JANIP

Conference on Israeli-Palestinian peace process - a summary

Written by conference chair, Dr. Moises Salinas

With the support of Meretz USA, the Jewish Academic Network for Israeli Palestinian Peace sponsored the First International Academic Conference on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process: Pathways to Peace. The Conference took place on March 28-29 at CentralConnecticut State University and was co-sponsored by the American Task Force on Palestine and the Geneva Initiative North America. It featured top-level keynote speakers Herbert Kelman, Naomi Chazan, Stephen P. Cohen, Sami Adwan, Daniel Levy, Gaith al Omari, and Saliba Sarsar, as well as over 36 other presenters.

The conference concluded with a summary of some of the recurring ideas, and out-of-the-box suggestions for follow up: (more…)

Add comment April 4th, 2008 Posted by Ron

JANIP Co-Sponsoring Academic Conference, March 28-29, 2008

We are proud to announce that The Jewish Academic Network for Israeli-Palestinian Peace (JANIP) is co-sponsoring the first international academic conference dealing with the Israel-Palestine peace process.  Entitled “Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Pathways to Peace”, the conference will take place March 28-29, 2008 at Central Connecticut State University in New Britain, CT.

For further details, including proposal submission forms and registration forms, please go to the Conference website.

Or contact:
Prof.  Moises F. Salinas - Conference Director
Central Connecticut State University
1615 Stanley St.
New Britain, CT 06050
E-Mail: salinasm@ccsu.edu
Phone:  860-832-3104
Fax: 860-832-3123

Add comment October 1st, 2007 Posted by Ron

ANNAPOLIS AND THE YELLOW BRICK ROAD

Once again, as the end of the term of a U.S. President nears, the ether of peace negotiations between Israel and its Arab neighbors re-emerges, as a cyclical tide of intangible Jelly fish. So was with the elder Bush and the Madrid conference, with Clinton and Camp David, and now the young Bush and Annapolis. The challenge of this most intractable, protracted conflict seems to simultaneously draw and repulse American statesmen who have nothing more to worry about but their legacy, because without a doubt, solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be seen by history as one of the greatest diplomatic achievements of our time. And yet, time and time again they fail. This is specially puzzling given the fact that, according to most polls, not only the vast majority of both Israeli and Palestinians want an end to the conflict, they actually agree on the general lines of a two state solution, very much in line with what was proposed by Clinton in 2000. This enigma can be better understood if we take a look at a couple of polls conducted jointly by the Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah. The first poll, in December 2006, showed that 68% of Israelis and 62% of Palestinians supported an end to the armed conflict. However, a second poll from July 2007 shows that in spite of their desire to end the conflict, 89% of Israelis and 76% of Palestinians still believed that the armed confrontation will continue, and only 31% of Palestinians believed it is possible to reach an agreement with the Olmert government, and 25% of Israelis believed it would be possible to compromise with a Palestinian national unity government. In other words, even though there is general agreement on the broad parameters to end the conflict, both sides are unwilling to yield because they do not trust the other side to be a sincere partner.
And therein lies the main obstacle to this problem, that neither of the Bushes nor Clinton ever focused on: The psychological obstacles to the conflict, such as hatred, mistrust, and prejudice, are not less critical than the political issues of borders, refugees and settlements. Yet, the social and psychological dimensions have been totally overlooked. The road to a negotiating table that does not include awareness of the core social, cultural and psychological issues, will be like the yellow brick road to Oz: A trek to an illusory destination that will not solve the underlying human problems that affect the parties.
Annapolis is indeed a positive and welcome development, if nothing else because it gives all sides in the conflict a platform to communicate. However, just as in any other conflict, getting the sides together to talk without addressing the underlying human factors fueling the conflict can quickly degenerate into a shouting match. To fully reach a solution to this long and bloody conflict, we can not overlook the psychological dimension. There can only be a true end to the conflict when this distant neighbors learn to see and talk to each other as human beings who only have a desire for a better life, a better future.

Moises Salinas is a professor of cross-cultural psychology at Central Connecticut State University. His latest book is Planting Hatred, Sowing Pain: The Psychology of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.

Add comment January 10th, 2008 Posted by Moises

British Academic Union Forgoes Boycott Move

Britain’s University and College Union (UCU) has announced that it is dropping its move to consider a boycott of Israeli universities, after it decided that the proposed boycott would be illegal under British law.

For the report in Haaretz, click here.

