{"id":116467,"date":"2017-10-05T14:04:16","date_gmt":"2017-10-05T14:04:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/?post_type=document&p=116467"},"modified":"2017-10-10T17:00:21","modified_gmt":"2017-10-10T17:00:21","slug":"participants-share-opinions-of-peace-efforts-ways-to-end-50-year-long-occupation-as-international-media-seminar-on-middle-east-peace-opens-press-release-pal2215-pi2213","status":"publish","type":"document","link":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/document\/participants-share-opinions-of-peace-efforts-ways-to-end-50-year-long-occupation-as-international-media-seminar-on-middle-east-peace-opens-press-release-pal2215-pi2213\/","title":{"rendered":"Participants Share Opinions of Peace Efforts, Ways to End 50-Year-Long Occupation, as International Media Seminar on Middle East Peace Opens – Press Release (PAL\/2215-PI\/2213)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
PAL\/2215-PI\/2213
\n5 OCTOBER 2017<\/h6>\n<\/div>\n
\n

VIENNA, 5 October \u2014 The 2017 International Media Seminar on Peace in the Middle East opened in Vienna today, with journalists, diplomats, academics and civil society representatives sharing views on the status of peace efforts, ways to end the occupation \u2014 now in its fiftieth year \u2014 and media narratives about the Israel-Palestine conflict.<\/p>\n

Organized by the Department of Public Information and the Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue under the theme \u201cMedia Narratives and Public Perceptions,\u201d the Seminar opened with two panel discussions on \u201cThe quest for peace in the Middle East and impact of 50\u00a0years of occupation on future prospects\u201d, and \u201cEmpathy as an alternative way for seeking peace\u201d.<\/p>\n

Alison Smale, Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications, noted in opening remarks that the Seminar was an annual reminder that the question of Palestine remained unresolved. \u00a0\u201cIt reminds us that media can be as much a part of the problem, as it can be part of the solution.\u201d \u00a0Given the special significance of 2017 as the fiftieth year of occupation, the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People would focus its activities on efforts to end the status quo, which the Department of Public Information had been asked to support, she said.<\/p>\n

Â鶹APP Secretary-General Ant\u00f3nio Guterres emphasized that the two-State solution was the only way forward and must be urgently pursued.\u00a0 \u201cWe at the Â鶹APP will do everything we can to work in that direction,\u201d he declared in a message read out by Ms. Smale. \u00a0\u201cWe must not let today\u2019s stagnation in the peace process lead to tomorrow\u2019s escalation.\u201d<\/p>\n

John Brandolino, Director of the Division for Treaty Affairs in the Â鶹APP Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), welcomed participants on behalf of Yury Fedotov, Director-General of the Â鶹APP Office at Vienna.\u00a0 \u201cAs journalists and communications professionals, you have a deep knowledge of the importance of fair, balanced and pluralistic news, as well as the role played by journalism around the world to inform and to empower,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Gertraud Borea d\u2019Olmo, Secretary General of the Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue, said the organization\u2019s namesake \u2014 a former Chancellor of Austria \u2014 had worked to place Vienna at the centre of international politics and had been pivotal in creating the Vienna International Centre, venue of the Seminar. \u00a0\u201cI\u2019m glad there is such a great interest in this topic,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

Throughout the day, participants reviewed the impact of 50\u00a0years of occupation, exploring whether past methods employed to bring parties to the negotiation table were viable amid today\u2019s shifting politics, perceptions and access to authentic narratives providing insight into the daily realities of Palestinians and Israelis. \u00a0Some panellists advocated empathy as a low-cost powerful option for diplomacy, while others viewed it as ineffective in creating an equal footing between the parties.<\/p>\n

In the morning, panellist Avraham Burg, former Speaker of the Knesset, said the Israeli dimension of the conflict was marked by the reluctance of the \u201cgreedy\u201d to relinquish privileges over resources, power, politics and sovereignty.\u00a0 \u201cFor 50\u00a0years, we gave the impression that the occupation was temporary and just a question of time,\u201d he said.\u00a0 While Israel\u2019s political left had created false impressions, right-wing nationalists had created facts on the ground that were \u201chere to stay\u201d.\u00a0 Meanwhile, shifting global and regional dynamics had probably rendered the two-State formula obsolete, he observed.<\/p>\n

Zaha Hassan, former Coordinator and Senior Legal Adviser to the Palestinian Negotiation Team, said no State appeared willing to stand in Israel\u2019s way.\u00a0 With the United States hesitant to advocate any preference for a solution, the question going forward must be answered by the Â鶹APP, the States parties to the Geneva Conventions, civil society, the business community as well as Palestinians and Israelis who rejected a repressive regime.<\/p>\n

