The original version of this article contained an error and has been changed. See the bottom of the article for additional information.
By Gil Bar-Or
Fellow Bruins, not just Israelis or Palestinians, Muslims or Jews, but every single student on the UCLA campus: I want you to sit back and think about the fact that a majority of our elected council members decided to vote against a resolution that recognized the plight of both Palestinians and Israelis. Politics aside, this resolution simply asked to frame a more proactive, constructive dialogue on campus.
I am an Israeli who believes the Palestinian people have a right to self-determination in their homeland just as the Jewish people have a right to self-determination in theirs. I’ve visited the Gaza border with a joint Israeli-Palestinian non-governmental organization, Other Voice, participated in several protests on the streets of Tel Aviv and spoken with a number of Palestinian activists fighting for the welfare of the Palestinian people. I chose these experiences out of a genuine mission to understand the suffering of the other side.
I have spoken many times with the resolution’s main author, Undergraduate Students Association Council Internal Vice President Avi Oved, and am confident that his intention was to foster a positive space where students, as human beings, can sit down and discuss a global conflict without yelling, name-calling and overused talking points.
Anyone who attended the meeting can agree that Oved offered compromise on virtually every single contentious issue by the time the final amended version of the resolution was read. The continued personal opposition to Oved by other council members, despite his willingness to accept their own amendments, hinted at a lack of ethical conduct by our democratically elected representatives. Furthermore, some opponents were directly violating democratic values by amending many parts of the resolution but ultimately voting against the final version.
This proud Bruin, who stayed in the council meeting for its whole eight-hour duration, 7 p.m. to 3 a.m., apparently has no right to speak to fellow Palestinian students because the widely accepted definition of “dialogue” is not in conjunction with the views of the majority of our elected representatives on the student council and their supporters on campus. Bringing all sides onto a negotiation table without deliberately placing one above the other is a fundamental principle of conflict resolution. Unfortunately, several opponents on the student council stated that because Israelis and Jews come from a background of “white privilege”, those groups cannot be placed on an equal dialogue table with Palestinians.
The essence of democracy relies on a mutual understanding that different perspectives exist and that each viewpoint, especially the minority one, should have a legitimate representation in the decision-making process. At their last meeting, our council decided to vote against this founding principle of democracy by rejecting a resolution that directly calls for dialogue.
I urge you to read the amended resolution for yourself and decide on your own whether we, as True Bruins who “respect the rights and dignity of others,” reject dialogue and cooperation as a necessary ingredient of conflict resolution. At a time when an Israeli delegation and a Palestinian delegation, for the first time in four years, are finally sitting down in dialogue over peace talks, and are in desperate need of public support from both ends, our own student council does not see fit that we build a similar campus climate.
Bar-Or is a first-year electrical engineering student and a fellow in the USAC Internal Vice President’s Office.
Correction: The word public was misspelled.
last paragraph: pubic support
Of course our leaders need pubic support!
Haha thanks for pointing that out, I brought it to the attention of the Assistant Opinion Editor and hopefully the typo will be resolved 🙂
Amazing article! I’m so shocked by the closed minded students on your student council that shocked obviousLove coming from Boston!
USAC should not be wasting its time on an issue that it has no influence on. No resolution is going to change anything at all, so this is nothing more than a waste of my student fees.
When UCLA divested from South Africa during the apartheid, the world listened and followed. That was a resolution voted on by the USAC council members, and it did influence the situation. There is a similar opportunity here, where human rights are being violated and there is a chance to influence that. It has no bearing on the council’s opinion of Israel as a state, as it had no bearing on the council’s opinion of South Africa as a republic.
The way this resolution represented “peace” was through barring the council from any real action. Peace does not mean sitting complacent superficially supporting dialogue – although dialogue is important. The fact is that UCLA is actively and currently invested in the same companies that are involved in violating human rights in Gaza, which is an issue that should supersede any Israel-Palestine conflict – it is a human issue. And USAC has a chance to make a difference as it did with the apartheid in South Africa. And that resolution would bar any discussion on ACTION and CHANGE in the form of divestment, which is a powerful tool at USAC’s disposal.