For JANIP’s statement on the UCU, click here.

1 comment October 1st, 2007 Posted by Ron

YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO FEEL OFFENDED

Judea Pearl, father of Daniel Pearl, suggests how to respond firmly and openly to anti-Israel and anti-Zionist remarks and language.

YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO FEEL OFFENDED

Judea Pearl

We, as Jews, have been grossly negligent in permitting the dehumanization of Israel to become socially acceptable in certain circles of society, especially on college campuses. Our silence, natural resilience to insults, and general reluctance to confront colleagues and friends have contributed significantly to the Orwellianization of campus vocabulary, and the legitimization of the unacceptable. Most of our assailants are even unaware of the shiver that goes down our spines with utterances such as “apartheid Israeli regime” or “brutal Israeli occupation.” … (more…)

Add comment October 1st, 2007 Posted by Judith

Making Emotional Sense of the Proposed Boycotts

A thoughtful and incisive analysis of the left’s support of the Israeli boycotts by a sociologist/ psychoanalyst.

Judith Lorber 

Making Emotional Sense of the Proposed Boycotts against Israeli Academics and Intellectuals - Catherine B. Silver

ENGAGE Issue 4 - February 2007

This essay explores the signifying discourses used to support the ban on Israeli academics and intellectuals. Particular emphasis is placed on understanding the links between the political and the personal, through an exploration of the emotional basis for supporting the boycott and the power of language in splitting thoughts from affects. We look at this splitting mechanism in the context of the recent attempts to boycott Israeli researchers and academics which were initiated in England in 2002 by two Jewish professors (2), and followed in 2006 with both a proposal by an Irish group of academics and an attempted ban of Israel at this year’s International Architectural Biennial in Venice. The boycott attempts have created deep divisions within the left, each camp resorting to attacks, counter-attacks, and mutual condemnations. 

http://www.engageonline.org.uk/journal/index.php?journal_id=14&article_id=54

Add comment August 27th, 2007 Posted by Judith

Alumni Group Seeks to Deny Tenure to Middle Eastern Scholar at Barnard

Controversial research on Israel and the Palestinian territories has become the basis of yet another campaign to prevent a professor from winning tenure - this time at Barnard.

Learn more:

Read the report in the Chronicle of Higher Education

Read the report from the JTA

3 comments August 15th, 2007 Posted by Ron

JANIP Statement on the UCU

The Jewish Academic Network for Israeli-Palestinian Peace (JANIP), made up of North American academics who support an end to the occupation and a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, opposes the resolution recently endorsed by Britain’s University and College Union (UCU), which encourages the boycott of Israeli academic institutions by the UCU and its members. We see dialogue, negotiations, and positive support for joint Palestinian and Israeli NGO initiatives, not boycotts or other efforts to disrupt communication, as key to terminating the occupation and establishing a just peace between Israel and Palestine. (more…)

1 comment July 19th, 2007 Posted by Ron

BOYCOTT, SHMOYCOTT

This article by Geoffrey Alderman doesn’t trivialize the anti-Israel UK boycott campaign, but gives a realistic view of how unions can get hijacked by a small, vocal group of political fanatics.

Posted by Judith

ACADEMIA’S ANTI-ISRAEL IMPERATIVE

Even when not explicitly on the agenda, knocking Israel seems to be a favorite pastime in academia nowadays. Last December, I attended two events at New York University that exemplify this tendency. One was a conference honoring the legacy of Hannah Arendt (otherwise a most satisfying and impressive affair). The other was a speech by the outspoken NYU historian, Tony Judt.

Hannah Arendt

Arendt was a controversial and complex character – a political philosopher and vocal social critic – widely regarded as a critic of Zionism. But the screening of an interview with her made clear that after leaving Nazi Germany for Paris, she worked with great dedication for a Zionist organization preparing young German and Polish Jews to move to Palestine in the 1930s. She was also the inspiration and mentor for a left-Zionist group in the US that included the young Nathan Glazer (who went on to be a well known sociologist and social critic in his own right). Her orientation was for a binational state in Palestine, but her connection with Zionism cannot be regarded as merely that of a critic.

