Loyola Holds Peace Talk For a Two-State Solution, Students Protest Outside

Peace, Justice and Conflict Studies, Global Studies and the Departments of Theology and Modern Languages and Literature held “Peacebuilding in a Time of War: Holding Hope Alive for Two Peoples” at 6 p.m. in Cuneo Hall April 10 to discuss a two-state solution to the War in Gaza.

According to the three speakers, including two Palestinian refugees and one Israeli woman, a two-state solution would grant land to both Palestine and Israel.

Chief Field Officer of the Peaceworks Foundation Ezzeldeen Masri called Associate Professor of Theology William French to ask if he could organize an event to discuss the topic. After speaking with several departments, French was able to set up the forum.

“Go in with sympathy, go in with skepticism,” French said to the room before giving the floor to the three speakers for their introductions.

As the event began, five pro-Palestine student protestors chanted outside the walls of the Cuneo classroom.

One of the students, who asked to remain anonymous, said the main goal of their demonstration was to protest the support of a two-state solution. 

“We fundamentally disagree with the premise of a two-state solution,” the student said. “It is mostly used as a way to legitimize genocide.”

Another student, who also asked to remain anonymous, added the group was trying to test the limits of university regulations on student protests. The students were assembled for about 15 minutes before being asked to leave by Campus Safety.

“There’s a lot of depression and fear on campuses and there’s been a lot there,” the student said. “A lot of people are scared to protest. And while this demonstration was small, we still felt like it was important to show up and show Loyola that we’re not going to stop talking about Palestine.”

Masri and journalist Ashraf Ajrami are Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. Both said they’ve lost loved ones in the conflict. 

“That’s why we promote a two-state solution, because we want to stop the bloodshed between the Palestinians and Israelis, between the Jews and the Arabs,” Masri said. “We need to negotiate for coexistence.”

The Peaceworks Foundation aims to establish lasting peace for Israelis and Palestinians. Since returning to the U.S., Masri said he’s worked on Loyola’s Lake Shore Campus to promote coexistence and promote an “appreciated” solution.

Masri returned to Israel to fight for the Palestine Liberation Organization before being arrested by the Israeli army, and spent his time as a journalist writing about the Israel-Palestine conflict.

The Israel-Palestine conflict has been part of speaker Ayala Brilliant’s life since she was born in the late 1970s, before the Abraham Accords were signed. Growing up as a peace activist whose parents took her to demonstrations and rallies, she said she believes in the idea peace is achievable through the formation of the right kind of government.

“If I look back, when I was 18, standing there at a peace rally, I felt hope in the air,” Brilliant said. “And I feel it now. There is a vast majority of people supporting peace.”

Brilliant concluded her introduction by criticizing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s concept of conflict management regarding the war.

“It’s the idea that we can give money to Hamas and that the conflict is manageable — this burst in our faces,” Brilliant said. “The concept that failed is the conflict management one, not the concept that one day we can create an agreement and live together.

French then opened the room to discussion, kicking off the Q&A session with his own question.

“If Americans are concerned about [the conflict], and agree fully with you, what are the buttons we can push in this country?” French said. “Who do we call — J Street, the Israeli Embassy? How do we make our feelings felt in Washington, to our senators, congresspeople and the administration?”

Brilliant responded first by emphasizing the diverse opinions she said are held within Israel.

“I want senators to know that the government officials who come and host only one position about Israel — the internal discourse in Israel is actually more diverse, and I want them to listen to other voices, like J Street, of course,” Brilliant said. “I want them to know it was not only one voice.”

J Street is a nonprofit organization which aims to “organize pro-Israel, pro-peace, pro-democracy Americans” to secure Israel as a democratic homeland for the Jewish people.

Ajrami criticized the U.S. government for its role in the conflict.

“The American administration — the previous one and the current one — forgot totally the values of the American people,” Ajrami said. “The international law, the human rights — they destroyed these values by their policies. We want them to hear us, to listen to the call of the Palestinians and the Israelis, the people, the innocent people who are killed by the Israeli-American weapons, the American bombs.”

The first question posed by a student audience member asked how the speakers honored their lost loved ones.

After around 20 seconds of silence, Ajrami began to answer. He noted the difficulty of the question, as death and injury are everyday issues for Palestinians. He said he’s tried many times to help people in the Gaza Strip by providing humanitarian assistance and delivering shipments. Still, he said, it’s not enough.

