SUNY Oswego recently hosted a panel discussion, “Making Sense of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict,” on March 26 in Lanigan Hall, featuring four professors. 

The panel included communication studies professors Jason Zenor and Arvind Diddi, history professor Murat Yasar and political science professor Lisa Glidden. Economics professor Elizabeth Schmitt served as moderator.

All four-panel members were allowed to give brief presentations about their expertise and how it relates to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Zenor spent his time outlining freedom of speech protections in the United States. Diddi’s presentation was centered around the ways that people and journalists get their information. Yasar gave a brief overview of the history of the region until 1948 when Israel declared independence. Glidden gave a bit more of history from 1967 until the present, while also offering a light overview of some of the international and domestic politics surrounding the conflict.

Both Glidden and Yasar stressed that this conflict is territorial, not a religious one.

“Be wary of ‘ancient hatreds’ arguments,” Glidden said.

Zenor’s presentation on freedom of speech informed attendees that the only public forum on campus was in the Hewitt Quad. Diddi provided resources to attendees for tracking the conflict in real-time.

Glidden also highlighted the structural inequality present in much of the conflict. Since Israel has been recognized as a state since it declared independence in 1948, it has had a vote in the UN, whereas the State of Palestine was only granted non-member observer status in 2012.

Glidden says that this has created a structural inequality within this conflict. Glidden also pointed out that not every player in this conflict wants a peaceful resolution, and that some actors may be able to exploit the conflict for their own gain.

Yasar gave examples of this happening throughout the history of the region, mainly with the British. He informed attendees of how the British played both the Zionist and Arab sides of the conflict to make themselves instrumental in their colonial holding.

After the presentations were given, the floor was opened to questions.

The panel discussed how to balance and find true information on social media, which is especially important because of the vital role that social media has played in Palestinian journalists sharing their reporting. Diddi noted that mainstream media is picking up on and starting to adapt to the way that social media is being used in the spread of information.

The panel also discussed the concept of statehood. Glidden said that declaring independence alone does not make a state. Instead, anyone declaring independence needs to be recognized by other states for their statehood to be worth anything. 

When asked if the conflict could be considered genocide, Glidden and Yasar both said they did not have enough information to definitively say yes or no. Both pointed out that genocide is a very specific legal term, and that neither had the evidence to make a definitive call, but both noted that the term is both political and malleable. Glidden said that the conflict can be considered an ethnic cleansing, or the forcible removal of an ethnic or religious group from an area. Diddi commented that the conflict is a humanitarian crisis and said not to get caught up in political terms such as genocide.

Before the panel wrapped up, a student accused Glidden of spreading misinformation for referring to the forcible removal of Palestinians as having “left.” Glidden agreed that using the word “left” gave a false impression about the amount of violence involved.

Photo by: Nate Sprenger