Director, Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation





Dr. Michael C. Hudson (Arab approach)
Director, Contemporary Center for Arab Studies at Georgetown University
Professor of International Relations, Georgetown University



Thursday, July 16, 2009
To RSVP, click here.

This panel will address similarities and differences in the approaches of the United States, Israel and the Arabs to an end of conflict, whether coordination is possible, and what distinct roles each nation or group of nations should have in the peace process.

Amjad Atallah is the Co-Director of the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation. Mr. Atallah advised the Palestinian negotiating team in peace negotiations with Israel on the issues of international borders, security, and constitutional issues. He was also responsible for liaising with U.S. government officials in Washington, D.C. on these issues.

Daniel Levy is a senior fellow and co-director of the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation and a senior fellow and director of the Prospects for Peace Initiative at The Century Foundation. Mr. Levy was a member of the official Israeli delegation to the Taba negotiations with the Palestinians in January 2001 and previously served on the Israeli negotiating team to the "Oslo B" Agreement from May to September 1995, under the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.

Michael C. Hudson is the Seif Ghobash Professor of Arab Studies in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. He is regularly interviewed about Middle East issues in the news media, including the BBC, Arabic satellite channels and major newspapers.

Lectures begin at 1:00 P.M. with lunch provided starting at 12:30 P.M.

All of the lectures are held at:

The Palestine Center
2425 Virginia Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20037
(202) 338-1290

The lecture series is open to the public, but RSVPs are required. Please click here to RSVP for the individual lectures or send us an email.

Views expressed on this post or on linked web pages do not represent the Palestine Center, the educational program of the Jerusalem Fund for Education and Community Development. All content is for educational purposes only.

read more...

Announcement: Nadia Hijab to Speak as Part of the 2009 Summer Intern Lecture Series

Notice: Change of Date

The Palestine Center is pleased to announce that Nadia Hijab, a senior fellow at the Institute for Palestine Studies will speak at the 10th Annual Summer Intern Lecture Series on Thursday, July 9, 2009.

Hijab's lecture on "The Gaza War and Public Opinion," will be the first in our three-part series entitled The Quest for Peace within Shifting Dynamics. The series is designed to bring area interns, scholars and the general public together for lectures, discussions, and conversations addressing changes within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict throughout the last year on a local, regional and international level.

The lecture will be from 1:00 PM to 2:00 PM with lunch provided beforehand at 12:30. RSVPs are required to attend. Please visit this blog or our Facebook group, The Palestine Center, for updates, forthcoming information on RSVP procedures and announcements of other speakers in the series.

Questions and inquiries?

Views expressed on this post or on linked web pages do not represent the Palestine Center, the educational program of the Jerusalem Fund for Education and Community Development. All content is for educational purposes only.

read more...

Interview with Dr. Robert Pastor: Israeli Elections

Palestine Center intern Nicolas Kabat interviewed Dr. Robert Pastor about the recent Israeli elections. Dr. Pastor is the Vice President of International Affairs and Professor of International Relations, American University; Senior Adviser on Conflict Resolution in the Middle East, The Carter Center.



Download mp3

read more...

From Talk to Change: The Test for President Obama’s Israel-Palestine Policy

Palestine Center Brief No. 175

12 February 2009

By Peter Gruskin*

Much has been said of the prospects for peace between Israel and the Palestinians under U.S. President Barack Obama's administration. Although it is too early to tell exactly how American policy will unfold, many are pessimistic given the ambiguous political circumstances, with the dominance of the right-wing in Israeli politics and the lack of clarity in Obama's declarations and moves, both as a candidate and in his short time in office. Optimists, on the other hand, consider an Obama administration the best chance for encouraging a peaceful resolution. They argue if anyone can break from the American record of unwavering commitment to Israel's policies, it is this president. This essay contends that the best test for how much change there is in U.S. policy is the extent to which American policymakers disagree with their Israeli counterparts.

On the Campaign Trail

Political commentators debated Barack Obama's past views on Israel-Palestine, mostly during the 2008 election. Many in the Republican Party, as well as some pro-Israel activists and pundits, feared that Obama was "anti-Israel" by virtue of his associations [1]. If they did not explicitly state this, they pointed to his alleged ties to "radicals" critical of America and Israel, such as William Ayers, Rashid Khalidi [2] and Reverend Jeremiah Wright. This was, of course, in the context of a heated presidential campaign. The Republican presidential candidate U.S. Senator John McCain, by and large, stayed away from such criticism in his public pronouncements.