A second student questioned what a two-state solution would entail with land partition.

The speakers continuously affirmed their commitment to a two-state solution, and the same student added on to their question, wondering whether zionists would be willing to give back land.

The consensus among the speakers was a reminder of suffering on both sides of the conflict due to the Israeli government’s policies.

Another student questioned how two states with a long history of hatred could live mutually and peacefully. 

Ajrami responded by making examples out of the historical conflicts between France and Egypt and between Vietnam and the U.S.

“When we think of peace, we think of peace with our enemy,” he said. “Sometimes we hate our enemy. But I think after everything, it’s positive. We can have a normal relationship. We can have cooperation.”

A fourth student asked if the speakers considered Israel’s actions in Gaza acts of genocide.

Ajrami said he personally believes Israel’s actions to be genocidal, but that only an official body can deem it a genocide.

The discussion then moved into the university’s purported role in supporting the conflict. 

A student expressed their frustration with the administration suppressing student protests, and asked whether actions like suppressing awareness on Loyola’s campus contributed to a two-state solution.

Loyola spokespersons didn’t respond to The Phoenix’s requests for comment.

Before answering, Ajrami explained his background as a Palestinian born under occupation, who was assaulted by Israelis many times for protesting.

“What I want to see from American students protesting are slogans that are doable,” Ajrami said. “Things that can ring in D.C., that heed the president and congress. When you adopt slogans that are racist, when you adopt slogans that exclude people, when you adopt slogans that are damaging, that doesn’t help me and the military occupation.”

Ajrami continued to talk about the importance of sending the right message during protests.

A final student questioned how they were supposed to trust a two-state solution when the recent ceasefire deal was quickly broken.

After agreeing to a ceasefire deal in January, Netanyahu pulled out of the deal and launched a wave of missile strikes across the Gaza Strip March 18, The Associated Press reported.

“As a Palestinian, I would love for my mom and my uncles to be able to go back to suffer and live and to practice the right of return,” Ajrami said. “But I am also a pragmatic Palestinian who studied politics, and I know the balance of power, and I know as a Palestinian what I can get and what I cannot get.”

Several students in the back of the room began to raise their voices and expressed frustrations with Ajrami specifically.

Ajrami’s response was capped by a summary of his stance regarding a solution to the conflict.

“We should practice our national rights, we should save the lives of our people,” Ajrami said. “We should live in normal conditions. After that, we don’t know what will happen. I believe that after establishing an independent Palestinian state, the connection between Israel and Palestine will be totally different. Maybe we will go to confederation with Israel and Jordan as one solution, maybe we would go to a one state solution after that.”

French called time, and laid out a holistic overview of the speakers’ responses.

“I’d like to make an observation that it’s often assumed that a two-state solution, ‘Well they’re the moderates and they’re settling,’” French said. “But you heard the visceral passion that lies behind this so-called moderate position, because it’s realistic, it’s pragmatic.”

Loyola’s Muslim chaplain Omer Mozzafar took the podium after French to give constructive comments on the talk based on the notes he took.

Addressing the speakers on the topic of characterizing the conflict, Mozzafar made sure to define the word his students in the audience were looking for.

“The point that you’re making is that genocide is an official term, right?” he said. “And as an official term, the body that would recognize the term is what you’re referring to. What they need to hear is that it’s an extermination.”

Following the event, students discussed their thoughts. Fourth-year statistics major Olivia Powell and fifth-year forensic science major Hailey Fejeran both said they came at the invitation of their friend, fourth-year biology major V Viswanathan. Powell and Fejeran both said they wanted to see different points of views.

Viswanathan said they wanted to observe the event because it covered a controversial topic and didn’t collaborate with student Palestinian groups on campus.

“I came here to see if this was a conversation space, and honestly I can’t say that it was,” Viswanathan said. 

Viswanathan cited the “censorship” of students in the room. Behind the row Viswanathan sat in, they said the students were told they were being disruptive by an administrator — the same group who raised their voices to ask Ajrami questions about his stance. Members of this group declined requests for interviews.

Regardless, Viswanathan said they thought it was important to involve Loyola students in conversations about the Israel-Palestine conflict.