« a-Rab magazine: issue #3 is out | Main | Israel MTV comes to campus! »
Responding to Campus Battleground
By yaman | November 26, 2007
Background
Throughout the spring of 2006, students from the Israel Action Committee and Students for Justice in Palestine at UC Berkeley were filmed while organizing their activities. Many individual members of each group were interviewed by the documentarians, who had said they were making a documentary for the “America at a Crossroads” series about campus activism related to Israel and Palestine. That documentary ended up with the name “Campus Battleground,” airing tonight, Monday Nov 26, on PBS for the first time.
That spring was the first that Students for Justice in Palestine had existed on campus during my time at Cal. At the end of my first year, a group of us had decided to bring the organization back to campus. There are, of course, a few things you learn along the way, intellectually, personally, politically, practically, tactically, etc, even over the course of what is now only about a year and a half, so it is safe to say that the organization, myself included, has matured in all these ways over time. Those differences only become so clear with the ability to refer back to this taped record of the past.
In writing about this documentary, I want to be clear that I am not responding out of anger in opposition to it. I am not angry at all. I want to be clear, though, that I am not wholly comfortable with the way I or the various issues raised in the documentary have been portrayed. I don’t feel that I have been slighted or manipulated, though I do feel that the political message that this documentary advances is not in line with my own political views. I will touch more on this after laying out a few of my main objections.
The Demonization of Religion
No Palestinians
Superficial Understanding of ‘Otherness’
The Jewish-Arab Battlefield
There is a part in the film where my religious views are given a narrative akin to the following: 1) Yaman is an atheist. 2) Yaman becomes Muslim for a short time. 3) DANISH CARTOONS! 4) Yaman leaves Islam.
Of course, my own experience with Islam is rather complicated, convoluted, and unfinished, so I won’t even pretend to offer a correct summary of my experiences and related thoughts in place of what the film suggests. But I will make the following explicitly clear: the Danish cartoons had little to do with my own stated convictions regarding Islam. I feel that the film unfortunately gives the opposite impression.
I still recall the day that my taped interview occurred over the summer of 2006. I agreed to participate in this documentary because I thought it would be about issues related to Israel and Palestine. I was uncomfortable when questions were asked regarding my religious views and other personal matters, not because these are issues that I shy away from discussing or thinking about (anybody who has known me can attest to that), but because I am weary of how these issues can be used by others. Why are my thoughts on religion important in a discussion about the Israeli occupation?
Regardless, there is also something highly regrettable about being the stereotypical anti-religious, secular “Good Guy” in a film whose only characterization of the response to the Danish cartoons was a scene of angry Muslim men protesting in who knows what country. Isn’t that something to think about? You never really need to identify a location, time, or affiliation when you use a clip of angry Muslim men in some Godforsaken corner of the world, because their specific circumstances never seem to matter in a worldview that understands the world as Fundamentalist Crazies Versus Rational Humans. Those so-called fundamentalists exist outside of time, while Rational Humans exist in a narrative with an overarching theme revolving around the March of Humanity to Good Things.
While I don’t think the creators of this film had any ill intent whatsoever towards any of the individuals in the film (indeed, they were very professional and more than courteous to me on a personal level before, during, and after this film was created), I will not forget comments from the audience at the 2 screenings I went to earlier this year that indicated that somehow I was “commendable” or “admirable” because of my views on religion. While the character of Khadija is supposed to offer an alternative, positive engagement with Islam, I think it is fairly clear which set of characters the film puts forth as the protagonists, and it is not the religious ones. The “praise” I received for the film’s version of me is not something I am happy about; I never want to be “praised” for my views, least of all by people who, in praising them, besides patronizing them, prove they misunderstand them.
These reactions only confirmed my sense that I unwittingly lent my support towards a confirmation in the film–intentional or not–of the idea that “fundamentalist” Islam (and religion in general) is the root of all evil in this world. My own views are sharply opposed to this idea. In fact, I think “the root of all evils” may actually be closer to the worldview this film conveys by defining conflict in terms of Fundamentalism Versus Humanity, a definition which itself continues to inflict much suffering in the world.
In a film that purports to be about Israel and Palestine on campus, I am amazed that the Palestinian voices in the film are almost non-existent. When I agreed to be recorded for this film, I was never under the impression that I would be its main focus. I probably would have declined if I had known. How is it that the two main characters presented as “the Palestinian side” are not Palestinian? I am Syrian, and Khadija is Iraqi. I know that both Berkeley and Columbia are in no shortage of Palestinian activists who work on Palestine-related issues. And I also know that many recorded interviews were conducted with them. What happened?
This certainly is not something that is unique to this film. It is too commonly the case that Palestinians are not allowed to speak for themselves. Reports from Palestinians of abuse, or of historical injustices, are rarely validated until a newspaper like Ha’aretz or a historian like Benny Morris ends up confirming them. All too often, even activists who work in solidarity with the Palestinians end up preferring such sources themselves over Palestinian accounts. That is a serious problem, and it is unfortunate that Campus Battleground suffers from it as well, especially when I know that there were quite a number of knowledgeable, active, and passionate Palestinians who could have played the part.
