The Three-Week Bubble
Feel-good peace camps that host Israeli and Palestinian teenagers may not actually produce any tangible results.By Sarah Karlin
May 20, 2009
Israeli Kinneret Wahnich and Meg Richardson hug at the Seeds of Peace camp in Otisfield, Maine. (AP Photo/Shawn Patrick Ouellette)Each summer, approximately 350 teenagers from Israel and Palestine live in the same bunks, eat together, play sports together, and engage in moderated dialogue sessions in the woods near Otisfield, Maine. In 1999, Palestinian high school student Amer Shurrab was one of the Palestinian teenagers who attended Seeds of Peace International Camp, a three-week-long program that brings the teenagers together in hopes of forging future leaders in the peace process. Founded in 1993, Seeds of Peace is one of dozens of peace camps located in the United States and abroad.
“It was an interesting opportunity to actually live with Israelis in the same place without having fear, without being threatened,” Shurrab says. “At least for this very short window, three weeks, you don’t have to feel fears when you’re around the Israelis because at least these people are not armed from toe to toe or trying to kill me.”
If only it were that simple. Fast forward ten years. In the wake of a destructive and deadly wave of violence in December and January, Israel and the Palestinians in the Gaza strip declared a cease fire. Despite the official call to halt hostilities, the unrest continued. On Jan. 16, Shurrab, who had recently graduated from Middlebury College, learned that his two brothers and father had been shot by Israeli forces and were trapped—the soldiers refused to perform first aid on the three men and prevented ambulances and international aid groups from attending to them. Shurrab immediately sprang into action. As a Seeds of Peace alumnus (also known as a seed), he hoped his relationship with the program’s organizers and other former seeds could help him save his family. But despite a host of international media attention and Shurrab’s desperate attempts to reach out to the alumni network, his two brothers died before help could reach them. Their father was finally retrieved by an ambulance nearly 24 hours after the initial shooting. He has not gotten full functionality of his arm back and still has pieces of the bullet in his arm, according to Shurrab.*
To help publicize the crisis, the executive vice president of Seeds of Peace, Barbara (Bobbie) Gottschalk,* posted Shurrab’s Jan. 21 interview with Democracy Now on the organization’s website and message boards. Very few Israeli seeds responded to the story.
“I was in a way disappointed with the responses coming from the seeds,” Shurrab says. “It was not only this it was all the discussion happening over SeedsNet, like the listserv over the duration of the invasion or the massacre in Gaza. Many Israeli seeds were actually defending the policies of their government in this invasion, in this massacre. They were defending the crimes of their government.”
Today, Shurrab is left wondering if perhaps he put too much hope in the Seeds of Peace organization. His disappointment with fellow seeds alumni raises important questions about the effectiveness and purpose of such programs.
Indeed, an October 2008 San Francisco Chronicle article reported that most observers agree that peace programs like Seeds of Peace have failed to produce a single prominent peace activist on either side. The article cited an unpublished report by Pal Vision, an independent Palestinian youth organization and research center located in East Jerusalem. Pal Vision surveyed 400 Palestinian camp participants and counselors from a variety of programs, including Seeds of Peace. The study found that only 5 percent of those surveyed said that their program had helped "promote peace culture and dialogue between participants" and only 11 percent said they came away believing that "there is something that unites [them] with the other party."
In response, Seeds of Peace issued a statement condemning the article. Seeds of Peace said the Pal Vision report’s findings are not consistent with public, independent studies of Seeds of Peace programs. Seeds of Peace representatives refused to comment further for this article, but an examination of the independent reports reveal some insight into fundamental flaws in the camp’s organization and structure.
Social Impact, Inc., which completed an evaluation of Seeds of Peace in March 2005, pointed out areas in which Seeds of Peace could stand to improve. The report found potential conflicts surrounding how participants are selected for the Seeds of Peace program. The study explained that some Seeds of Peace staff expressed concerns about the involvement of Israel’s Ministry of Education in selecting Israeli Jewish and Israeli Arab seeds. According to these concerned staff members:
In the process of preparation, Israeli Seeds (as well as Palestinian Seeds, when the MOE was involved) were intensely pressured to represent mainstream views of Israeli society and adopt even their own government’s propaganda information. Such pressure was reflected in the dialogue and coexistence sessions in the camp, especially during the first week when Seeds repeated exactly what they were told by their [Delegation Leaders]. Thus, some of these pressures and types of preparation potentially present challenges to SOP camp goals and objectives.
