*** DEBUG START ***
*** DEBUG END ***
Important information: We are currently experiencing technical issues with the webiste and it is currently running with reduced functionality, some category pages may not contain a full list of articles and the search is not currently working. We apologise for the inconvenience and should have everything back to normal as soon as possible.

A better way to discuss the land

by
29 July 2016

Laura Janner-Klausner explores ways of approaching Israel-Palestine

demotix

Never predictable: members of the small Orthodox Jewish group, Neturei Karta, campaigning last year on behalf of an independent Palestine

Never predictable: members of the small Orthodox Jewish group, Neturei Karta, campaigning last year on behalf of an independent Palestine

THE Israel-Palestine conundrum can seem complex and emotive, as well as distant from our experience in Britain. There are, however, help­ful ways in which all of us — Jews, Christians, Muslims, and others — can learn to talk about it more constructively, and so develop a more positive approach.

Israel is so intensely engaged with its multi-layered history that many of its mainstream newspapers have their own archaeology section. This attests to a wider truth: that Israel is a country where the past has never been, and can never be, put to rest.

Like the archeological sites, where stratas of ruins are built on top of one another, the current political situation is the sub­ject of multi-layered narratives and national stories. Their awkward co- existence means that the past is present in a visceral and unresolved way.

 

EARLIER this year, I visited Israel and Palestine with the Council of Christians and Jews to explore these multiple Israeli and Palestinian nar­ratives as part of a joint trip of British Jewish and Christian leaders.

No matter how many times I go there, there is always another extra­ordinary set of stories to hear. By speaking with stakeholders and peace activists on the ground, we wanted to think more critically about how our own communities talk about it.

One message that came out of our trip is important for all of us in Britain: if people who live in the coal-face of conflict can see beyond the tribal approaches that so often plague discussion of these issues, then those of us who live thousands of miles away surely have no excuse. As Jews and Christians, as inter­national stakeholders in the region, we have a responsibility to temper our debate, to embrace the com­plexity, and to see the other point of view.

We met the Very Revd Hosam Elias Naoum, the Dean of St George’s Cathedral in Jerusalem. He serves as pastor to the cathedral’s Arabic and English-speaking congre­ga­tions, and works with a panoply of dif­ferent organisations that promote co-existence. Dean Naoum’s politics are characterised by nuance, but he deals in a number of absolutes; one is his willingness to welcome anyone, to carry out his post as if his congregation were not on the front line of a bitter, decades-old conflict.

His church is a short walk from the protests and stabbings in the Old City — he lives the conflict as much as anyone — and yet he is prepared to engage in dialogue any who leave violence and confron­tation at the door.

The Abraham Fund (which promotes equality among Jewish and Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel) showed us a Muslim and a Jew working together to improve the lives of Arab citizens in Israel. Their priority is peace and co- operation, driven by a belief that people-to-people contact will bring down barriers. The pair, Thabet Abu Ras and Amnon Be’eri Sulit­zeanu, stand together because they focus on the need to overcome the social and historic hurdles that hinder the search for a peace agree­ment. They prioritise people, not politics.

 

THE Jews in our party felt like exhibits as well as participants. As leaders of communities with huge emotional and historical invest­ments in Israel-Palestine, at times our narratives became the story..

I am a dual Israeli-British citizen, who lived in Jerusalem for 15 years, working with Palestinians and Jews; so I felt a particularly acute sense of being part of what we were exper­iencing. Such an emotionally and politically complex trip was any­thing but “tea and samosas” — the kind of interfaith work where we share in pleasant but superficial dialogue about our similarities and differences.

And yet meeting people such as Dean Naoum and the peace-activists was salutary. If they take part in dialogue with anyone and everyone as a matter of course, how can we in Britain account for the incendiary, accusatory, and simp­listic tone of discourse online, on campus, or at public events?

When the next big conflict arises — and, sadly, it will — we should acknowledge what is in our hearts, but act with our heads. Sensible responses come from practised con­vers­ations, not waiting for a height­ened state of tension before actively voicing our views.

The only way to do this is by forcing ourselves to have those conversations that we often avoid. The beauty of our recent trip was that we could discuss the conflict, including its impact on Christians, at a relatively calm time.

It means that we have built the relationships we need to co-ordinate measured and calm social-media responses and combined statements when the next outbreak occurs.

 

RELATIONSHIPS and robust conversations should be the driving force of our approach to Israel-Palestine. Relationships are vital for lay people, and not just community leaders. The next time we feel pas­sionate about Israel-Palestine, we don’t have to think immediately of the images on our screens.

You could think about the Jewish people you have met who care deeply about the State of Israel: speak to them; find out what they are thinking. My message for Jewish people is the same. Some groups do this formally, through networks such as the Council of Christians and Jews; other relationships start with a meet-and-greet between a church and a synagogue.

It is a conflict defined by shades of grey. Defining it in terms of simple dichotomies, clear-cut solu­tions, and perpetrators and victims is a strategy that is doomed to fail.

Conversations built on better relationships in Britain can boost those already engaged in construct­ive dialogue in Israel-Palestine. And even where such interaction is lacking, surely our own behaviour can set a positive example. We should not import conflict. We should do what we can to export peace.

 

Rabbi Laura Janner-Klausner is Senior Rabbi to Reform Judaism, and a President of the Council of Christ­ians and Jews.

Letters to the editor

Letters for publication should be sent to letters@churchtimes.co.uk.

Letters should be exclusive to the Church Times, and include a full postal address. Your name and address will appear alongside your letter.

Church Times: about us

The Church Times Podcast

Interviews and news analysis from the Church Times team. Listen to this week’s episode online

Welcome to the Church Times

​To explore the Church Times website fully, please sign in or subscribe.

Non-subscribers can read four articles for free each month. (You will need to register.)