Responding to those views, Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the Â鶹APP, disagreed with such negative portrayals of the current situation.\u00a0 The panellists\u2019 remarks might reflect the thinking in Israel, Washington, D.C., or Vienna, but \u201cthey are not the thinking of Palestinian people\u201d, he said, emphasizing that, having been in discussion with the President of the United States, he could say that the two-State solution was not obsolete.<\/p>\n

During the afternoon discussion, panellist Simon Baron-Cohen, Professor of Developmental Psychopathology at the University of Cambridge, said Israelis and Palestinians had lost their empathy \u2014 the ability to place oneself in another\u2019s shoes.\u00a0 \u201cEmpathy is a necessary step for truth and reconciliation,\u201d he said, adding that other difficult steps could then follow, notably for mutual security.<\/p>\n

Ahmad Abu Akel, Research Fellow, Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, stressed the importance of inter-group relations in diffusing tensions, and of addressing power differences within a relationship to create equal footing among parties.\u00a0 While empathic anger could be a motivator of positive action, it was important to understand its effects at the local level.<\/p>\n

Gudrun Harrer, Senior Editor at\u00a0Der Standard<\/em>, advocated a human rights approach to convincing Israel that Palestinians needed their own State, while describing the uncertain regional political context.\u00a0 The Kurdish situation had opened anew, the \u201ccold war\u201d between Saudi Arabia and Iran was generating a sectarian crisis, and there was now a rift involving Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, among others.<\/p>\n

The International Media Seminar will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Friday, 6\u00a0October.<\/p>\n

Panel I<\/u><\/p>\n

The day began with a panel discussion titled \u201cQuest for peace in the Middle East and the impact of 50\u00a0years of occupation on future prospects\u201d. \u00a0Moderated by Alison Smale, Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications, it featured presentations by:\u00a0 Avraham Burg, former Speaker, Knesset, Israel; Zaha Hassan, former Coordinator and Senior Legal Adviser, Palestinian Negotiation Team; and Gudrun Harrer, Senior Editor,\u00a0Der Standard<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Mr. BURG, asked why the peace process was not advancing, said he could speak about the Israeli dimension, which was marked by a lack of motivation and the \u201cgreedy\u201d feeling of Jews reluctant to relinquish their privileges over resources, power, politics and sovereignty.\u00a0 \u201cFor 50\u00a0years, we gave the impression that the occupation was temporary and just a question of time,\u201d he said.\u00a0 Now, while the left had created false impressions, right wing nationalists had created facts on the ground that were there to stay. \u00a0Until the first Intifada, resolving the problem had not been a \u201cburning issue\u201d in Israeli society, he recalled.<\/p>\n

Afterwards, the two-State formula had emerged, mainstreaming a marginal idea.\u00a0 At the time, peace movements were succeeding in South Africa and Ireland, and the Berlin Wall had come down. \u00a0\u201cOslo was the spirit of the time,\u201d he said, referring to the peace accords signed in the 1990s.\u00a0 \u201cWe are not there anymore,\u201d he said, questioning whether the two-State solution was still on the shelf.\u00a0 The more people discussed its potential, the less benefit it would have for reconciliation.\u00a0 \u201cWe have to pay attention to the transition of the times, the international situation and the local Middle Eastern environment,\u201d which had likely made the two-State formula obsolete, he said, pointing out that there had been a rollback of Middle Eastern civil rights processes in Washington, D.C., and Brussels.<\/p>\n

Ms. HASSAN agreed that the situation was at a fork in the road. \u00a0It appeared no State was willing to stand in Israel\u2019s way, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu making his intentions clear in declaring \u201cwe are here to stay forever\u201d. \u00a0For the first time in 25\u00a0years, Israel would break ground on a new Government-backed settlement, rather than authorizing illegal outposts, while Mr. Netanyahu endorsed a plan by the National Union Party calling for the West Bank\u2019s annexation and the expulsion of Palestinians who might demand their voting rights.\u00a0 Meanwhile, President Donald Trump of the United States had stated his preference for a solution to which both parties agreed, while a Department of State spokesperson said the country would not reaffirm support for the two-State solution since any position on an outcome would show bias.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe United States has never been anything but biased in favour of Israel,\u201d she continued. \u00a0A policy shift, championed by Republicans, was in play, as evidenced by a resolution now in Congress that rejected the two-State solution in favour of one prioritizing Israel\u2019s sovereignty and borders.\u00a0 One quarter of a century of negotiations to end half a century of military occupation had been reduced to an outcome described by Mr. Netanyahu as a \u201cState minus\u201d, she said.\u00a0 Israel would maintain its occupation over 6\u00a0million Palestinians, denying reparations to refugees, while controlling settlements, land and resources.\u00a0 Going forward, the question must be answered by the Â鶹APP \u2014 as it had recommended the establishment of two States \u2014 as well as by States parties to the Geneva Conventions, civil society, the business community, Palestinians who wanted freedom and self-determination, and Israelis who rejected a regime that subjugated other people.<\/p>\n