Superficial Understanding of ‘Otherness’
Many members of the audience I saw the film with in Spring 2007 were fascinated that my friend Itamar and I were able to “come together” despite our “differences.” The film’s narrative seems to indicate that we had met as a result of some forums on campus and some skillful social engineering. That is not the case. Itamar and I knew each other well before the filmmakers knew that we knew each other. We did not “later” meet off-screen–we met long before we were interviewed on tape, and both of us surprised each other when we found out we were being interviewed by the same people for the same documentary. In fact, when we were asked to have a meeting on tape, Itamar and I, both uncomfortable with the proposal, mutually agreed to reject it.
As for Itamar’s own thoughts on the film, I’ll leave it to him to speak on them. From the time that I have gotten to know him in the past 2 years, I can say pretty confidently that I don’t feel the film accurately reflects his attitudes today. But–and referring back to that ever-so-Enlightened audience–I am still surprised by how fascinated people were that an Arab and a Jew were able to keep up a friendship. I think we have both received numerous “compliments” about this “achievement.” This, of course, is a reflection of ignorance people have both about Israelis and Palestinians, and about how the related conversations happen on college campuses. And the film, rather than dispel that ignorance, encourages it by presenting Itamar and I as having fostered a novel, unique relationship by “escaping” hateful, fundamentalist, and reactionary atmospheres to become what the middle-class Berkeley audience I was with classified as “Good” Arabs and Jews.
I can hardly conceive of any time it would be appropriate to refer to a college campus as a “battleground.” This sheer sensationalism has almost no grounding in reality, where students generally are more concerned with getting high grades than acting for what they believe in–if they believe in anything at all, anymore. The last thing a conversation about the Middle East needs is a reference to an academic discussion as a “battleground.” One might consider exploring whether or not that is the way most of us have come to understand the Middle East today, as a never-ending battleground. The more interesting task for me, however, is to think about how that battleground is framed in this film.
After one screening this past spring, my friend Tom Pessah asked a question to the film’s producer that was in line with my own thoughts: wouldn’t it have been much more interesting if the film makers had featured interviews with one of the many Jewish or Israeli members of Students for Justice in Palestine?
Unfortunately this documentary totally ignores those individuals, even though the makers were aware of them, and instead re-affirms an idea of the conflict in Israel and Palestine as being one of Arabs versus Jews. In this understanding, Arabs and Jews are at odds with each other because they are Arabs and Jews. This point, of course, is thoroughly connected to several of the previous ones: it is only with this understanding that Itamar and I can “redeem” ourselves by “escaping” those “crazy” and problematic backgrounds. This framing also sits quite well with the average, middle-class, moderately-liberal American who is so overwhelmed by the sheer volume of raw data coming out of the Middle East that it is easy to write everything off as being a squabble between crazy Arabs and Jews.
The problem, though, is that this neatly conceals many of the important factors that are at play in Israel and Palestine. It is certainly more interesting to look at the “exceptions” (like the Jewish and Israeli members of Students for Justice in Palestine) to that “general rule” (that Arabs and Jews are on opposing sides because they are Arabs and Jews, even if they can agree on one or two things, or have lunch together). That kind of exploration challenges the “general rule” itself and makes it possible to understand what is happening in Israel and Palestine in different ways, at the same time opening up other innovative avenues for addressing the relevant issues. Unfortunately, this inquiry becomes impossible and incomprehensible to anybody that is so attached to the paradigmatic division of Arabs and Jews from each other that they totally ignore those “exceptions,” like the film does.
Conclusion
As I mentioned earlier, it is very difficult to “oppose” this film. It is everything, I think, that skeptical, centrist Americans who know very little about either the Palestinians or Israelis and their respective supporters like to see when it comes to this polarizing issue: relatively “progressive” persons who, in the context of the film, “engage” the Other, are willing to “criticize” “both sides,” and, in the end, appear to exhibit some vaguely cynical skepticism, all within the bounds of nothing that seems too “fanatical.” Part of the reason that many people may enjoy this documentary is that what should have been its focal points (that is, the real, substantive issues surrounding Israel and Palestine), all became tangential in the film, taking a back-seat to the egos of a handful of student activists, who are by no means representative of the many people involved in the way this issue plays out on campuses across the country. I suppose that this tendency of avoiding the important topics is actually fairly characteristic of American politics, where the news media report primarily on Hillary Clinton’s hairdo and Barack Obama’s mystery primary schooling rather than actual, concrete platforms or voting records.
That, I think, is everything that is wrong not only with this documentary, but with the discussion around Israel and Palestine and politics more generally in this country. On this, I agree with Itamar’s remarks at one of the earlier screenings:
I’m very tired of talking about the conflict only in terms of my identity. There are far more important economic, social, and political issues that need to be dealt with, and what this film leaves me feeling is that the battleground is not on campus. Discussing one’s identity doesn’t do anything but make us feel good about ourselves.