A number of great Jewish-refugee minds from this period are honored in certain intellectual circles, not only for their academic work, but likewise for supposedly being critics or opponents of Zionism. Most of this is anti-Zionist wishful thinking or exaggeration; for example, Albert Einstein was probably a dove regarding the Arabs, but he was a renowned supporter of Zionism and Israel. The same can be said of the famed theologian-philosopher Martin Buber, who definitely was a peacenik, but spent nearly half of his long life as a Zionist oleh (immigrant) living in Palestine and Israel. (more…)

1 comment April 23rd, 2007 Posted by Ralph

Defending Zionism in a Time of Occupation and Oppression

As someone who has emerged in recent years as one of the more prominent academic supporters of Palestinian national rights and critics of Israeli policies and U.S support for the Israeli government, many people are surprised that I am unwilling to categorically denounce Zionism.

(more…)

1 comment April 18th, 2007 Posted by Chris

How Zionism Was Hijacked by the Right

Today, in campuses all over America, Zionism is readily associated with conservatism, imperialism, the Bush administration and a host of other right wing movements. Many progressive historians are fond of showing that Zionist history was imperialistic and even racist from its beginnings. And even right-wing Zionist movements like the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) want to limit the de facto definition of Zionism as a movement that unconditionally supports Israel, even when the policies of its government are pro-occupation and militarist. Case in point: the ZOA attempted to expel the Union of Progressive Zionists, a liberal student group, from the Israel Campus Coalition, the umbrella organization which promotes pro-Israel campus programs. This connection has left thousands of Jewish faculty and students, who are largely liberal, with an uneasy feeling that often leads to a disconnection from Israel oriented activities, and sometimes to outright rejection of Israel and Zionism. The current state of affairs is deeply ironic; it was not always this way. Over a century ago, Theodor Herzl, the father of political Zionism, proposed the creation of a State for the Jews as the only way for the Jewish people to end its abnormal status as a stateless nation, loathed and rejected everywhere it settled. This political dream, however, could not come without a price, both human and political. (more…)

Add comment April 14th, 2007 Posted by Moises

The Euston Manifesto: A New Vision for the Left

http://www.eustonmanifesto.org/

A. Preamble

We are democrats and progressives. We propose here a fresh political alignment. Many of us belong to the Left, but the principles that we set out are not exclusive. We reach out, rather, beyond the socialist Left towards egalitarian liberals and others of unambiguous democratic commitment. Indeed, the reconfiguration of progressive opinion that we aim for involves drawing a line between the forces of the Left that remain true to its authentic values, and currents that have lately shown themselves rather too flexible about these values. It involves making common cause with genuine democrats, whether socialist or not.

The present initiative has its roots in and has found a constituency through the Internet, especially the “blogosphere”. It is our perception, however, that this constituency is under-represented elsewhere — in much of the media and the other forums of contemporary political life.

The broad statement of principles that follows is a declaration of intent. It inaugurates a new Website, which will serve as a resource for the current of opinion it hopes to represent and the several foundation blogs and other sites that are behind this call for a progressive realignment. (more…)

Add comment April 10th, 2007 Posted by Chris

Dual Israeli/Palestinian Historical Narrative Textbooks Emphasize Educational Role in Building Peace

In Washington, D.C., The American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP) held a briefing on March 23rd at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The briefing was titled “Developing a Dual Israeli-Palestinian Historical Narrative”. Dr. Sami Adwan of Bethlehem University and Dr. Dan Bar-Or of Ben Gurion University presented their experiences as co-directors of the Peace Research Institute in the Middle East (PRIME) in developing and teaching the ‘Dual Historical Narrative’ booklets to their pupils. (more…)

Add comment March 27th, 2007 Posted by Chris

Polemics Lead Us Nowhere

The following is my response to an article by SUNY Professor Emeritus Jerome Slater, published in Tikkun as “The Need Not to Know: The American Jewish Community and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict,” and republished at AlterNet as “The Zionist Dream is Becoming a Nightmare,” posted on January 24. Prof. Slater was reviewing Tanya Reinhart’s polemic, The Road Map to Nowhere: Israel/Palestine Since 2003, published by Verso in 2006 (Prof. Reinhart suddenly passed away last week while on leave in the United States). That Tikkun and Alternet would publish his tirade without an alternative view reflects badly upon both.

While I do not have a problem with much of Jerome Slater’s indictment of Israel’s shortcomings and failings, I am struck by the strident and one-sided nature of his presentation. Slater’s analysis provides barely a hint that there are two sides that have continually made mistakes and committed wrongdoing in this conflict. (more…)

Add comment March 27th, 2007 Posted by Webmaster