Ms. HARRER said it was difficult in 2017 not to feel disheartened about prospects for ending the occupation.\u00a0 A window of opportunity had opened in the late 1990s, after the fall of communism and the end of the cold war, which many thought would facilitate the resolution of conflicts around the world.\u00a0 Thinking beyond the two-State solution, she drew attention to a group at the Bruno Keisky Forum which was preparing the ground for a one-State solution. \u00a0\u201cI would very much like to believe in it,\u201d she said, but it was difficult to envision its success, given the huge grievances on both sides.\u00a0 She sympathized with the human rights approach in convincing Israel that Palestinians needed their own State.\u00a0 Former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin had advocated such for pragmatic reasons, fearing for the Jewish State.\u00a0 Today, there was reason to fear for the democratic Jewish State.<\/p>\n

It was important to be honest about the surroundings, she said as the \u201cmessy\u201d state of affairs in the region would not improve soon.\u00a0 People had taken for granted that the Palestinian State, once in existence, would succeed, with functioning institutions, elections etc.\u00a0 Yet, the experience with freedom and democracy in the Middle East had been \u201csobering\u201d, she said. \u00a0The Palestinian domestic split in 2006 was far from being healed.\u00a0 It was not difficult to organize elections, but rather, to provide legitimacy. \u00a0More broadly, the Kurdish situation had opened anew, while a \u201ccold war\u201d between Saudi Arabia and Iran was playing into every conflict, bringing about sectarian crisis.\u00a0 A rift had also opened involving Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, all amid the acute danger of the United States President possibly scrapping the nuclear deal with Iran. \u00a0\u201cThe consequences are totally unknown,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

Mr. BURG, asked whether any aspect of the conflict had been overlooked, said nothing had been overlooked.\u00a0 As much as Israelis had dreamed of an international flotilla carrying the German Chancellor and United States President who offered a solution, \u201cit will never happen\u201d, in large part because of the one-sided position of the United States and the guilt-driven position of Germany. \u00a0The two-State solution contained the concept of a nation-State and he asked whether that concept was not being eroded.\u00a0 Exercising a nineteenth century philosophy in the twenty-first century was \u201coff tune\u201d.\u00a0 The situation required redefinition of national communities, as was happening with the Catalans and Scots, and possibly the Kurds.<\/p>\n

The Palestinians, too, were a serious national community, he said, and the question was around the type of relationship they would have with the Israeli national community.\u00a0 \u201cI refuse to be paralysed by the two-State structure only.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0 Not only the architecture, but the \u201cvalue system\u201d it offered, must be considered.\u00a0 Democracy was more than a technical experience involving a ballot box. It was a principle in which an individual had the right to decide who had influence over his or her life, and a situation where so many people lacked the right to decide over their lives was an undemocratic reality.\u00a0 He explained the Oslo Agreement as a cynical trade-off: \u00a0\u201cWe will pay you in the currency of 1967 to forget the issues of 1948\u201d.\u00a0 Today, the 1967\u00a0issues had been left unaddressed. \u00a0Why not discuss the whole package, he asked?<\/p>\n

Ms. HASSAN said that while the discourse was moving beyond a two-State reality, it was unclear where things were going.\u00a0 The reality was that Israel still exerted control in much of the territory.\u00a0 Any alternative would bring about violence and chaos, which must be considered, in advocating a different paradigm.\u00a0 In Washington D.C., there were discussions of a confederation, which involved maintaining the status quo, with Jordan controlling some part of West Bank and Egypt taking some control over security in Gaza.\u00a0 She questioned the need for ethnically-defined States.<\/p>\n

The floor was then opened for interactive discussion.<\/p>\n

RIYAD MANSOUR, Permanent Observer for the State of Palestine to the Â鶹APP, objected to panellists\u2019 negative portrayal of the current state of affairs.\u00a0 Their remarks might reflect thinking in Israel, Washington D.C. or Vienna, but \u201cthey are not the thinking of Palestinian people.\u201d \u00a0Israel had been created for the Jews only 100\u00a0years ago and three-quarters of the world\u2019s countries had come into existence during the last 60\u00a0years.\u00a0 He asked why now the nation-State concept would be something of the past.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhy should we be excluded from that process,\u201d he asked, describing Israel\u2019s support for a Kurdish State \u201cbizarre and ridiculous\u201d in that context.\u00a0 He said that, having been in discussions with the President of the United States, he could say that the two-State solution was not obsolete. \u00a0He cautioned against focusing exclusively on perceived negative aspects, stressing that success was being achieved daily. \u00a0Palestine was being treated \u2014 and was acting as \u2014 a responsible State, including in handling global issues, not simply those related to Palestine.\u00a0 It had joined various organizations, the latest being the International Police Organization (INTERPOL).<\/p>\n

