A light unto the nations

As the Palestine Solidarity Movement approaches, students—pro-Arab, pro-Israeli, non-partisan and those who fall under more than one of these categories—should begin to think of the right questions to ask during the conference. At the very least, PSM conference participants and the Duke community should affirm the basic human right—the right to life—and with it, reject all groups that employ the killing of innocent civilians to achieve a political or military objective. As a result of the conference, we at Duke have the opportunity to form a genuinely progressive movement—that is, a community committed to progress in the Middle East conflict—a group of people of all political and religious motivations who recognize that human rights are the only basis upon which a consensus can be built.

Time and again, I’ve heard the refrain that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is too complicated to debate, or that we are too far removed from the Middle East to make sense of it. This is simply untrue. Our distance, rather than acting as a handicap, can serve as an advantage.

As informed individuals who seek out news from many sources, we must recognize that this war—no matter what you call it—violates human rights on both sides. It also impedes Israelis’ and Palestinians’ ability to act morally. For moderate Israelis who would support a peaceful solution, the situation is too complex to integrate into their daily lives; instead, they fall victim to the long-standing Israeli tradition of ignoring the plight of the Palestinians. For Palestinians, the conflict is impossible to ignore; the security wall, the proliferation of roadblocks in the West Bank and the Israeli military incursions have made life harder than ever before.

But perhaps what neither side is capable of seeing—whether blinded by hatred, fear or desperation—is the moral imperative of stopping the cycle of violence against innocent civilians. This is where we come in.

As products of a liberal education, we must unwaveringly declare that the slaughter of innocent civilians is morally wrong. Whether you are Jewish, Muslim or Christian; if you are of Israeli or Palestinian descent, or if your parents came from another Arab nation; even if you have no personal stake in the conflict, you—a student at an American university—must reject any action that results in the killing of innocent civilians. Whether you call it terrorism or state-sponsored terrorism, whether it is manifest in suicide-bombings, indiscriminate house demolitions, rocket attacks or urban shoot-outs, you must speak out against it.

This is the central dilemma that faces this year’s participants in the PSM, whose guiding principles set down in last year’s conference yield a troubling contradiction. Although PSM claims that “certain key principles, grounded in, but not limited to, international law, human rights, and basic standards of justice, will be fundamental to a just resolution to the plight of the Palestinians,” it also asserts that PSM’s status as a solidarity movement prevents it from “dictat[ing] the strategies or tactics adopted by the Palestinian people in their struggle for liberation.” Therefore, as local spokesman Rann Bar-On has repeatedly made clear, PSM cannot condemn fundamentalist groups that target Israeli civilians in suicide bombings and rocket attacks, and herein lies the dilemma. To proclaim that solidarity with a certain group prohibits one from passing judgment upon that group is moral relativism, antithetical to the international human rights movement, and thus detrimental to the cause of Palestinian solidarity in the first place.

In the same way, Israel supporters who stand in solidarity with the Israeli government and/or people must reaffirm a commitment to denouncing violence against innocent Palestinian civilians. They must come to grips with reality; that disagreeing with the Israeli government does not amount to anti-Semitism in the same way that disagreeing with the U.S. government does not entail anti-Americanism. To the contrary, debate and disagreement form an environment where innovative strategies can emerge. In addition, Jews should recognize that their religion gives them special responsibilities, among them “tikkun olam”—the healing of the world—and the promise of Israel as “a light unto the nations.” Defending Israel should remain a priority, but putting it above all other moral considerations can only exacerbate the cycle of violence and further erode Israel’s international standing.

This year’s PSM Conference offers a unique chance for those who truly seek a peaceful and timely end to the war in the Middle East. Both sides can and must come together to reject violence against innocent civilians and affirm the most basic human right to life. Once we form a consensus on this human issue, we can only then begin to discuss political ones, such as a one—or two—state solution, the right of return for Palestinians and divestment as a strategy for achieving peace. Such an agreement could serve as the basis for a truly progressive movement, that is, a movement that actually believes in progress, and rejects the sort of propaganda that preserves the polarized status quo. Duke, the home of this year’s PSM conference, is the ideal place to start.