Dodd Center panel examines strategies for peace in Israel, Gaza 

On Thursday, Nov. 30, from 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m., Dodd Human Rights Impact Programs held a panel in the Dodd Center for Human Rights regarding the impacts of the Israel-Hamas conflict and strategies for enduring peace in the region. 

Panelists included UConn Professors Gary M. English, distinguished professor of drama and author of the 2019 anthology “Stories Under Occupation and other Palestinian Plays,” Avinoam J. Patt, director of the Center for Judaic Studies and Contemporary Jewish Life, and Jeremy Pressman, professor of political science and director of Middle East Studies.  

Amahl Bishara, associate professor of anthropology and studies in race, colonialism and diaspora at Tufts University, brought a distinctly Palestinian perspective to the table, while Yezhekel Landau, an interfaith educator and consultant with over 40 years of experience, rounded out the panel. 

The event was moderated by James Waller, the Director of Dodd Human Rights Impact Programs. 

“We come today in the spirit of dialogue rather than debate,” Waller opened, “A shared connection to human rights should be embodied in how we interact with each other, respond to each other and particularly how we disagree with each other.” 

Three question prompts framed the initial hour-long conversation and the last thirty minutes were reserved for an audience Q&A. Questions prompted the panelists for their reactions to the ongoing war and their visions for peace and understanding in a world of “two different truths.” 

“I do think that the frame of an Israel-Hamas war doesn’t capture the scope and in some senses the gravity of what’s going on … Palestinians have been impacted beyond Hamas,” Bishara responded. “The mass dispossession of Palestinians of their homes in Gaza has resulted in 1.7 million Palestinians being displaced, along with Bedouin communities in the West Bank.” 

The Nakba (catastrophe in Arabic) describes the displacement of over 700,000 Arabs from the region of Palestine following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War — a catastrophe Bishara posits is “ongoing in a new chapter of dispossession.” 

Pressman criticized both sides of the dispute and placed his arguments in the context of international law and strategies of international relations. 

“Hamas’ attack was brutal — the attack, the rockets, the kidnapping, the sexual assault includes war crimes. Israel rightly removed Hamas fighters from pre-1967 borders,” he noted. “But even military officers in allied companies are privately in shock over the level of Israeli destruction in Gaza.” 

“If we care about international law, the U.N. Security Council should refer both to the International Court of Justice.” 

The destruction of one’s homes and the death of one’s loved ones is “the best prediction of a future political militant,” Pressman lamented, remarking that neither Hamas’ policies nor Israel’s national security strategy have done anything to bring about a two-state solution to ensure both parties’ self-determination. 

“What disturbs me just as much [as the violence] is the absences of any peace offensive directed at the hearts and minds of Palestinians by the Israeli government,” Landau said, advocating for the presence of “new leaders who can replace the reigning paradigms with coexistence.” 

A shared vision for peace and collaboration in the region was placed at the forefront of the discussion, with various panelists offering their outlooks on coexistence between “two dueling perspectives,” as Patt put it. 

“We are dealing with profound intergenerational trauma on both sides,” English noted. “We know from history that the longer a conflict goes on, the more brutal they become, as each side perceives an existential threat is upon them.” 

“Cognitive dissonance and ambiguity are scary because many of us prefer to be absolutely right, to maintain a sense of control over our lives,” Landau said. “Victim scripts require an enemy, a villain.” 

We must understand “the diverse nature of Israeli society, not just composed of Ashkenazi white European Jews, but of every continent, the Middle East, North Africa, Yemen and beyond,” Patt noted, “and in the same way, to see Palestinian society as incredibly diverse and composed of many different competing viewpoints.” 

“I cannot but believe that Palestinians and Israelis want the same,” Pressman said, citing the words of the King of Jordan Abdullah II. “They are not monsters … they do not cherish misery and death.” 

As the discussion evolved, direct questions over the measures necessary to secure peace were posed to the panelists. 

“Extremism has gained the ascendancy,” Patt said, speaking of the difficulty of peace with the current structures in place. “We have Hamas, an extremist group from the 90s that was trying to derail the peace process, and we have the settlement movement that has entrenched itself even more in the West Bank if we’re comparing it to the 90s.” 

“We need to re-assert that the first step has to be recognizing Palestinian humanity — in other places too, not just in the rhetoric of Israeli Palestinians,” Bishara offered. “The Palestinian Right of Return and equality under Israeli sovereignty are guiding principles to build towards security for Israelis and Palestinians and justice for everyone involved.” 

Panelists grappled with questions over the future of the region, including whether the post-peace picture of the region would be one of a one-state or two-state solution. 

Pressman spoke in favor of a “need to develop a transcendent nationalism that did not displace [Jews and Arabs] but sat alongside them,” while English advocated for the benefits of a “confederated or bi-national state where the discourse shifts completely from a land-based discourse to a rights-based discourse.” 

“I don’t believe one binational state would work,” Landau said. However, he maintained that “there are rights to live in an ancestral homeland without crushing the rights and aspirations of those who also live in that homeland.” 

The Q&A portion of the talk gave an opportunity for speakers in the audience to solicit answers and clarifications from the panelists.  

One audience member questioned the panelists’ equivalencies between Israel and Hamas’ conduct during the war and a peace plan advocated by Landau, which would see Marwan Barghouti, a militant imprisoned for armed resistance against the State of Israel, take on a “Mandela” role as leader of a Palestinian state. Another asked how one recognizes a system of apartheid developing in a nation, a crime many international observers and human rights organizations have leveled at Israel. 

To end the talk, Pressman praised those who had taken the time to attend and offered three fundamental points for the audience to take away. 

“One. Continue to educate ourselves. If you’re reading Al Jazeera, you should be reading Times of Israel. Two. If we’re not familiar with crisisgroup.org, we should be. Three. This is the fifth event I’ve participated in at UConn in the last few weeks, and here we are — we’re still talking. This needs to continue.”