AHMED SHIHAB-ELDIN, correspondent at AJ+, asked panellists about their thoughts on the power of boycotts and the lack of attention it received in forums such as today\u2019s.\u00a0 More broadly, he asked about the viability of sanctions against Israel, given the regression from the Oslo commitments.<\/p>\n

Ms. HARRER questioned whether it was productive to foster boycotts or sanctions.<\/p>\n

Ms. HASSAN, referring to polls showing 60\u00a0per\u00a0cent of United States respondents supporting sanctions, said equal percentages of Republicans would support a one-State or a two-State solution. \u00a0If Republicans had not solidified their views on what constituted an unjust solution, young people had the opportunity to influence them. \u00a0The Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement was a tactic used by people interested in a value-based approach to resolving the conflict.\u00a0 There was a bill before the United States Congress seeking to criminalize those activities with prison terms and fines. \u00a0\u201cPeople are afraid of this tactic,\u201d she said, but it was important to include it in broader discussions about influencing opinion.<\/p>\n

Mr. BURG said he found any boycott tool intellectually and morally difficult to use.\u00a0 \u201cAs long as I can talk to you, I prefer it,\u201d he said. \u00a0On the other hand, it was an act of civil disobedience.\u00a0 By fighting \u201cBDS\u201d, Israel had an easy enemy, he said, adding that there were no more Iranians, Iraqis or Syrians to fight.\u00a0 Palestinians were not an effective enemy, and Israel\u2019s need for one stemmed from \u201cpsycho-politics\u201d and the belief that \u201cthe external enemy defines me\u201d.\u00a0 When philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre had stated in the 1940s that \u201cthe anti-Semite defines who is a Jew\u201d, he had not been far off.\u00a0 Imagine what happened when peace succeeded, he said, exclaiming:\u00a0 \u201cI am lost. \u00a0Give me war, a pogrom, I know what to do.\u201d \u00a0He said he did not believe boycotts would be effective, given the political climate in the United States and Germany. \u00a0\u201cIf you want it, you need to do it differently.\u201d<\/p>\n

A participant from Egypt\u2019s Embassy in Vienna spoke in his personal capacity, saying many of the comments focused on the role of the United States.\u00a0 Yet, the problem was that the status quo was comfortable. \u00a0\u201cBDS\u201d must touch the nerves of Israeli society, he said.\u00a0 Noting the strong attachment between land and people in Egypt, he said the problem was different in Israel:\u00a0 there were those living inside the green line, those living in settlements who did not know their fate, and those in the diaspora who were not well attached to the land.\u00a0 He asked why the notion of national identity was difficult to understand, and whether the left in Israel could make a comeback.<\/p>\n

SIMON BARON-COHEN, a professor at the University of Cambridge, asked how one-person-one-vote would take place in Palestine, while Daoud Kuttab, columnist and journalist, advocated a new paradigm, however unclear its path forward.\u00a0 As long as the Israeli army protected the civil administration responsible for building settlements, the two-State solution would not happen.<\/p>\n

AMIRA HANANIA, a Ramallah-based journalist, asked why voices like Mr. Burg\u2019s were not more widely heard. \u00a0\u201cWe talk about solutions as if they were a choice,\u201d she said, when it was really Israel that had the control. \u00a0\u201cBDS\u201d was a tool to force Israel to think about peace. \u00a0\u201cWe need someone to tell us why international law is not effective enough to stop this occupation,\u201d she said, or why Palestinians needed a super power, like the United States, to be a biased judge in the process.\u00a0 Tony Klug, special adviser at Oxford Research Group, said there was a strong sense of nationhood on both sides, much more so than 50\u00a0years ago.\u00a0 He asked how those supporting the one-State solution reconcile that with the national imperative of both sides.\u00a0 Confederation could not be accomplished until both sides had gained statehood. \u00a0The question was not over whether there should be two States, but rather, about the relationship between them.\u00a0 He said that he and a Palestinian-American thinker had put forward a proposal requiring Israel to choose between recognizing a Palestinian State, as an interim measure, or equal rights for everyone living under Israeli jurisdiction.\u00a0 \u201cBDS\u201d could be used to advance that goal, he said.<\/p>\n