The report goes on to say, “As stated by some facilitators and staff focus groups: The Israeli Ministry of Education selection process of Israeli Arab kids is done with conditions of loyalty and suppression of national identity.”
The Social Impact study also found that most seeds are academically and often socioeconomically privileged. For Palestinian seeds, this means that few are selected from refugee camps, prime recruiting grounds for extremist organizations. Students from less privileged backgrounds could stand to benefit most from Seeds of Peace’s programs.
The overall impact of the Seeds of Peace programs, the study found that many seeds were positively affected by their experiences, but only half of respondents said they gained the ability to “empathize” with the plight of others and about the same number. Slightly less, 48 percent, said they have the desire to stay involved with conflict and peace issues. Even worse, only 37 percent of respondents said they have a desire to further their professional training for assisting their communities. It’s certainly better than nothing, but it’s hard to know if the half who do have an interest in peace issues actually continue to do work.
A decade after his own Seeds of Peace experience, Shurrab has mixed feelings about his time at camp and his relationship with the program in the following years.
Shurrab realized that this is not a conflict that could be solved through arts and crafts. At one of these dialogue sessions, Shurrab remembers fellow Palestinians asking Israelis about their mandatory military service.
“All Israeli citizens have to serve in the [Israeli] Army so we asked them if two years from now when you go and serve in the army and you are at a checkpoint and I’m walking in the street, ‘Would you shoot me if you get orders to shoot me?’ And many of them answered, ‘Yes,’” Shurrab says. “That was like a wake up call, a reality shock. Seeds of Peace … it’s a bubble for three weeks, you go there and live in this bubble and pretend you’re equals but it’s not the case … I’m not saying that there were not people who were really wholeheartedly in it for faith and they wanted to make real change, but a lot of people weren’t.”
After Shurrab returned home, the glimpse of hope that the Seeds of Peace brought him quickly faded. He attempted to visit the Seeds of Peace center in Jerusalem for follow-up activities but the logistics of navigating Israeli restrictions on the movement of Palestinians often got in the way.
“For us Palestinians it’s not easy. We don’t just get in our cars and drive to the [Center for Coexistence], although it would be like 40 minutes or an hour drive. We need to get special permission from the Israeli Army, from the Israeli authorities. And even if we get these permissions we would have to go and wait at check points for hours in the line, waiting for the soldiers for when they feel like letting us in. … We are not equal.”
Despite the many legitimate reasons Shurrab has to give up, to become bitter, to hate anything and everything Israeli, he has made a conscious decision to stay hopeful and continue to work for peace. He says he wishes people would stop taking sides and focus on a unified solution, but he is also realistic.
“I realize the task is extremely hard. I realize it might not be solved or accomplished in my lifetime,” Shurrab says. “If we wake up and get involved and start being active, do something about it then that’s going to generate change … But if we don’t get involved we know for sure its not going to change.”
Sarah Karlin is graduating from George Washington University and until last week, was an editorial intern at Campus Progress.
* This text has been edited from the original.
Social Bookmarking
--------
Comments
“Despite the many legitimate reasons Shurrab has [...] to hate anything and everything Israeli”
— Regina - May 21, 03:54 PM - #Are you kidding me? Maybe this is part of the attitude that prevents people from living in peace together; if hatred for an entire country and their entire being, culture etc. can be explained as legitimate, maybe a peace camp is not the right place to put supporters of this idea. Saddening.
“Despite the many legitimate reasons Shurrab has [...] to hate anything and everything Israeli”
— Regina - May 21, 03:55 PM - #Are you kidding me? Maybe this is part of the attitude that prevents people from living in peace together; if hatred for an entire country and their entire being, culture etc. can be explained as legitimate, maybe a peace camp is not the right place to put supporters of this idea. Saddening.
Wow, you took that sentence completely out of context. The emphasis is on the fact that his life experiences merit feelings of hatred, which is obvious since so many Palestinians with similar experiences DO hate Israelis. It’s saying that he’s been through enough challenging experiences to legitimize hatred for some, but he’s hopeful for the future in spite of all of it. What a good attitude.
— Josh - May 21, 07:35 PM - #Fear kills even family ties so don’t expect much of strangers that get to meet eachother’s humanity for a little while. HAMAS and the Zionazi lebensraum settlers have put quite a wedge between the two chambers of one Semitic heart. But as fear subsides and a sense of common purpose obviates, it is those who had these moments together that will guide the many on both sides. I saw it before and am sure that, even if I die, my kids will see it again. The alternative is to see eachother as extraterestrials; and that will happen only when ignorance breeds fear; for nothing causes fear like fear. Every move that quells fear quells death, quells vengence, quells humiliation and gives hope, even if buried deep in the heart for now. These will be the pioneers when the fearful dark forest thins.
