At Frisch, we are still determining a specific model for presenting the issues to our students this coming September. Still, regardless of which approach we take, we will certainly address the inevitable question of how does the Palestinian attempt to achieve statehood through the UN differ from Israel's in 1948. I think the most important factor to stress is that by resorting to a UN vote, the Palestinians are actually circumventing the peace process. The Israeli government has stated repeatedly since Oslo that it is in favor of creating an independent Palestinian state. Both Israel and the Palestinians agreed that it would work towards this goal via direct negotiations. The fact that the Palestinians are now bypassing working with Israel by unilaterally approaching the UN indicates that they are now ignoring the peace process. This is very different than the vote in the UN General Assembly in 1948. In 1948, the UN proposed to set up two independent states: one Jewish and one Arab. Had the Arabs accepted the initial partition plan, then there would have been two states living side-by-side in peace (in theory, at least). The Arabs rejected the partition plan and history took its course. As is very often the case when discussing Israel, it is important for us as educators to stress the historical context in order for our students to understand the deeper differences between situations that might appear similar at face value.
I would love to hear any other ideas on this point or any of the other issues that Rabbi Goldmintz has raised.
All the best,
Rabbi David Sher
The Frisch School