Mr. BURG replied that the Jewish national concept was no less strong than new Jordanian or Iraqi ones. \u00a0What happened in Israel over the last 70\u00a0years had impacted the entire Jewish people.\u00a0 There were two expressions \u2014 diasporic and local \u2014 but Jewish nationality was in both. \u00a0The national definition of Israel was of a Jewish Israel, although 20\u00a0per\u00a0cent of the population was not Jewish.\u00a0 The definition of the national belonging \u2014 unprecedented for the Jewish people \u2014 was a fusion of five elements:\u00a0 territory, religion, power, language and sovereignty. \u00a0There were times during which they had lived in a country, but had no sovereignty. \u00a0Or they sometimes had sovereignty, but did not speak the language, and so on.\u00a0 The fusion was a powerful one:\u00a0 in seeking to separate one element from the whole, \u201cyou do not belong\u201d, he said. \u00a0\u201cYou are [considered] a traitor.\u201d\u00a0 The question became, \u201cWho are you?\u201d<\/p>\n

He said that his views were not widely espoused because they were considered \u201cboring\u201d, adding that the left in Israel was defined solely by the conflict.\u00a0 \u201cIt is a conflict-only position.\u201d\u00a0 To create change, an idea must be developed as a seed for more mature times.\u00a0 His society listened better to trauma first.\u00a0 In 1973, the Yom Kippur war had led to peace with Egypt. \u00a0The first Intifada had led to the Oslo Accords.\u00a0 The political work involved preparing the foundations, ideas and solutions for the time when people were ready to listen.\u00a0 He asked why Arab States had played so cynically with the idea of a Palestinian State since 1948.\u00a0 Going forward, he advocated the development of an alternative model, a mass movement behind a one-State solution \u2014 which, in turn, would prompt a preference for the two-State solution by default \u2014 and a new trauma to get to the next step.<\/p>\n

Ms. HASSAN, recalling the focus on creating empathy, said that because Palestinians had become fragmented from both Israelis and each other, it would be difficult for that to happen.<\/p>\n

Ms. HARRER said there had been much trauma in the region.\u00a0 She was convinced of the need for a human rights approach to create change, one that would lead to a situation compelling Israel to help create a Palestinian State.<\/p>\n

Panel II<\/u><\/p>\n

The day\u2019s second panel discussion titled \u201cEmpathy as an alternative way for seeking peace\u201d was moderated by Gertraud Borea d\u2019Olmo, Secretary General, Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue.\u00a0 It featured presentations by Ahmad Abu Akel, Research Fellow, Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne; Stephen Apkon, Executive Director, Disturbing the Peace; Simon Baron-Cohen, Professor of Developmental Psychopathology, University of Cambridge; Gaby Goldman, Director of Communications, Hand in Hand, Center for Jewish-Arab Education in Israel; and Haifa Staiti, Executive Director, Empathy for Peace.<\/p>\n

Ms. BOREA D\u2019OLMO recalled the Bruno Kreisky Forum\u2019s work with young people from Palestine, Israel, Egypt, Jordan and Austria, for whom empathy was a driving principle and \u201csomething that brought us to obstacles very quickly when it came to politics.\u201d\u00a0 She asked panellists to address the possibilities and limits of empathy as an instrument which she hoped would be included in the politics around the conflict.\u00a0 \u201cI believe it cannot replace political solutions,\u201d she clarified, stressing that the Forum advocated basic rights as the foundation for any solution.<\/p>\n

Mr. BARON-COHEN said economic, political, military and other solutions had failed to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict, now 100\u00a0years old.\u00a0 He advocated a psychological approach, both by leaders and at the grass-roots level.\u00a0 Empathy \u2014 the ability to place oneself into another\u2019s shoes, setting aside one\u2019s own perspectives and feelings, in place of the others \u2014 was a new approach based on the theory that, during conflict, both parties could lose their empathy for the community by which they felt attacked.\u00a0 At best, they could feel self-interest, and at worst, cruelty.\u00a0 Fear, anger and revenge made a person blind to the fact that the other was like oneself. \u00a0Israelis and Palestinians had lost their empathy and were now locked in a cycle of violence.<\/p>\n

Describing the Parents Circle Families Forum project, involving Palestinian and Israeli women whose sons had been killed by the other side, he said the participants could have become ethnically prejudiced and called for retaliation. \u00a0Instead, they formed a friendship across the political divide. \u00a0The project sought to connect people and encouraged those bereaved by conflict to meet.\u00a0 \u201cTo resolve any conflict, ultimately, there has to be an empathy-based dialogue,\u201d he said. \u00a0It was a natural human resource \u2014 it did not involve millions of dollars to employ and had great potential.\u00a0 It allowed each side to listen to the other, hear about the causes of conflict, and both acknowledge and address them.\u00a0 When those feelings were not acknowledged, they festered as low-level anger or exploded as hate.\u00a0 Apologies could be offered to those who had been heard.<\/p>\n