Topics: Comment |
November 27th, 2007 at 1:17 am
I just finished wataching the Documentary that you were in.I have always considered myself relatively centrist. I am not an activist nor would I be one, until I can say I have all the facts.
As a Jew most ‘people’ would tend to think I am anti-Palestinian and a ‘Zioinist’. That is not the case. I have cousins who grew up in Israel(who are now in the US) and I have had friends who were Lebanese, Syrian, and Palestinian.
Your discussion, as well as Itamar’s was, I believe a very interesting lead-in to the Documentary. I am sure that you are correct, that the Documentary could have been done differently. But I suppose if I made a Documentary today, that some people, would find fault with it and point out what I may or may not have included. That will always be the case.
I am sorry I am long winded about this. It is a hard subject to answer to in a short ‘brief’. But I have to disagree with you on the “…fairly characteristic of American Politics.” statement. PBS has been an Oasis in the sea of ‘American Network garbage’. The one documentary that stands out in my mind is the last one I saw about the ‘Torture Policy’ of the US in Guantanamo and in Iraq.
I consider myself relatively well informed…and I do not get my news from the 11:00 Network News , nor even from CNN I just ‘get it’ from all different sources and likely to be just as informed or more so than the Network watchers.
I would have complemented you, but not on your identity(although I think nothing wrong with that) but on your dedication and work in making sure people on Campus and elsewhere hear your story and that of the Palestinians. But you also have to remember the way Americans ‘are’. It is their culture to be positive and to commend people. “Hey Good for You!” is a common statement.
My husband who is European, always makes jokes about Americans in that respect and about that specific comment. I am first generation and sometimes can see myself as an American ‘outside of my body’, so that I can put myself ‘outside’ and make observations.
I think your Blog is important. I do not know if Itamar has one, but I think he should have.
And finally, it appears you have an aversion to the Documentarians making a big issue of you and Itamar being friends. I can only say, I wish there were much more of that………even though I am aware of Peace groups consisting of both cultlures who are trying to change the world. It does exist, but obviously not enough or there wouldn’t
be a Studenst for Justice in Palestine and an Israel Action Committee. I suppose, bottom line is , that we need to change our Governments………wouldn’t that be great?
I had a chance to speak to Mr. Jimmy Carter about his book. I asked him wouldn’t it be a good idea to reach the children and teach them peace in the schools instead of hate.(I first praised him for trying to bring peace Politicians together). He never answered my question and just went on about the wall Israel had built. Anyway I do not trust Politicians. But unfortunately we have to rely on some of them, or we may not bring about a State for Palestine, nor peace between Israel and Palestine.
November 27th, 2007 at 1:31 am
I couldn’t agree more.
Two additional points:
1. notice how the scary images (burning caricatures) and scary music only accompany the arab activists. hmmm….
2. According to -
http://www.current.org/doc/doc0620crossroads.shtml
the film was screened as part of a series of films which include “Holy War” (”will examine modern radical Islamic groups”). a film about “how the
U.S. military has taken on new humanitarian and intelligence-gathering functions as part of the war”, another one about “following the terrorist money trail and uncovering how extremists have used legitimate Muslim political and charitable groups to finance the Jihad”, etc. etc.
… could that be the reason why they focused so much on the caricatures and on Muslim identity?
(BTW notice the big picture of Osama Bin-Laden on the series’ website)
November 27th, 2007 at 1:33 am
and this is how the film was described on the official website:
Campus Battleground
An America at a Crossroads film examining concerns that a new form of anti-Semitism may be emerging on American college campuses since 9/11. Some experts have voiced concern that student organizations and professors sympathetic with the Palestine Solidarity Movement are breaching the line between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, harshly condemning and even threatening those who disagree with them
http://www.cpb.org/programs/program.php?id=139
November 27th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I watched it last night. It was obvious that the Danish Cartoons part was overdramatized.
November 29th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
I couldn’t agree more with Itimar’s statement. There is a pathological obsession with ‘identity’ in the U.S. Difference is emphasized to the point of mutual exclusion and isolation. The reaction to Yaman’s and Itimar’s meeting is a good example; a normal friendship is contextualized as a breakthrough, as if Jews and Arabs have only a snowball’s chance in hell of ‘getting along.’
November 30th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
As Tom Pessah’s link shows, this documentary is really about (or at least was marketed to CPB as being about) “antisemitism.”
In fact, it got its initial funding under the name “Studying Hatred”, which was pitched to CPB as follows:
“will the examine if and how the 9/11 attacks have created new anti-Semitism on college campuses.”
http://www.cpb.org/programs/grantee.php?id=57
This probably explains why there was no great effort made to include Palestinian voices.
November 30th, 2007 at 7:03 pm
Tom and David, to be fair, though the original film was supposed to be framed along those lines, once it was assigned to Bill Jersey, he departed from that script to create, essentially, his own film. I am glad that he did that because the film he came up with definitely does not sink to the lows that any film following that original abstract would have gone.