These commentators may have been wrong to the extent that understanding the plight of the Palestinian people is not the same as being "anti-Israel." Regardless, there is evidence that Obama was cognizant of the Palestinian narrative. Ali Abunimah, co-editor of Electronic Intifada and a Palestine Center fellow, knew Obama from the activist scene in Chicago. He claims he spoke to Obama at a 2000 campaign fundraiser at which Obama called for an even-handed approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Obama also, according to Abunimah, went to a community fundraiser in 1998 at which Palestinian academic Edward Said was the keynote speaker [3]. In college, Obama was a student of Professor Said at Columbia University [4].

Indeed, Obama drew some political inspiration from leftist critics of U.S. foreign policy, such as the radical organizer Saul Alinsky [5], as well as from critics of Israel, such as the international financier George Soros. Some who knew Obama from his pre-Senate days claim that he was somewhat sympathetic to the Palestinians. One such person, Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf, claims that Obama used to be "on the line of Peace Now… He was a moderate peacenik [before getting further into politics]" [6].

One reason for the sustained speculation is the lack of clarity and consistency in Obama's positions and statements. In March 2007, the candidate told a small group in Iowa, "Nobody’s suffering more than the Palestinian people" [7]. This statement was later qualified [8] just as he corrected his remark about Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem [9] at a speech to AIPAC (The American Israel Public Affairs Committee) in June 2008. His public pronouncements in support of Israel's 2006 war against Lebanon [10] and his statement that Israel's recent offensive in Gaza was self-defense demonstrated his vocal commitment to Israel. As a candidate, he sought to comfort pro-Israel voters and projected himself as a pro-Israel candidate. Yet, at the same time, he provided kernels of hope to those seeking a more honest and impartial American engagement in the region by speaking of the need for change generally in American foreign policy and promising to put Israel-Palestinian peace at the top of his agenda.

This triangulation led some Israel supporters to argue that he, as a candidate, was untrustworthy. For example, the former Israeli ambassador to the U.S., Danny Ayalon, wrote in an op-ed to the Jerusalem Post that Obama's candidacy was cause for "some degree of concern" [11].

The triangulation did not just worry advocates for Israel. Many pro-Palestinian activists believed President Obama catered to the Israel lobby for electoral purposes and will most likely continue America's pro-Israel agenda. During his AIPAC speech, which many observed, he made no references to "settlements," "occupation" or "territorial compromise" [12]. His repeated calls for a two-state solution have not impressed these critics, as presidents before him have said the same. President Obama recognizes, as he said in his interview with Al-Arabiya shortly after taking office, that he will be judged for his actions not his words.

Although there is a debate right now about U.S. policy towards Hamas, Obama's statements during the campaign did not give much hope to those who prefer a more realistic approach of engagement. He remarked on the campaign trail, while talking to a group of Palestinians, that the U.S. will never recognize winning Hamas candidates until the group renounces its mission to destroy Israel. Obama claims he told this to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in a 2006 meeting [13]. In his January 2008 letter to UN ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, he expressed qualified support for the Israeli bombing of Gaza. He wrote, "Israel has the right to respond while seeking to minimize any impact on civilians" [14]. A perfect example of his attempt at balance is in this same letter: "We all are worried about the consequences of the blockade on Palestinian families. Nonetheless, we must understand why Israel is forced to do this" [15].

In Office

There is disagreement over whether President Obama is going to be even-handed and fair. The test is how hard Obama is going to push Israel on issues such as the settlements (whose expansion Israel sought to hide publicly), Palestinian control of East Jerusalem, the borders, a Palestinian unity government, the refugee quagmire and Palestinian sovereignty. For too long, American officials merely echoed Israeli positions. The extent of the difference between the Obama administration's policy and the next Israeli government will determine how much change there actually is.

Besides his well-publicized symbolic gestures--calling Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas first, appearing on Al-Arabiya and the $20 million in aid sent to the Gaza Strip--he took the bold step of naming George Mitchell as a Middle East envoy. While these moves certainly signal the potential for change, the question of how far the administration will confront the anti-peace agenda of certain prominent elements within Israel's political establishment, especially those most empowered by the recent election, is an open one.

Skeptics argue that even if he is serious about peacemaking, Obama will be constrained by the Israeli lobby. Pro-Israel lobby groups provided him over $110,000 from 2000 to June 2006 alone [16]. Furthermore, he has chosen a rabidly pro-Israel Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, to oversee the implementation of his policies and to advise on political moves. His silence on the Gaza conflict before his inauguration was another hint. Despite the positive steps he took, he still affirms Israeli positions on the Gaza offensive and the cause of the conflict at-large; for instance, that Israel acts out of security and that Palestinian militants are the source of the current conflagration. Others argue that the two-state solution, the end goal President Obama has affirmed, is past its moment in history.