He asked participants to imagine an Israeli leader showing empathy, seeing Palestinians as victims, rather than aggressors, and a Palestinian leader seeing Israelis in the same way. \u00a0Each community mirrored the other from a belief that its aggression was justified self-protection.\u00a0 For diplomatic talks to be meaningful, the same level of empathy would be required from both sides. \u00a0Recalling the success achieved by Nelson Mandela and F. W. de Klerk in South Africa, he said eventually Israelis would need to acknowledge the displacement of 700,000\u00a0Palestinians in the creation of their country, while Palestinians would likewise need to acknowledge their role in the conflict.\u00a0 \u201cEmpathy is a key necessary step for truth and reconciliation, which would ultimately be needed for peace,\u201d he said, so that other difficult steps could follow, notably for mutual security.<\/p>\n

Mr. APKON said he did not believe a political solution could be reached without empathy.\u00a0 Playing a clip from a film titled\u00a0Disturbing the Peace<\/em>, during which former Israeli and Palestinian combatants had discovered they had things in common with each other, said empathy was about feeling someone else\u2019s humanity, not simply their victimhood.\u00a0 It was also a two-way street and he pressed participants to imagine holding a place of empathy for both the occupied and the occupier. \u00a0Empathy was the foundation for trust, a precursor to peace. \u00a0\u201cThe media cooperates in showing us images that create the other.\u00a0 How can you have empathy when all you see is violence\u201d he asked?\u00a0 The media industry was based on advertising. \u00a0\u201cWe need to understand that we need to demand stories that humanize the other,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Ms. STAITI said she was born in Jenin, near Nazareth and Haifa.\u00a0 Her father, born east of Haifa, had fled his village when he was six\u00a0weeks old, towards safer ground.\u00a0 Her grandfather had been killed by Israeli soldiers. \u00a0Her father, who became a political activist, had been violently arrested many times. \u00a0Upon his final release in 1994, he returned home legally blind, and with physical and other illnesses stemming from of his poor living conditions. \u00a0\u201cOur family has always felt we lost our grandfather and our dad because of the Israeli occupation,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

While fear and anger had taken over for a while, they had not diminished her desire for peace, she said, thanks to the actions of a Jewish Israeli woman from Haifa, whose projects sought to build empathy between Israelis and Palestinians. \u00a0In 1988, the woman had come to the Jenin camp with a desire to make a difference for traumatized children.\u00a0 The project became essential for local families, keeping children off the streets and offering drama, art and other activities as channels to express their trauma.\u00a0 Those early experiences today allowed her to feel empathy.\u00a0 In 2000, she travelled from Palestine to study in Norway, where she shared housing with Israeli students \u2014 another experience that had solidified her ability to empathize, regardless of what the media, Government or others had told her.\u00a0 With that, she founded Empathy for Peace, identifying and sharing empathy science with other organizations working for peace.<\/p>\n

Mr. AABU-AKEL described how to ensure that empathy was used as an efficient resource.\u00a0 First, inter-group relations were important.\u00a0 His experience as a Palestinian student in a Jewish high school in 1987, just before the first Intifada, had offered opportunities for interaction.\u00a0 Over time, he could understand both perspectives and see how polarization was destroying communities.\u00a0 Research had shown that intergroup interactions diffused tensions and fostered understanding. \u00a0At a minimum, they led to in-group censoring of hostility.\u00a0 While authority and institutional disapproval could reverse the benefits of empathic activities, their effects could be mitigated through recurrent exposure to literature, art, film, and other people, notably in integrated schools, and by abolishing practices that fostered segregation.<\/p>\n

Secondly, he said, it was important to focus on power relations, which were often modulated by a \u201ccost function\u201d \u2014 the perception that the Palestinian Authority was a subcontractor for Israel, for example.\u00a0 In maintaining that power disparity, the party in power enjoyed the advantage. \u00a0For empathy to be effective, the power differential must be addressed.\u00a0 Truth and reconciliation offered a starting point, as those efforts entailed narratives that could be highly culturally specific. \u00a0For example, mentioning the Holocaust and Al-Nakba in same sentence was enough to close Israelis off, whereas bonding over the loss of a loved one offered a \u201cpoint of entry\u201d. \u00a0Next, he focused on the concept of empathic anger:\u00a0 Empathizers often experienced the distress of others.\u00a0 They could also express that anger at the situation or the perpetrator.\u00a0 Empathic anger was associated with more action than empathic sadness.\u00a0 As empathy could invoke a range of emotion, it was important to understand how it had an effect on the local level.\u00a0 He was developing an empathy index, which would analyse demographic, socioeconomic and other factors that signalled empathic behaviour.<\/p>\n

Ms. GOLDMAN focused on how to ensure that children growing up in war did not learn to hate people who were different from them.\u00a0 She said that she had formerly been a journalist, covering many aspects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and was guilty of much of the behaviour described by panellists.\u00a0 Today, she worked for Hand in Hand, which promoted a shared society through a network of bilingual schools, offering 1,800\u00a0Jewish and Arab children \u2014 aged three to 18\u00a0years \u2014 and 8,000\u00a0adults, opportunities to learn about each other\u2019s religions, cultures and other aspects of life.<\/p>\n

