At Dartmouth, discussions about the outside world often fall behind our busy course loads and extracurricular activities. The issues that we so actively isolate ourselves from here in Hanover, however, can permeate the bubble and directly impact our lives at Dartmouth. The recent American Studies Association boycott of Israeli academic institutions, as well as President Hanlon’s rejection of the boycott, brought issues of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict into campus discussion, as did the protest of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has emerged once more a hot topic for the student body, but not all students believe the dialogue surrounding it is a diverse one. The nature of the discussions that occur on campus, facilitated and moderated largely by Jewish student organizations, creates an environment that does not accurately reflect the polarized and complicated nature of the conflict. For those who advocate alternative solutions, back the creation of a Palestinian state or are unsure of their stance, there are fairly limited venues in which an even dialogue can occur.
For the most part, student groups such as Hillel, J Street U and Al-Nur — the Muslim Students Association at Dartmouth — control campus conversation about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Asher Mayerson ’15, president of Hillel, said these conversations likely take place in such a setting because the students who join such groups are most passionate about discussing the conflict in the Middle East. While the College’s chapter of Hillel maintains a neutral stance on the issue, J Street U advocates firmly for a U.S.-sponsored two-state solution.
Al-Nur does not have a political stance on the issue, but the group’s president Hamza Abbasi ’16 said that several Muslim students participate on their own by attending discussions sponsored by other groups. Al-Nur also works with students’ family members who live in the region or are personally affected by the conflict.
“The main rhetoric [of Al-Nur] is praying for a peaceful solution, not a specific political solution,” Abbasi said.
Madeline Cooper ’16, co-chair of J Street U and member of Hillel, said she believes the current conversation surrounding the issue is productive. Cooper said the participation of students with varied views, and particularly students who have been directly touched by the conflict, fosters interesting and stimulating dialogue.
“It is wonderful to have students who have experience with some of the issues — what they have to add to the conversation is really invaluable,” she said.
While other Jewish and Muslim campus organizations focus discussion on specific political solutions, Dartmouth Students for Israel sees itself as an “ally to Israel” and aims to educate students about Israel through speakers such as Olmert. Dartmouth Students for Israel president Michael Klein ’14 explained that the group tends to shy away from the larger political discussion model used by J Street U.
Some students on campus argue that though Dartmouth has forums available for discussing the conflict, there is an inherent bias in classes and the discussions currently taking place.
While participating in Birthright, a program that sends Jewish young adults to Israel to learn about their history and culture, Steven Povich ’16 said he became interested in the conflict as well as keenly aware of the pro-Israel bias inherent in Birthright.
When Povich returned, he said he wanted to learn more about the conflict and subsequently became involved in J Street U, an organization he was drawn to because of its relatively balanced perspective.
Yet Povich also said that he often feels the dialogue at Dartmouth, including within J Street U, is not as polarized as it is around the country or the world. Most students in J Street U have fairly similar opinions on the issue, he said, and such agreement inevitably limits discussion.
Ala’ Alrababa’h ’14, who is restarting Dartmouth’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, said that he too is frustrated by the limited pro-Palestinian representation on campus. As a Jordanian, Alrababa’h said he was impacted by the Arab-Israeli conflict growing up because of his country’s political involvement in the region.
“I definitely feel that the Palestinian view is not adequately represented on campus,” he said. “While I did participate in forums by groups like J Street [U] and Dartmouth Students for Israel, those groups do not meaningfully represent the Palestinian point of view.”
Cooper said she is excited about the revival of Students for Justice in Palestine, as it creates a new forum for discussing the conflict while allowing more voices to join the conversation.
“I would say that since I’ve been at Dartmouth, we have not had a group that has many of the aims of [Students for Justice in Palestine],” she said. “They definitely represent a different voice than groups that are already on campus including J Street U.”
The campus dialogue also crosses over into academic settings, since the College offers classes that cover different aspects of the conflict. Yet even these academic settings do not always portray the multi-faceted nature of the issue. Felicia Jia ’16, for instance, said her experience taking classes on the Middle East at Dartmouth has at times been colored by the opinions and backgrounds of her professors.
Jia said that in one of her classes, a focus on Israeli history created an environment in which the Palestinian narrative was addressed in a secondary way. While Jia does participate in campus discussions about the conflict, she echoed Povich’s dismay at the lack of balanced conversation.
“I feel like in a way I don’t fully fit in in J Street U,” she observed. “Obviously I feel like my opinions will be welcome, but they have an agenda. I don’t feel completely comfortable, I guess, with this organization.”
