Submission: Two sides to Israeli-Palestinian conflict, both merit reflection

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a polarizing issue that many UCLA students are familiar with, whether they hold a direct stake in it or not. Certain communities and groups on campus have cut ties as a result of hostile rhetoric, with each side speaking in terms that reflect their inherent biases and failing to acknowledge the narrative of the other. While healthy debate and conflicting viewpoints are essential to any college campus, students invested in this issue have yet to engage with one another, contributing to an already negative campus climate. Editorials and submissions in this publication constantly point fingers and, as witnessed recently, disregard the validity of an entire group’s claims. This gets us nowhere. We should not continue to operate as though this is a conflict of right and wrong because, ultimately, this is a conflict of right and right, and its discourse should be nuanced accordingly.

During spring break this year, we had the incredible opportunity to travel to Israel and the Palestinian National Authority, or PA, with 20 other student leaders to witness firsthand the ways in which the conflict has affected individuals and families living on both sides. Going into the trip, many of us had our own perceptions and thoughts about what we wished to learn. For some of us, these perceptions came from what we witnessed on campus; for others, including ourselves, they came from our upbringing and background knowledge of the region’s history. At the end of our weeklong journey, however, we were all more willing to set aside any preconceived notions, replacing them with a more nuanced understanding of the intricacies of the conflict.

One of the more profound interactions we experienced during our trip was centered around compromise and cooperation. We visited Gush Etzion, an Israeli settlement in the West Bank and a town where violence periodically erupts due to the contentious nature of the settlement. While in Gush Etzion, we met with two individuals – an Israeli settler named Shaul Judelman and a Palestinian man named Antwan Saca – who, against all odds, share a unique friendship and a collective desire to achieve peace.

The individuals play an integral role in an initiative called Roots, which focuses on a grassroots, ground-up approach to a peaceful solution, rather than relying on government officials, who can often be misinformed or misguided in their tactics. Judelman and Saca stressed the importance of this type of grassroots work, not only in Israel and the PA, but also in places such as UCLA. It is integral that we use these narratives to challenge our own biases. In our view and the view of Judelman, Saca and many others in the region who live with the repercussions of this age-old conflict on a daily basis, this is the type of mindset that will achieve peace – not one where both sides are constantly at each other’s throats.

We can learn a similar lesson about appreciating others’ narratives from our experiences with Israel’s notorious checkpoint system. Palestinian students from Al-Quds University in East Jerusalem told us stories about being unable to sit for exams because of checkpoint closure. We heard similar stories of students missing lectures after forgetting their ID at home and being barred passage.

On the other hand, we listened to an Israeli soldier who operates a checkpoint that is responsible for preventing one to two acts of terror daily. Consequently, we were given statistics relating the institution of checkpoints to a decrease in suicide bombing attacks.

Complex issues like these characterize the nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but their intricacies fail to materialize during discourse. One would be unfairly painting the situation if they included only obstacles to Palestinian freedom of movement without mentioning that such roadblocks have saved Israeli civilians from terror. On the other hand, one would be unfairly painting the situation if they described all Palestinians as unwilling to make peace, when in reality, that description applies to only a specific subset of the population.

All too often, as our passions flare, we get focused on being correct. It is true and unjust that Palestinians suffer, and it is also true that Israel needs to defend itself. This obsession with convincing people to take a side without listening to different narratives feeds into this phenomenon of polarization. Until we begin to think more with our heads and less with our hearts, we will be stuck in this unforgiving vortex of playing right versus wrong.

We are Sujith Cherukumilli and Jay Joelson, and we come from very different communities, but are united by a common goal: bridging the divide. We are pro-Israel, pro-Palestine and pro-peace.

Cherukumilli is a third-year political science student. Joelson is a second-year business economics student.