She said there were branches in Jerusalem, Haifa, the Triangle Area and Jaffa, among other locations, where teachers taught Hebrew and Arabic, and where students celebrated each other\u2019s holidays, learning how to argue by agreeing to disagree.\u00a0 An empathetic glimpse into another\u2019s pain was the first step to dismantling hatred.\u00a0 Story telling was an effective means for doing so.\u00a0 \u201cIt\u2019s very hard to create a relationship with an idea, but very easy to create with a person whose story you\u2019ve just heard,\u201d she said.\u00a0 The media was hungry for that angle of the conflict.\u00a0 Her organization was laying the groundwork for a new paradigm.\u00a0 There would always be a reality where Jews and Palestinians lived together. \u201cWe are already doing that,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

The floor was then opened for interactive discussion.<\/p>\n

SALAH ABDEL SHAFI, Palestinian Ambassador to Austria, said he had difficulty with the concept of empathy as presented by the panellists. \u00a0It could work as a post-conflict tool, but not in resolving conflict.\u00a0 He said he did not agree that Mr. de Klerk had demonstrated empathy, noting that apartheid had collapsed because he had realized he could not sustain it under an international boycott.\u00a0 After the end of apartheid, empathy had become possible, he said, adding that in the Israeli-Palestinian context, he did not believe the two-State solution was obsolete. \u00a0It had failed thus far because Israel was able to get away with rejecting it, due to a lack of political will to hold it accountable. \u00a0He said that he also did not agree that Germany would always support Israel out of guilt.\u00a0 Guilt was being used as a pretext for taking real action.\u00a0 He asked how one could convince somebody from Gaza to show empathy for Israelis.\u00a0 \u201cWith all due respect to suffering on the personal level [\u2026] at the end of the day, we have to talk realpolitik,\u201d he said, expressing doubt that empathy would lead to a political solution.\u00a0 Such projects were politically misleading, he said, adding that empathy would only work when Israelis and Palestinians were on an equal footing.<\/p>\n

Ms. Tala Hawala, the Ramallah-based journalist, asked how to convince people in the West Bank and Gaza that empathy would lead to a State of Palestine.\u00a0 Normalizing ties with the oppressor was rejected in those areas.\u00a0 Palestinians involved with the Seeds of Peace initiative had been rejected.\u00a0 Mr. Klug, adviser to the Oxford Research Group, asked whether there was confusion between sympathy and empathy, which were different notions that had different functions.\u00a0 He viewed empathy as a tool of analysis.<\/p>\n

Mr. ABU-AKEL said the question hinged on how to create that equal footing.\u00a0 None of the channels being exercised today had achieved it.\u00a0 It was important to recognize that empathy \u2014 and the notions it invoked \u2014 were tools to help create an equal footing.<\/p>\n

Ms. STAITI said the need for an appropriate reaction was an important aspect in understanding empathy.\u00a0 When an Israeli was able to understand how she, a Palestinian, must feel to live in the West Bank, going through check points to see her father in prison, it created change. \u00a0\u201cIt\u2019s important to see, in this room, everyone got on guard because we want you to hear you need to have empathy for Israelis\u201d.<\/p>\n

Mr. APKON focused on the importance of breaking the cycle of victimhood, feeding an idea that my experience as a victim is greater than yours.\u00a0 The idea was to step out of entrenched roles, creating connection and humanity that led to direct action, and a belief that it made no sense to occupy.<\/p>\n

Mr. BARON-COHEN said empathy had a role to play throughout the process, not just the post-conflict phase, whether between two leaders or children on the playground.\u00a0 By postponing it, \u201cyou\u2019re just missing an opportunity,\u201d he said.\u00a0 As to whether Messrs. de Klerk and Mandela had an empathetic relationship, he agreed that the international community had supported sanctions against South Africa, \u201cbut de Klerk was ready to listen\u201d.<\/p>\n

Ms. GOLDMAN assured that her work was not to \u201csugar coat\u201d the conflict. \u00a0However, there was a problem in that schools were segregated, Jews and Arabs did not learn the 1948\u00a0narrative, and Jews in Hebrew schools learned about Arabs in a specific context.\u00a0 Many arguments were not solved. \u00a0\u201cWe\u2019re angry at each other,\u201d she said, asking when last Israeli and Palestinian leaders had spoken to each other. \u00a0She said Jews spoke with Palestinians every day in her work, adding: \u00a0\u201cI\u2019m not ready to give that up.\u201d<\/p>\n