The more optimistic argue Obama has a firm understanding of the need for a constructive American approach and is just playing politics with rhetoric to appeal to pro-Israel sentiments. They think Obama will outreach to both sides and put the necessary pressure on Israel and the Palestinians in order to lessen the tensions between the two. They also argue that a negotiated settlement is necessary for American interests in the region and is thus inevitable. For holders of this view, any parties seeking a just resolution should embrace the Obama administration with hope, even if expectations are low.

Conclusion

As a candidate, Barack Obama used some degree of political triangulation to appear balanced yet sufficiently pro-Israel in order to sustain political support from an indispensable constituency and lobby network. Yet, in his first weeks in office, he made interesting and noteworthy moves that rub against his election rhetoric. However, none of them indicate a break from the traditional U.S.-Israel alliance, and we cannot expect such nudging anytime soon while Israel sorts out its ruling government coalition--one likely to be divided by partisanship--and the dust in recent Palestinian politics settles. Ultimately, the only way to prompt change will be if the United States confronts the most untenable of Israeli positions--something former President George W. Bush's administration never did. The challenge lies in the inescapable fact that many of those positions, including Israel's control over certain settlement blocs, use of collective punishment against Palestinians, construction of the Wall and denial of responsibility for the Palestinian refugee crisis, are orthodoxy in the dominant political persuasion of Israel.

For those who believe peace between Israel and the Palestinians is attainable, President Obama offers optimism. Even his symbolic acts suggest a marked departure from the Bush administration, which explicitly took the position that conditions are not optimal to negotiate with Palestinians. Still, the degree of change possible is limited by domestic political constraints as well as the abysmal state of affairs on the ground. This optimistic vision is incongruent with the sour pessimism on the ground, as Palestinians mourn the Gaza offensive and remain divided politically and Israel's anti-peace right dominates its politics and public opinion--increasingly pitting it against Obama's stated agenda.

Given the rightward trajectory in Israeli politics and the growing gap between the rhetoric of Obama and the Israeli right, the best measure of change will be how much actual tension arises between the American and Israeli positions. Resolving such disputes between traditionally close "allies" in a way that corrects the power imbalance between Israel and the Palestinians will be crucial since that is the only way a just settlement can really be effected. Concretization of Palestinians' losses since 1993, when the peace process began, is simply no basis for peace. Only an insistent and tough approach towards Israel can bring about a solution along the lines Obama outlined.

*This brief was written by Palestine Center intern Peter Gruskin as part of his research project during the Spring 2009 Internship Program.

The views expressed within are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of The Jerusalem Fund or its educational program, The Palestine Center. This brief maybe be used without permission if credit is given to the Center.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1 Sammy Benoit, "An Election Plea To Those Who Love Israel," American Thinker, November 2, 2008.

2 Hilary Leila Krieger, "McCain camp pushes Obama-Khalidi ties," Jerusalem Post, October 29, 2008.

3 Ali Abunimah, "How Barack Obama learned to love Israel," The Electronic Intifada, March 4, 2007.

4 Peter Wallsten, "Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Barack Obama," Los Angeles Times, April 10, 2008.

5 Peter Slevin, "For Clinton and Obama, a Common Ideological Touchstone," Washington Post, March 25, 2007, A01.

6 Larry Cohler-Esses, "Obama Pivots Away From Dovish Past," The Jewish Week, March 8, 2007.

7 Justin Elliott, "Obama's Israel Shuffle," Mother Jones, February 1, 2008.

8 A spokesman for Obama later said that it was Hamas who was causing the Palestinian people’s suffering; see "Obama under fire for comment on Palestinians," Associated Press, March 15, 2007.

9 http://blog.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/06/05/obama_backtracks_on_jerusalem.html.

10 Larry Cohler-Esses, "Obama Pivots Away From Dovish Past," The Jewish Week, March 8, 2007.

11 Shmuel Rosner, "Gaza overlooked by U.S. voters; economy dominates race," Ha’aretz, January 24, 2008.

12 Larry Cohler-Esses, "Obama Pivots Away From Dovish Past," The Jewish Week, March 8, 2007.

13 "Transcript of remarks by Senator Barack Obama," AIPAC Policy Forum (Chicago, Illinois), March 2, 2007.

14 Justin Elliott, "Obama's Israel Shuffle," Mother Jones, February 1, 2008,

15 Shmuel Rosner, "Gaza overlooked by U.S. voters; economy dominates race," Ha’aretz, January 24, 2008

16 Larry Cohler-Esses, "Obama Pivots Away From Dovish Past," The Jewish Week, March 8, 2007

read more...