Bay Area seminar looks at the future of the peace process

Friday, February 24, 2006 | by

maureen earl

Supporting Israel and a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict isn’t an easy task.

So the goal of national Jewish grassroots peace organization Brit Tzedek v’Shalom is to do just that. The group takes a tough stand against terrorism — and looks for ways to engage with moderate Palestinians who are ready to work for a two-state negotiation.

To that end, Brit Tzedek held a weekend conference Feb. 18 and 19 in Burlingame to examine how peace can be achieved following the recent Palestinian elections.

Scholars, activists and local community members gathered at the Sheraton Hotel to share their views on how peace talks can go forward with Hamas in power. Skilled negotiators from Jewish and Palestinian communities spoke on the history of Hamas and its rise to power.

“It was not so much that Hamas won, as much as al-Fatah that lost,” said Omar Dajani, assistant law professor at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento and a leading Palestinian peace negotiator. “The election was Fatah’s for the losing.”

Dajani said the election of Hamas was a reaction to wide-ranging corruption, mismanagement, lawlessness and a lack of positive accomplishment on the part of Fatah.

Amjad Atallah, founder and president of Strategic Assessments Initiative, which works to bridge the gap between conflict management and resolution, agreed with Dajani, saying that the Hamas victory represented a significant degree of hopelessness in Palestinians.

Both speakers insisted that the vast majority of Palestinians want peace negotiations to be renewed, but unlike Dajani, Atallah felt that Hamas would not be swayed or in any way coerced into negotiations over permanent status.

Dajani, on the other hand, says that Hamas has a long-term strategic plan for some compromise and have already modified their anti-Semitic rhetoric and nuances.

Atallah approached the subject of violence and Islam by pointing out that many Muslims have not studied religion or theology — alluding to the underprivileged and disenfranchised who might be regarded as the more fanatical members of Islam.

“Most Muslims are unable to justify violence in the name of their religion,” Atallah replied. “After much debate and much contention, at the end of the day they can only say that ‘no, our religion does not condone the violence, but we have no option.’”

When the seminar divided into smaller workshops to provoke more intimate discussions, emotions ran high. The group had gathered under the banner of peace, so it was not surprising that left-wing activists had arrived in fairly large numbers.

Some spoke on how they have lost friends when they criticize Israeli policies.

“We [Brit Tzedek] are working toward a two-state solution,” said Diane Balser, the organization’s CEO, “but we are still in the minority.”

Balser spoke of her sadness on being condemned as anti-Israel, and of the passionate arguments she has been involved in. “But I refuse to lose a friend over these issues,” she said. “I tell them that they may not like the words I am speaking, but we are still friends.”

When asked how she remains so positive on the issue of peace, Balser replied that it was a decision she made a long time ago. “I took a stand. I often have to remind myself of that,” she said. “I sometimes have to work hard on it. But I am a Jew, so to tell me I’m anti-Jewish or anti-Israel is ridiculous and has no weight with me. Not now.”

Balser called for Jews to speak with an authentic voice. “Either you are passive or you speak up,” she said. “And while many think of Jews as outspoken, I would say that no, too many Jews have learned to keep quiet. We need loud advocacy for the long-term interests of the Jewish people, and that has to include seeing Jews and Palestinians living side by side peacefully.”