I am not Israeli, I am not Palestinian. But as an outsider to the issue, I would say that the basic human right to not be uprooted and mistreated is far more important than anything else. Before we are a nationality or an ethnicity, we are all human. I wish that empathy was the rule. Empathy and action.
As an outside to this issue, you clearly do not understand the conflict beyond flashpoint brochures handed out by one sided groups. The settlements are just as much a human rights issue as is Hamas using civilian shields and shooting rockets from elementary schools as a political weapon. By saying that the human rights issue supersedes the Palestinian conflict, you can’t relate it to it being a “Israel is universally wrong”. You have to relate it to both sides of the conflict, meaning, you have to have some friggin dialogue.
By analogizing this conflict to the Apartheid, you are misrepresenting the complexity of the issue – of wrongs committed by both sides. Israel is far from perfect, and as a liberal Zionist, I am constantly in disagreement with its government. But demonizing one side and disregarding the wrongs committed by BOTH sides (YES, the Palestinians have also wronged, and wronged pretty hard) is an obstruction to progress and an obstruction to democracy.
When u take peoples land they fight back. To use that as an excuse to continue taking land shows that Israel has no interest in resolving the dispute, but rather use terrorism as an excuse.
There is nothing complex about a plan called “facts on the ground” that seeks to progressively take as much Palestinian land that makes any Palestinian state unviable. And to call it for what it is, just states the facts.
Across the world, lots of Muslims have been stealing land. Muslims in South Asia stole Kashmir from Hindus. Pakistan was stolen and wrenched from India as well.
This sounds like a child saying “but he hit me, too!” as he tries to justify punching a kid he teased, robbed, and bullied for years.
I don’t understand, why do we need a bill to have dialogue? You just need a time, a place, and people to talk. Like how would the bill get students to talk about it? I read the bill, before it was amended and after it was amended, but I don’t necessarily see anything concrete that will show how this “dialogue” will take place. In fact, the amended dialogue seems pointless. Can someone clarify?
The resolution was framed and titled to support respectful ‘dialogue’ between the two sides on the issue. But, upon closer inspection of the actual LANGUAGE in the whereas clauses, it basically condemned the idea of ever addressing divestment. It said: divestment is harmful to campus climate… Which is weird, because we are currently INVESTED in companies that enable and profit from the illegal occupation of Palestinian territories (for example, HP provides the technology used at checkpoints, Caterpillar provides bulldozers used to demolish palestinian homes to make way for illegal settlements, etc. see this infographic: http://sjpwest.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Ucbds-updated-01.jpg). So the fact that we are invested already is hurtful and offensive to Palestinian students and pretty much anyone that took the time to look into the issue would see that.
The MISCONCEPTION is that divestment is anti-Israeli. IT IS NOT. Israel has a right to exist, the entire WORLD recognizes that as per international consensus. It does NOT, however, have the right to expand and deepen Israeli settlements beyond its internationally recognized borders into Palestinian territories of the west bank and gaza, which it has done over the past 35 years, and continues to do TO THIS DAY! Why don’t we hear about this? Even though it’s in direct violation of the Geneva Convetions, MANY MANY UN resolutions, etc etc? BECAUSE the United States is essentially the only vote that counts on the global geopolitical stage. That is what happens when you have overwhelming, hegemonic power. So Israel goes on committing human rights violations and we continue investing our tuition dollars in the companies that make it possible.
The point is, everyone on Council agreed that the clauses that condemned divestment should be taken out, after, of course, much resistance from the author of the resolution. After that, the entire resolution was pointless. It was just a tool to disguise an attack on Palestinian students’ right to bring up divestment as a tool for addressing injustice and for re-assessing our investments and the type of activity they are supporting. You;re totally right, though. AFTER THAT, the resolution was absolutely pointless. The ‘dialogue’ part was just pretty window-dressing for a much more insidious cause.