NOAM SHEIZAF, co-founder of +972\u00a0Magazine, said in relation to funding decisions by the European Union that resources were often moved from human rights or legal advocacy to the \u201cencounter\u201d sector. \u00a0The more you pacify participants in advance of a project, the more you politicize the process on the ground.\u00a0 The national workings of societies made him uncomfortable, he said, as peace projects were often supported by elite, left-wing circles open to peace messages. \u00a0The inter-workings of politics could be negative. \u00a0For example, he had considered sending his child to a bilingual school, but families who wanted to change segregated daily life responded with an answer that lay outside the main system. He asked if families did not have other options could create change through the heart of the public system.<\/p>\n

DAOUD KUTTAB, Palestinian journalist, describing efforts to introduce Sesame Street to the region, said it was difficult for Palestinians to believe in puppets, when \u201cyou open the door and there is a tank outside the house.\u00a0 Which is more powerful, the tank or the puppet?\u201d he asked.\u00a0 He cautioned against legitimizing the status quo by using such efforts as a way of assuaging guilt or replacing the hard work necessary to end the occupation.<\/p>\n

TAGHREED ELKHODARY, senior editor of Fanack, said she did not like the trailer shown earlier, particularly as someone from Gaza.\u00a0 At Harvard, she had interacted with Israelis, however, she struggled to equate that discourse with the ongoing reality in Gaza.<\/p>\n

BAYAN SHBIB, cultural attach\u00e9 from Palestine, said that having attended a series of empathy-focused workshops, \u201cyou come out harmed,\u201d experiencing more suffering and less empathy, incapable of defying the sources of occupation.\u00a0 On the other hand, BDS was a great tool for ending occupation.\u00a0 She asked how one could be empathetic without involving the literature, film, media and other spheres sharing narratives together and moving from a psychological state of empathy to an action-based state of empathy.\u00a0 Without doing so, \u201cthe voice is voiceless,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

Mr. MANSOUR, Permanent Observer for the State of Palestine, said he was eager to hear more about mediation, stressing:\u00a0 \u201cWe want to end our occupation.\u201d<\/p>\n

EDMUND GHAREEB, professor, American University, similarly asked about practical steps for fostering mediation.<\/p>\n

Mr. BARON-COHEN, to arguments that empathy did not lead to change, said he did not agree that empathy was only for elites, but rather, that parties must start somewhere.<\/p>\n

Mr. ABU-AKEL said that employing empathy, post conflict, was counter-productive as it did not take advantage of the urgency of a situation. \u00a0Recognizing another\u2019s pain could be an advantage in that it opened a door.<\/p>\n

Ms. STAITI said that if she could understand someone\u2019s thoughts or feelings, perhaps it would make her a better negotiator. \u00a0She advocated seeing empathy as a neutral concept, rather than attaching positive or negative ideas to it.<\/p>\n

Mr. APKON said that what preceded empathy was curiosity. \u00a0Empathy was about understanding the narratives that shaped a person\u2019s desire to act. The empathy he sought led to a place where occupation made no sense.\u00a0 He viewed it as an essential tool to creating a lasting and just peace.<\/p>\n

Ms. GOLDMAN assured that her organization worked from within to change the system.\u00a0 Israel\u2019s State Comptroller, following its examination of the education system, had found that the Ministry of Education had been negligent in addressing sharp stereotypes and had failed to prevent racism. \u00a0It concluded that an excellent way forward was through bilingual schools, noting that there were 800\u00a0families on the waiting list, many of whom had requested that additional bilingual classes be offered for kindergarteners.<\/p>\n

For information media. Not an official record.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

PAL\/2215-PI\/2213 5 OCTOBER 2017 VIENNA, 5 October \u2014 The 2017 International Media Seminar on Peace in the Middle East opened in Vienna today, with journalists, diplomats, academics and civil society representatives sharing views on the status of peace efforts, ways to end the occupation \u2014 now in its fiftieth year \u2014 and media narratives about […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":172,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"country":[],"document-category":[1329],"document-source":[1897],"committee-meeting":[],"document-subject":[1805,1797,2145,2741],"entity":[1729],"document-language":[6542],"class_list":["post-116467","document","type-document","status-publish","hentry","document-category-press-release","document-source-united-nations-department-of-public-information-dpi","document-subject-occupation","document-subject-peace-process","document-subject-public-information","document-subject-statehood-related","entity-united-nations-system","document-language-english"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/116467","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/document"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/172"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/116467\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=116467"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=116467"},{"taxonomy":"document-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-category?post=116467"},{"taxonomy":"document-source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-source?post=116467"},{"taxonomy":"committee-meeting","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/committee-meeting?post=116467"},{"taxonomy":"document-subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-subject?post=116467"},{"taxonomy":"entity","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/entity?post=116467"},{"taxonomy":"document-language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-language?post=116467"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}