Last week, I was walking up campus from class when a large white wall caught my eye on the Frist Campus Center north lawn. Curious, I walked closer to give it a look. I quickly realized why it was there and I spent a while scanning it over on both sides and reading the text on it. I walked away from the structure intrigued and thought about it throughout the remainder of the day, but as the hours passed and the toils of everyday life took hold again, I pushed it to the back of my mind.
The wall’s presence was pushed to the forefront again, however, on Feb. 10 when I read first Eli Schechner’s column about why he and Tigers for Israel oppose the wall’s construction and then the Princeton Committee on Palestine’s rebuttal the following day. And after soaking both of them up I began to realize, “I think they both have it wrong.”
To be clear, I’m referring to the wall erected by the PCP and the Princeton DREAM Team to oppose the real-life barrier separating Israel from the West Bank, which to the Committee, "is the most recognizable symbol of the [Israeli] occupation and of the crippling lack of self-determination given to the Palestinian people."
Last school year, when I was still Chief Elections Manager for USG, I managed the Israeli divestment referendum pushed for by the PCP and opposed by Tigers for Israel and its sister initiative, Tigers Together. And to be honest, never before had I seen such strife and hostility displayed by students toward one another since arriving at Princeton two and a half years ago. I was quickly disillusioned by the tactics both sides displayed in their efforts to win the day.
Every single day during the campaigning period leading up to the vote, I received calls, texts and emails from both sides complaining about how the other was violating the rules, urging me to disqualify or penalize the offending party. In addition, I received complaints from neutral students detailing how they were being stalked, harassed, intimidated or pressured by both parties to vote their way. By the end of the process, I was outraged by the behavior displayed by all involved.
Now, I bring this story up because I want to highlight what I believe are callow and counterproductive performances by both sides when they engage one another on this important and sensitive topic. While I completely understand that passions run high on this matter, I do not believe that pointing fingers at each other and writing opinion articles on the action taken by the other side is going to solve any of the issues surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Instead, I would love to see both groups come together and hammer out a compromise on how they can work together to help solve and influence the pressing issues surrounding the conflict, which ideally would lead to lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians. To my knowledge at the writing of this piece, that action has not happened thus far.
If we as Princeton students cannot come together to work out compromises, how can we expect our leaders and those making decisions to do so? On the international stage, certainly both Israel and the Palestinian National Authority, along with Hamas, are to blame for the current impasse on this issue. For one thing, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not help when he exploited fears about Arab and Palestinian encroachment in the finals hours before an election last year to secure a fourth term as prime minister. In addition, his actions in regard to Israeli settlements in the West Bank have not indicated to anyone that he is serious about pursuing peace with the Palestinians. If he was truly serious, he would immediately call for a permanent freeze on Israeli settlement building as a starting position to sit down with the Palestinian leadership to work out a peace agreement.
On the other hand, from an Israeli perspective, I can see why it would sometimes be hard to take the Palestinian viewpoint seriously after Palestinians elected Hamas, a terroristorganization, to lead their government in Gaza in 2006 — and when the Palestinian Authority does not do nearly enough to help Israel rein in Hamas or to assist in capturing key Hamas leaders and other terrorists hell-bent on destroying Israel.
It takes bold leaders who have the stomach and political will to pursue peace to actually achieve peace. Right now, neither side has that. Instead of blaming the other side, the University students so thoroughly engaged in this process should be encouraging the leadership on both sides to engage one another and forge a peace settlement.
Beginning in 1993 with the Oslo I Accord,Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat took bold steps to move toward an agreement, despite public opinion being opposed to a solution. Two years later, Prime Minister Rabin was assassinated in Tel Aviv by a Jewish extremist who believed Rabin was selling out his fellow Jews. If we want peace, we need to encourage our leaders to have courageous visions and to take bold action in the face of public opinion. That is what TFI and PCP should be directing all of their efforts toward instead of the steps they have taken thus far this school year. As President Abraham Lincoln said, "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves."
I call on both sides to take the action necessary to achieve freedom for all and to desist from the activities they have publicly displayed so far.
Grant Golub is a history major from Sarasota, Fla. He can be reached at ggolub@princeton.edu.Read More
On encampments, free speech, and ‘time, place, and manner’ rules on university campuses
Christopher L. EisgruberPresident Christopher Eisgruber ’83 comments on encampments, free speech, and “time, place, and manner” rules.
President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 comments on encampments, free speech, and “time, place, and manner” rules.
Princeton needs to be a climate justice leader — emphasis on the ‘climate,’ emphasis on the ‘justice’
Alex Norbrook and Eleanor Clemans-Cope“Princeton must not only withdraw its support from injustices, but also positively re-invest in sustainable and community-informed initiatives.”
“Princeton must not only withdraw its support from injustices, but also positively re-invest in sustainable and community-informed initiatives.”
Princeton must move towards a world-changing curriculum
Luqmaan Bamba“If we in the Orange Bubble are supposed to be taught how to be changemakers, our education should not just stop at learning about change but also extend to the tangible application of it.”
“If we in the Orange Bubble are supposed to be taught how to be changemakers, our education should not just stop at learning about change but also extend to the tangible application of it.”
