Collegiate Times

Squires Colonial Ball Room hosted a heated debate last night, as Palestinian Awareness at VT (PAVT) held a policy forum to discuss the past, present, and future of Palestine in today’s foreign policy spectrum.

The focus of the discussion, entitled “Palestine: Forging Peace, Resisting Apartheid,” was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Historically, this idea involves the ongoing dispute between Jewish Israelis and Arab Palestinians in which both groups claim the right to sovereignty over the total lands of Israel and Palestine.

Today, the Israelis have sovereignty over most of the land, which they established by defeating the Palestinians in both the Arab-Israeli War of 1948 and the later Six Day War of 1967, while the Palestinians are still trying to establish an independent, viable, and sovereign state of their own on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as their capital.

Virginia Tech Faculty, staff, students, and administrators, along with members of the Blacksburg community were in attendance to listen as three keynote speakers brought to light the issues of what is going on in Palestine today and what needs to be done to ensure the future of the Palestinian people.

This panel included Ambassador Robert V. Keeley, who served the United States Foreign Service for 34-years as an Ambassador to Greece, Zimbabwe, and Mauritius, and is now a free-lance writer in Washington, D.C.; Dr. Steven Salaita, an Assistant Professor of English here at Virginia Tech; and Dr. Basel Saleh, an Assistant Professor of Economics at Radford University and Chair of the Initiative for Middle East Policy Dialogue (IMEPD).                                            

Dr. Salaita was the first speaker to introduce the topic, opening with background on the Palestinian position of the conflict. He not only gave the history of the actual control of the territory from the 19th century to the present, but also included statistics of the number of dead and injured, the acres of land destroyed, and the amount of money given in aid from the United States to Israel v. that of Palestine.                                                                                              “First, I think it is important to clarify some of the myths about the

Palestine Israeli conflict,” Salaita said. “One of the greatest myths is that the conflict is thousands of years old and therefore irresolvable, but that is not the case. It is not about religious acrimony, not about Jews v. Muslims, and not about ancient tribal rivalries, but instead, the basis of this conflict is about real estate, meaning colonization of the land. (While) the conflict is deeply rooted in history, I believe that it does have a soluble outcome; it’s simply not true that it is irresolvable,” Salaita said.                                                                                   These remarks were expanded upon by

Dr. Saleh, who discussed the Palestinian economy, specifically how oil plays a role in this conflict.                                                              “This conflict has demanded such extensive financial, military, and political need,” Saleh said. “The middle east is the gateway to the largest oil reserves in the world, so it is important that policy makers here make sure the U.S. never gets thirsty for oil. (However) the status of the Palestinian economy has been exploited under Israeli occupation. Today, Israeli’s are among the richest in the Middle East, with an affluence that matches Spain, Italy, France.

Yet, the United States gives aid to Israel, (while) giving the Palestinians nothing.”

Finally, Ambassador Keeley read from a document he published last year on the United States foreign policy in the Middle East, highlighting his position of the approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and acknowledging that we need a new diplomatic approach toward the issue at hand.

“The United States should abandon or essentially abolish the ‘war on terror’,” Keeley said. “Terrorism is not an ideology…so by definition, it cannot be an enemy, and therefore it cannot be attacked. (Furthermore), so long as the underlying grievances persist, such a ‘war’ will never end. The tactics used to fight such a war have only succeeded in creating more terror. It makes as little sense as a war on bombing or occupation.”

When the Q&A portion of the discussion came about, those in attendance gave a very opinionated reaction to their statements. While most who came to the podium wanted to applaud the panel for their presentations, others felt that the information provided was not completely unbiased.

“I feel that this is the Palestinian presentation of the issue- how they would see things,” said Rob Fentress, a staff member here at Tech.
A strong statement that sparked debate between audience members and the panel met his comments.

“The information you get from the American mass media publications comes from the Israeli point of view, so hearing the ‘Palestinian side’ would be a new opinion for almost anyone who gets their information from turning on the TV or picking up the paper,” said Rammy Haija, a doctoral student in sociology and the vice-chairman of IMEPD.

Dr. Salaita gave a final comment attempting to settle this dispute, stating “I know most American’s agree with Israel’s discourse for colonization, now I will urge you however, to approach (this) conflict within the context of human rights.”