Former member of the Israeli parliament Naomi Chazan spoke in Shanklin 107 on Monday about the obstacles that currently hinder peace between Israel and Palestine. About 80 students showed up to hear Chazan discuss the possibility of a two-state solution to the conflict.
The talk, titled “Practical Implications of Liberal Zionism: Obstacles to Peace in the Middle East,” was organized by Kol Israel, a student Zionist group. Members of Kol Israel said that they were hoping to dispel some of the preconceptions about Zionism by bringing Chazan to campus.
“Especially last year, I think people may have made assumptions about Kol Israel’s views, and about the people we brought to speak,” said Nitzan Ziv ’07, a member of Kol Israel. “For a left Zionist voice to be heard was essential for Kol Israel.”
According to Chazan, the only line of action that will potentially solve the conflict is to return to negotiations. She advocated a re-examination of old agreements, such as the Geneva Accord and the Oslo Accord, in order to determine how these agreements failed. Chazan also emphasized that the desire for a two-state solution is enormous among both Palestinians and Israelis, and that a minority of extremists in power are hindering this type of solution.
“Never before in the history of the conflict has there been overwhelming agreement on the nature of the solution to the problem,” she said. “70 percent of Israelis support a Palestinian state and disengagement from Gaza.”
According to Chazan the primary obstacles to reaching an agreement are occurring both in Israel and Palestine. A breakdown of trust, the rise to power of extremists, the existing political systems, conflicting narratives and lack of involvement from the international community are the greatest problems, she said.
As Chazan spoke, Kol Israel circulated a pledge for the audience to sign, stating “we affirm our recognition of the state of Israel as a legitimate, sovereign, and free nation, equal among other nations.”
There are five main lines of action available, according to Chazan, the worst of which is to do nothing.
She mentioned the Sharon disengagement plan, a one-state solution, and an International Trusteeship or mandate as possible, albeit unsatisfactory, actions. Chazan stressed that negotiations are the only option that may lead to a permanent solution.
“There is nothing more volatile in our region than the status quo,” she said. “We’ll have to take decisive action in 2005, one way or another, or the situation will explode.”
“As someone with left-wing views I was really grateful to hear that contrasting views were expressed from a position of leadership in Israel,” said Leora Abelson ’07.
“There’s this stigma that Zionism has associated with racism, it’s just not true,” said Niv Elis ’05, a member of Kol Israel. “There’s a whole spectrum of perspectives that are Zionist.”
Chazan was born and raised in Jerusalem and attended Barnard College. She was a member of the Israeli Knesset from 1992 to 2003, where she served as the deputy speaker, chair of the Committee on Women’s Rights, and a member of the Foreign Affairs and Security Committee. She is currently a professor in the political science department of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and is the Robert Wilhelm Fellow of the Center for International Studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Leave a Reply