In bridging gaps, dialogue is key

Marwa Abou Dayya and Alex Fortes, Common Ground News Service -- Partners in Humanity Sanaa, Yemen

Since the events of Sept. 11, 2001, and especially since the beginning of the Iraq War in March 2003, the relationship between Arab states and the United States has been particularly contentious. As participants in Soliya Connect, a program that engages American and Arab college students in dialogue through weekly online videoconferences, we have discussed with our peers the politics, policies, and perceptions that divide these two regions.

Encouraged by our surprising agreement and driven by our often-heated debates, we have attempted to better understand the issues that spark the greatest controversy between Arab and American nations. Through examination of our own views and our understanding of our respective cultures, we have identified three major areas of disagreement: Israel-Palestine; democracy, rights, and war ethics; and media objectivity. We believe that a better understanding of these issues, with an unwavering commitment to dialogue, is a vital initial step in disentangling the Arab-American tensions so prominent today.

The most viable proposal we can make is to maintain a serious commitment to increased dialogue and interaction between the two regions. This dialogue must transcend the normal interactions of diplomacy and work to place members of the society in every discipline at a discussion table, to air perceptions and grievances and to help clear up confusions.

Programs such as Soliya are well designed to address this problem, but they do not go far enough. The United States' relationship to Israel, and implicitly, Israel's relationship to the Arab world, plays a pivotal role in American-Arab relations.

Therefore, a dialogue between Americans and Arabs must also include Israelis in order to be as productive as possible. The Lebanese government currently prohibits interaction between Lebanese citizens and Israelis.

Throughout the course, we honored this rule and did not interact with Israelis at any point in the program; however, we think that it is vital for the interests of the whole region to open up dialogue fully between Israelis, Americans, and Arabs, at least in the context of programs with goals of fostering understanding such as Soliya.

We therefore propose an effort to lobby the Lebanese government to modify this rule and exempt programs that aim at increasing understanding among the different cultures. It is also important to note that the United States, in its diversity, presents a less problematic arena in which to enhance American- Arab relations.

By fostering dialogues among Americans of various backgrounds and those of Arab descent, we can soothe internal tensions having to do with the conflict without needing to address the more entrenched divides one encounters when dealing with the Middle East.

Since the Arab relationship to America is so heavily marked by the conflict in Israel and Palestine, commitment to resolution of this conflict must be the first priority of American foreign policy in the Middle East. While under the Clinton administration the United States did make earnest attempts to mediate between the two parties in the conflict, the Bush administration has until very recently been less willing to take an active role as mediator beyond putting forth proposed terms of peace. What has replaced the emphasis on Israel and Palestine only serves to further aggravate American-Arab relations -- the war in Iraq.

While the justifications for this war were various and poorly corroborated, one of the chief ones stated by the American leadership is bringing democracy to the Middle East. As a general policy goal, this is meritorious; using war as a means to achieve it, however, is anything but.

The U.S. must instead emphasize reform from within, aiding it through trade liberalization and political support of popular liberal revolutions of the society. Achieving a democratic Middle East must be done on the terms of the people of the Middle East.

It is the burden of Arab States to cooperate in prosecuting the most destructive elements of Arab society; however, in so doing, these governments risk being perceived as pawns of the United States and losing popular legitimacy. The subtleties of these interactions and the circumstances surrounding them are extremely complex and beyond the scope of this piece to address comprehensively.

Even so, a commitment to more enlightened policies -- both at the level of international politics and at the level of cultural dialogue and exchange -- furthers our goal of cooperation and reconciliation.

We emphasize that maximizing social interaction and cultural exchange through various forms of dialogue -- whether they be sponsored by NGOs, governments, educational institutions, or legitimate elements of the mass media -- is central to decreasing the tension between American and Arab cultures.

This joint piece by a Lebanese Muslim and an American Jew is itself a testament to the compromise and consensus that can be achieved between the two; any and all steps taken to further this goal, no matter how small, are positive.