Submission: Students should consider both sides of Arab-Israeli conflict

By Lea Luterstein

In the war of ideas, it is unfortunate that he who shouts louder often wins. It then follows that parties whose accusations may lack credibility have long since learned how to use shouting to their advantage.Shouting louder is not limited to megaphones – we’ve become more advanced. The decibel range of the words doesn’t matter so much as the words’ voltage – and UCLA is no stranger to charged language.

Palestine Awareness Week is perhaps the flashiest and most electric time of winter quarter. Bombarded with words like “occupation” and “apartheid” and physically confronted with a giant wall marring Bruin Plaza, students weave through megaphones, posters and angry faces just to get to class.

Campus climate turns stormy and to even the most indifferent student, the two minutes to make it through Bruin Plaza and up Bruin Walk become an ordeal.

This article does not intend to discuss the two sides in the Arab-Israeli conflict and its manifestation on campus. Instead, it aims to deal with the fact that the way the conflict is portrayed by Students for Justice in Palestine is severely divisive, intimidating to the point that it marginalizes a significant population on our campus, and – most importantly – is extremely confusing for many students.

As arguably haphazard the accusations made by Students for Justice in Palestine and their Palestine Awareness Week are, the accusations’ construction is decidedly calculated. The claims of “apartheid,” and those who make them, know their audience: They are targeted at students unfamiliar with the issues. This tactic’s success rate is frightening in that a success rate even exists.

Students are bombarded and bamboozled into having a first impression of Israel that is not only negative, but also biased and erroneous.

To address Students for Justice in Palestine’s most prominent accusation: The voices through the megaphones shout about “apartheid” and a giant wall separates Students for Justice in Palestine from the Bruins that walk by.

It’s an effective strategy, but not an honest one. Although the wall still stands, no one ever seems to want to answer why it’s there.

Neither side denies that there’s a security fence between Israel proper and the West Bank – in fact, it is a rather great accomplishment. Israeli Intelligence Community estimates show that before the wall’s construction, about 75 percent of suicide bombers who attacked targets inside Israel came from across the border where the first phase of the fence was built.

According to the Israeli Ministry of Defense, since the wall’s construction in 2003, terrorist attacks in Israel have gone down by more than 90 percent, and the number of Israelis murdered and wounded has declined by more than 70 percent and 85 percent, respectively.

Besides, to call it a wall is wrong too – it’s a fence, not an actual wall for more than 90 percent of its length, as detailed in the International Court of Justice ruling on the Israeli security barrier.

There’s little question that this security barrier is not ideal, but since the second intifada – a wave of terror attacks between 2000 and 2005 aimed mainly at Israeli civilians that killed 1,000 Israelis, both Jews and Arabs, and 64 foreigners – clearly showed the Palestinian Authority’s decision to use terror to achieve its goals, the security barrier is the only way to prevent the civilian population from further bloodshed in and from the West Bank.

Although there are obviously many factors – like the truce after the second intifada – that contribute to the relative stability in the region and the decrease in suicide attacks, the security barrier is a large part of that dynamic.

In the end, there are two sides; if you consider one, you must also look at the other. Sensationalism certainly has its place in the international arena – and it belongs in tabloids. For everything else, the responsibility lies not with the contenders to accurately present a situation, but with the observer to accurately perceive both sides.

At UCLA, students have the unique opportunity to surround themselves with diversity and confront multiple perspectives – it is up to Bruins to see through the melodrama and to uphold their integrity by seeing both sides and seeking the truth.

Luterstein is a first-year economics and political science student, a member of Bruins for Israel and a contributor to Ha’Am newsmagazine.