What should we discuss in our Peace Café?

On June 1st we will have our Peace Café in Tel Aviv. This will be a fun evening where every table will have a discussion and our peacemakers will move from discussion to discussion.

What should we discuss? Please respond. This will enable you to participate in our first event Our conversation topics will be based on your feedback. We will continue our discussions on mepeace.org, so you will be able to participate.

Examples:
How can we create a community of peacemakers that offers hope?
How can we overcome physical barriers to create more Peace Cafés?
How can we use the internet to make peace?

What discussion topics would you suggest?

Tags: Peace Café, conversation, discuss, discussions, feedback

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Neri Bar-On on May 23, 2008 at 4:00pm

Paul,

As Peppe opinion may be controversial I think that at this thread we should focus on Important Questions we want to investigate and care about the meaning of it.

So one/two state solution may be a good question to investigate.

I think still to discuss this question we can open new thread and share our opinions but as brainstorming can can leave any one statement as it is.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul RETI on May 23, 2008 at 4:04pm

Yes and yes Neri. :-)

There is already a related thread at http://www.mepeace.org/xn/detail/661876:Comment:56911

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Yahya Merchant on May 23, 2008 at 5:45pm

Neri, talking about peace is controversial so be controversial!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Neri Bar-On on May 23, 2008 at 6:44pm

Yahya,
I'll add my controversial perspective in the Link Paul brought. do not warry I am holding many controversial prespectives;)

But her and for the Peace Cafe event it is to open and let all views and idea flow in and then we can see the picture together.

When we get into opinions, and start to investigate Peppe or other legitimacy we are getting away from the intention of this thread.

... and now I must add my post about one/two state solution here

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Yahya Merchant on May 23, 2008 at 5:44pm

This is not the place to argue your or my opinions but make suggestions as to what to discuss at the Cafe which is what I did!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul RETI on May 23, 2008 at 6:43pm

I doubt that it is wise or prudent now (at the Peace Cafe) to attempt to discuss or suggest any solutions regardless of how brilliant or insightful or well-intentioned they may be.

It seems to me Yahya, that your original language was very clear.

Several peace cafe sessions can:

1) Build relationships between people
2) Start to make comprehensive lists of the problems from the point of view of all real stakeholders.

The initial (not just first) sessions can only be a start.

For me the obvious sequence and priorities have to be:

Build people relationships
Build people relationships
Try to define where we are now (the problem)
Build people relationships
Try to define where we want to be eventually (the goal)
Build people relationships
Try to figure out how to get there without too much pain (the solution)
Build people relationships
Try to implement the solution
Assess progress. Revise as appropriate the goal and/or the solution.
Build people relationships
Try to implement the (revised) solution.
Build people relationships
Assess progress. Revise as appropriate the goal and/or the solution.
Build people relationships
Try to implement the (revised) solution.
Build people relationships
...
...
...

People relationships and definitions of most of the problems, in my view, can be the planned for outcomes of the initial few peace cafes. Aiming for more than that, in my view, would be just an impossible dream

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Yahya Merchant on May 23, 2008 at 10:05pm

Paul,
Are you going to go from Australia! I do not think I can make it from California with the cost of gas LOL. So at least we are not going to make any people relationships. I guess we should leave that for the moment for the people on the ground there.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul RETI on May 24, 2008 at 3:08am

Not this time, Yahya. $'s and time are both very significant factors. :-)

Although face to face meetings are best, one can learn a lot about other members from forums like this, simply by writing.

The internet also provides voice and even video conferencing facilities.

Forums like this are even convenient for people who do not have the time to make it (for whatever reason) to scheduled meetings even in the places where they live.

I don't have to visit the West Bank and Gaza or Sderot to learn that people are suffering and to really learn why they are suffering.

Besides, building quality relationships need lots of elapsed time. One face-to-face meeting does not build quality relationships.

I am sure though that you really know all that. And I guess that we should be really discussing this under another topic. That is Can we meet online which is at http://www.mepeace.org/forum/topic/show?id=661876%3ATopic%3A56538 .

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Yigal D. Kahana on May 22, 2008 at 9:42pm

Hi Eyal,
Here are some of the topics that come to my mind as being important:
1a) What must be done within the PA to build a Palestine in which minority and human rights will really be defended?
1b) What can and should Israel do to facilitate the process?
1c) How can/should freedom of religion be guaranteed by the PA in the future?
2) What practical projects of common interest can we undertake together? (If they're financially self-sustaining, even better)
3) Can promoting Jewish tourism to holy sites such as the Tomb of Joseph, strengthen the Palestinian economy?
4) Do Jerusalem's Arabs really want to part of the PA? What of those with Israeli citizenship?
What role does the will of the residents of a community play in deciding their political fate?
Should there be a referendum? Of Arabs and Jews together?
5) Israel and Palestine, even together, are small to be "viable, functioning" nations. As separate entities, there may not be enough space for two countries, and especially when one is violently opposed to the other's existence. If that issue of opposition must in any case be overcome for there to be real peace, is it more efficient to focus our efforts on promoting a two-state, or a one-state, solution?
6) If some ask Israel to accept its share of the responsibility for suffering of the Palestinians as a consequence of the "Naqba," it is equally fair to ask the Palestinians and other Arab countries/populations to accept their own share of the responsibility; not only for rejecting the UN partition plan and starting the war that ended in the Naqba, but also for causing the occupation of the WB to be become indefinite by declining Israel's 1968 offer of the conquered territories in return only for normalized relations and peace; as well as for the suffering and deaths of tens of thousands of Israelis, both before and since 1948.

7) Define the kind of peaceful coexistence we'd like to see, ultimately, in Israel/Palestine? What should be the "federal laws" and what left to local option?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Erik van Zuylen on May 23, 2008 at 6:35pm

Hi all, as a European student, who has also worked at a Dutch peace organization as an interim and visited Israel/Palestine last year, I'm especially interested in the role of outsiders in the conflict, both politically and on a civil society level. You are confronted with the fact that the whole world is watching. Does this impact the conflict positively or negatively?
Is it a good thing that outsiders are involved in peace activism, or should they leave this to people who actually live in the area?
If peace activists from outside can help, how?
How can the policies from outside powers be most effective towards peace?

Best,

Erik

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hiba on June 1, 2008 at 10:50am

Regarding to what happened with Donna, a peace seeker who wished to be able to attend this event, and worked on being there but she was stopped on the borders. I would like to suggest discussing the issue of to what limit a country could be allowed to violate a person's human rights under the excuse of security, why such behaviors against innocent people occurs and most of the times are not questioned, and reveals to be as a normal thing to happen, because the government is doing the best to protect its security, also what are the limits for a soldier\police on borders in the way that they treat visitors to their country, are they allowed to treat those passengers in a moody way and sometimes regarding to the place they are coming from? May be it is of their responsibility to ask some questions , but not making unnecessary comments that would make them feel humiliated.

how does all of that affect and contribute to the process of peacemaking?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul RETI on June 1, 2008 at 11:59am

It seems to me Mary that trying to build real people-to-people relationships must be more important now than any other issue. I hope that you really agree, Mary.

So it seems to me, Mary, that it is you and not others here who are "fighting the wrong fight", for now.

Donna is one of us!

Donna has been active here. Your good friend Khalid Amayreh has not been active here.

Besides, Donna does not accuse others of being Nazi. Khalid Amayreh routinely did and does, elsewhere!