“Please, don’t list all of them,” Ali Abunimeh quietly asked during the lengthy introductory list of his achievements and honors last night.

Enlarge
#gallery http://daily.stanford.org/image/full/6336
Mae Ryan

talk about initiatives for peace in the middle east

Abunimeh’s discourse, “Ending Apartheid in the Holy Land: A Future of Reconciliation,” centered upon the sensitive topic of similarities between Afrikaaner-Black ethnic relations in apartheid South Africa and Israeli-Palestinian relations in the current Israel.

The Palestinian Abunimeh began his nearly two-hour presentation with a quote from his book, One Country: A Bold New Vision for Israeli-Palestinian Impasse. He compared South African apartheid to the current situation in Israel, supporting his most controversial statements with quotes from scholars, journalists and former South African President Nelson Mandela. In both cases, he argued, the established, minority government presented the majority population a choice between submission and annihilation, with any other action inevitably ending in conflict.

“My purpose here is not to argue whether Israel is or is not as bad as [the South African regime], nor to deny the differences between the two situations, but to consider a recent experience where people with fundamentally incompatible views of history could emerge in peaceful reconciliation,” Abunimeh said. “Can Israelis and Palestinians afford not to learn all the lessons that South Africa holds?”

In the past few years, many former South African apartheid officials have addressed Israeli leadership on that note.

Abunimeh is hopeful the situations in South Africa and Israel exhibit one major difference. In the case of South Africa, reform took place only after widespread violence and chaos. Abunimeh claims that the violence in Israel’s reform can be supplanted by extensive boycott, disinvestment and sanction, on both a local and international level. Abunimeh, who evoked an amalgamation of all three of Sacha Baron Cohen’s “Da Ali G Show” characters, attacked Israel’s self-proclaimed right to exist as a primarily Jewish state. According to Abunimeh, this is akin to the minority-majority state of Texas declaring that it was a “European state” and actively expelling minorities until it possessed the supermajority to carry out its right.

A central topic of the night’s discussion was an emerging, alarming trend in Israeli politics. Abunimeh noted that Israeli parties openly supportive of unilateral separation (or wall-building) and Palestinian transit (or deportation) have enjoyed a jump in the polls and in the Israeli legislature. This form of “ethnic cleansing,” as Abunimeh put it, is the result of a shift to the extreme right within the Israeli electorate.

During his presentation, Abunimeh made a clear attempt to remain objective, despite his strong beliefs. He expressed empathy for Israelis during his examination of what he called “the illusion of Jewish democracy.”

The primary solution Abunimeh offered for the rising tension is a unified state in which Palestinians and Israelis would live together in an open society of equality. He struck down the idea of a split state by affirming the “indivisibility” of the Palestinian people and recalling the past separation disasters in Ireland, Cyprus and South Africa.

Though the notion of this new nation is not yet seriously considered on the international stage, Abunimeh offered eight principles to guide such a country. These included freedom of religion, universal suffrage, free enterprise and a transparent state.

“Any one of a number of structures can fulfill these principles,” he said. Furthermore, he explained that it is crucial for the international community to provide “global civil resistance” through letters to representatives and discussions about the future of Israel.

Some audience members vehemently disagreed with Abunimeh and made themselves heard in the subsequent question-and-answer session. With a deliberate calm, he answered questions ranging from clarification softballs to accusatory fireballs attacking the very core of his argument.

Notably, he dismissed the popular rumor that Palestinian children were taught “the Jews are our dogs” in school as a fabrication. In reality, he said, Palestinian curricular reform has been the most closely monitored in history.

The response to the event was generally positive, with many audience members staying afterwards to discuss the issues raised.

“It was effective; [Abunimeh] was very well spoken, sophomore Sammy Abusrur said. “He tried to be as unbiased as possible; he answered all the questions.”

“We had a real sense of frustration,” said event organizer Omar Shakir, a senior. “When you talk about Israel-Palestine you see the same kinds of arguments made on both sides. When I saw Ali speak I was inspired by his thinking. The perspective he brought put the conflict in the context of other historical issues.”

The renowned journalist and Middle East scholar addressed a near-full house in the Geology Corner of the Quad. His presentation was a joint project of the ASSU Speakers Bureau, the Stanford Bookstore, the Coalition for Justice in the Middle East, and the recently founded Students Confronting Apartheid in Israel.