Students walking down Commonwealth Avenue on Tuesday may have been caught off guard by the appearance of a blood-splattered gray wall on which was written, “Gaza Similar to Warsaw Ghetto.” In response to Israel Peace Week, the Boston University Students for Justice in Palestine took to the streets to vocalize their support for Israel Apartheid Week in a dramatic fashion, unfortunately attracting attention to their outlandish methods of protest rather than their cause.
Likewise, while SJP proved itself to be an organization intent on garnering needless observation, advocates of Israel Peace Week at BU were almost polar opposites in their passivity. Although its creators identify the nationwide collegiate movement as “an initiative to spread awareness about Israel and her pursuit of peace,” Israeli supporters in the BU community largely concentrated on the country’s resources and “environmentally friendly” technologies, such as alternative energy sources, that should warrant America’s alliance. While this is admirable, it doesn’t fundamentally address the issue at hand: finding a way to achieve peace.
In regards to the BU aggregations, Israeli and Palestinian supporters are equally blind in that both sides appear concerned with their public images more than they do with convincing unbelievers why their country of choice is under undeserved attack. Regardless of whether they knew if their advocacy would make a direct, tangible impact, these proponents spread ideals seamlessly by leaving everything up to the ultimate “message.” At this point in the Israel-Palestinian conflict, each camp’s message is equally internationally convoluted.
If Israeli and Palestinian college organizations continue to maintain a vetted interest in the efficacy of public relations, miscommunication will only be prolonged. On the assumption that these students truly want to effect peaceful and just change, they would be wise to integrate and demonstrate an ability to empathize, even if only for a week on BU campus. At this point, intentions are unclear all around and the mounting antagonistic attitude in the Middle East seems to be permeating across the globe to the United States.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
Even if it were not filled with typos ( like”vetted interest”), this would be one of the stupidest things I’ve ever seen grace the pages of the freep.
It is extremely unfortunate that both sides have to use PR tactics in order to convince us of their side. I would really like to see education. Forget building walls and flyers. I wish both groups would sit down with people from all views of the conflict and explain the truth: neither side is right. They should be explaining to the BU community that the author of this article is right! The conflict is EXTREMELY convuluted and it is not black and white. I’m sick and tired of the PR campaigns. Someone please help me learn and let me make my own decision.
this article demonstrates a relative ignorance about the issues at hand, not to mention that it completely ignores what the point of activism is.
if you found the wall “outlandish” or “dramatic” in marsh chapel, then imagine someone building a cement structure twice that size through your backyard. the wall has been deemed illegal by the ICJ (an authority most people recognize), and serves an unambiguous purpose of strategic territorial and natural resource annexation.
the point is, that perhaps unwillingly or in ignorance, we are supporting certain policies, and we should probably know the full extent of these policies. the seige of gaza, also had the stated purpose pushing Gazan’s to the very edge of survival. this includes the calculating of “necessary calories” to be let in to gaza, so that they would get enough to survive – no more. the economy has been deliberately strangled.
do some more research, learn about what is happening. these facts are not pleasant, and they do not make for good PR from any angle, whether you are for or against.
i guess it is lucky for most bu students that they will never have to think about something like a 25 foot wall cutting them off from hospitals, schools, their families, the beach, etc. except for one afternoon when walking down commonwealth avenue.
sorry if that’s a little too aggressive for you.
While I hear the point of this article, I think the issue is that most BU students don’t care to educate themselves about the issues even when given the opportunity. If anyone who took a flier from either side actually went to the events that are advertised as the forums for education, when there can be time to sit down and discuss what the PR has to do with the information behind it, such as peace, then perhaps they would get the bigger picture. I was interested, and did attend Mr. Temkin’s speech on the environment and how its sustainability is promoting peace in Israel; it was fascinating, and due to the complex nature of Western relations to Arab countries via oil dependency, it made complete sense why the two are interrelated. While I would look forward to attending a similar event by SJP on what steps must be taken to secure peace, somehow I feel that’s not their message.
You’re free to come to SJP’s table or go to their events this week: Thursday, SJP will be hosting Diana Buttu, a former legal advisor for the PLO. Decide then.
While I agree that Israel Peace Week was about PR, it was about the truth as well. The point was clearly to draw attention to positive attributes and Israel’s commitment to peace. And although it was in a fortune cookie, I received a fortune cookie that was a fact about human rights for Arab citizens in Israel. This may not be about the conflict but it is about Israel and does directly combat the concept of Apartheid, which SJP is claiming. In addition, if anyone has actually stopped by the BUSI table, as I did, they would see the material is about the peace seeking measure Israel has taken. While SJP has a model of the “wall,” it is factually incorrect, as the security barrier is 97% fence. While BUSI has said that they feel for Palestinian civilians, it draws attention to exactly what the group thinks must happen in order for that peace to happen, it needs a partner. While SJP may say that they do not recognize the rights of Palestinians, BUSI has said they do- but in order to have peace, you need someone who is willing to sit down and talk to you without calling for your destruction. How can you sit down with someone who not only calls for your destruction but the annihilation of all Jews, as Hamas does. BUSI empathizes with the Palestinian people, promotes coexistence organizations, and HAS called for dialogue, and has been giving out FACTS about terrorism, Hamas, the peace seeking measures Israel takes AND is searching for a partner in peace. And BUSI has said that it exists to support Israel’s right to exist as a democratic society, so ultimately it is up the Israeli citizens, and the Palestinians to elect a peaceful government, to be able to come up with a solution. Ultimately, I am not really sure what your problem with the group is, if you pay attention to what is being said?
Here’s another statistic: the Separation Wall is twice the length of Israel’s eastern border and is built largely on West Bank land (85%).
You’re free to do one of two things: check out information on the Separation Wall from the major human rights groups (Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, B’tselem, Oxfam, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, etc.), the world’s highest-ranking court (ICJ), UN reports, etc – OR – you can trust what you read in a fortune cookie. Your pick.
Anyone can say that he/she “wants peace” — it is a rhetorical assertion that puts you in the majority. A necessary precursor to such peace is a recognition and acknowledgment of the profound human rights violations at hand.
Peace requires a mutual understanding. The separation barrier, or apartheid wall (call it whatever you will – notice either name denotes exclusivity), is not conducive to such an understanding.
Beyond whatever motivations lie behind the construction of the wall, how can two populations live in peace when they cannot even look one another in the eye? Those who truly desire and value peace would realize that the wall is counterproductive.