After the resolution was pointless? The Resolution stated that both Israelis and Palestinians have a right to self determination. It stated that the demonization of any one party is a hindrance to peace and justice. It stated that UCLA is in support of peace. The rejection of that notion and the idea that it is pointless is stating that you are not in support of peace and you are not in support of the rights of both peoples
Except, there was no tangible point. Do ya feelz? It did nothing to actually encourage dialogue except state it.
Taking an official stance of dialogue rather than choosing a side (which would make a large portion of the UCLA community feel unsafe) is already a key step towards progressivism….
Unsafe how. You mean exposing kiddies to what Israel does is now unsafe ?
This article, and the USAC’s actions preceding it, are a microcosm of the reality of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: Israelis recognize the Palestinians’ right to exist, but not vice versa.
And I guess thats why Israelis are busy settling on land the world recognizes as Palestinian. Nice way to “recognize” Palestinians.
The world can kiss Israel’s ass. No country has the right to dictate borders to any other country. Most of the area in the West Bank is disputed and until, if ever, there is a peace agreement reached, Israel will remain in control over it. Palestinians put themselves in this situation by blowing up kids on the way to school and couples dancing at discotheques.
Also don’t forget Gaza. Israel has absolutely no control over it. It’s all Hamas.
Yes, settlements suck. But meanwhile, Israel offers more rights and more opportunities to Palestinians than any other country in the middle east. It’s quite a lot more recognition than asking to push the Jews into the sea, no?
You mean being stateless third class citizens without representation of a country that seeks to strip them of a majority of a land is far better than any other country in the Middle East. Hmmm….
The plight of Israelis and Palestinians are not even. Palestinians are being evicted from their lands for settlements as we speak. And to pretend as if this is some complex issue that cannot be condemned without some never ending “thought provoking” process is deceitful. First condemn Israeli ethnic cleansing. It has nothing to do with its security, but a deliberate attempt at “facts on the ground”
LOL of course you would be Israeli and in the IVP Office to write this article. The resolution was just a sneaky way to stop talk of divestment; we all know it. We are not stupid.
This is really sad that many of the comments state inaccurate information… Or maybe it is on purpose.
“There’s nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it.” William James
UCLA, first and foremost is an educational institution and an excellent one too. I’d like to preface by saying that I do not consider Political Science a science. Politics is useless and harmful to everyone involved. Hence, I would even say Political Science should be taken completely out of curriculum of any university. There is nothing useful one can learn from it that can be applied in the real world. Instead, we should concentrate on learning useful subjects such as medicine, biology, chemistry, engineering, etc, well you get the drift. However, none of these are “sexy.” Instead, lots of people want to go into politics, be it local level, national level, or even international level. Of course, where else one can make money without actually working. Does anyone think that being a congressman is actually work?
In light of all this, how about we make UCLA about a place where people can get education applicable to the real world instead of looking for ways to find fault with someone or something? This question of investment of divestment is a silly one. If the US as a government allows for investments in companies that do business with Israel, clearly any entity within the country has the right to do so. Just because someone feels offended by something, does not give the right to that someone to push for boycott or divestment. Paying tuition to UCLA does not entitle students to choose how that money is invested. You are paying for a service, in this case, education. What happens with that money afterwards is none of your business. There are countries that prohibit doing business with Israel, these are all based in the Middle East; the US is not one of them. Think about what would happen to the students in Iran or Libya if some students decided to proclaim that their universities should DO business with Israel. Do you think shouting and name-calling would be the extent of their punishment? I don’t think so. So, I say to all of the Palestinians (I had no idea there were so many of them here), you now live in the US which has always been an ally of Israel and if you don’t like the US policies, you should move to a country that shares your views such as any country in the Middle East. However, do not tell an american institution where to invest or divest, especially in regard to great american companies like HP. Instead, go become engineers or inventors so that maybe one day, there may be a company run by Palestinians that can boast the same type of reputation for innovation as HP can. Until then, peace and prosperity to everyone at UCLA!