— DE Teodoru - May 21, 11:02 PM - #Dear Sarah, to say that Seeds of Peace is a failure by imposing your own terms of success on the organizations goals is not a fair standard.
Firstly, the killing of Amer Shurrabs brothers and the wounding of his father was horrible. The entire situation in Gaza was and continues to be horrible, however your first criticism of Seeds of Peace is that its network of Seeds failed to save Amer’s brothers after he sent out email’s to the organization members while his brothers lay in the street bleeding to death. I am a “Seed” from the organizations early years and I received that initial email from Amer who was looking for media contacts to bring attention to his brothers plight, and I sent him my media contacts, and I am sure others did as well. To all of our dismay, Amer’s brothers died before international media attention could make a difference. As much as I wish something could have been done to save them, to say that Seeds of Peace failed in this regard is simply absurd. As an organization it doesn’t have the capacity, nor was it designed for that purpose.
The other criticism of Seeds of Peace in which you cite Amer on, is that some Israeli’s wrote emails to the organizations listserve and defended the actions of their country during the Gaza invasion. As somebody who receives those emails, I can say for one that there are a large variety of opinions expressed in those discussions, ranging from Israeli’s who supported the military operation and others who didn’t, but that’s really not the point. The important point is whether that is a legitimate measure of the organizations impact, and I say it is not. Seeds of Peace, like many other organizations relies on encounters between Israeli’s and Palestinians to build relationships and trust, change attitudes towards those on the other side of the conflict, and “empower” the participants in their programs to take leadership roles in the future. The organization doesn’t explicitly define political-belief change as one of its goals, and it is very important to note that attitudinal change towards the “other” in a conflict setting, doesn’t implicitly translate into political-belief change. Now, whether Seeds of Peace should define political-belief change as one of its goals is another question, but it is not fair to say it failed at something it never set out to do.
With regards to the recent violence in Gaza and its relation to encounter programs that bring together Israeli’s and Palestinians, Gavriel Solomon, a research at the University of Haifa has conducted fascinating research showing that program participants attitudes of hatred towards the other side tend to hold more constant in times of heightened violence than those of a control group (who haven’t participated), who’s levels of hatred rise significantly in times of violence. You can see him speaking on this subject here (although the video quality is not great) www.youtube.com/watc…
Your next criticism echo’s the San Fran Chronicle’s article saying that that Seeds of Peace hasn’t produced a single prominent peace activist… Again here, I think you are imposing your own definitions of “prominent” and “peace activist”, but what I can say for sure is that I know plenty graduates of the Seeds of Peace program who work in activist/advocacy “peace” organizations and others who do “non-political” peace and coexistence work. I suppose their “prominence” is a matter of ones personal gauge. If you are waiting for the next Israeli or Palestinain equivalent of Ghandi, don’t hold your breath… this is about generational and long-term change. I think its also important to say that its almost more significant to have graduates of this program in professions that are not explicitly peace or activist organizations. Its important to have graduates of Seeds of Peace in professions like medicine, law, journalism, business, and yes, god forbid… government. These are all fields which cut across conflict lines, and will needs relationships built to further regional peace.
You bring up several points mentioned in the 2005 Social Impact report on Seeds of Peace, which are important issues regarding the specific design of the program. In particular, the selection process of participants through the Israeli and Palestinian government ministries of education. While it is true that both ministries representatives can play a counteractive role during the Seeds of Program, particularly in pressuring their youth to represent official government positions, the system of government ministry’s in the selection process is actually beneficial in ways that you see as negative… Firstly, government involvement legitimizes the program, both politically, and it also legitimizes it for those youth who are participating. Psychologist, Gordon Alports “Contact Theory” says that in order to change attitudes, one of the conditions of contact with someone from an enemy group is that the contact is seen as legitimate by a higher power… too many Israeli and Palestinian encounter programs and “peace education” programs are illegitimate in the eyes of both societies, so its important for Seeds to have that legitimacy. Also, while you see it as a negative that education ministries seek youth who represent the mainstream, I see it as a huge strength and one of the things that distinguishes Seeds of Peace from many other organizations. There is no point in bringing together all the left-wing pro-peace people. In other words, there is no point in preaching to the converted.
I think there are a great deal of area’s where Seeds of Peace and other encounter programs can improve, but I don’t find it fair to criticize these programs when using unrealistic and incorrect measurements of success.
— Ethan - May 22, 03:17 AM - #