It has generally been perceived in Israel that people from
underprivileged social backgrounds are often more opposed to peace
than the well established. Indeed, looking at Beit Ham (Hebrew for
"warm house"), an organization for youth in underprivileged
neighborhoods of West Jerusalem, one notices that most of its youth
have been rather disinclined towards peace. This article is the
result of a series of discussions with psychologist Henry Cohen
Solal, cofounder and president of Beit Ham.
Beit Ham comprises seven different clubs located in the poor
neighborhoods of Jerusalem, where 400 young people gather. The
youth come from different socioeconomic backgrounds, but all are
facing problems of drugs, violence, social integration or broken
homes. Some of these clubs specialize in particular activities and
the youth can choose between arts, music, theater, and sports;
others conduct more general activities. Also included in the
program are meetings with psychologists, specialized educators and
support groups, which help the young people cope with the problems
they face in daily life.
These activities are not run by the staff alone: whenever possible
the youth accept full responsibility for them, as befits a
democratic environment in which young people learn responsibility
and leadership skills. Indeed, self-management is emphasized to the
extent that the youth sometimes take part in budget and building
plans. The wide range of extracurricular activities, combined with
peer support and professional assistance, is a formula that has
proven so successful that the demand to open new centers is
constantly on the rise. In September 1999, a new center debuted in
Tel Aviv, where the demand is increasing; the same goes for the
southern development towns.
Attitudes to Arabs
The youth of Beit Ham (90% Jewish) can, in a sense, be viewed as a
microcosm of that sector of underprivileged youth in Israel. All
the Jewish youth are of Sephardi (Oriental) origin. These young
people have faced problems with their families and with their
integration into society. Most have a negative perception of Arabs,
in general, and of Palestinians, in particular, and are highly
skeptical about peace. This, which is considered a common attitude,
has several possible explanations:
* The underprivileged Sephardi youth tend to distance themselves
from Arabs in a more radical way than most Ashkenazim (Jews of
Western origin). Many express this distinction through rejection,
by a need to distinguish themselves from the Arabs. Unlike the
Ashkenazim, Sephardim and Arabs both come from Semitic backgrounds.
Underprivileged Sephardi youth subdue the Arab within themselves in
order to prove that they are not their country's enemy. Hence the
importance for them of drawing a clear barrier between Arabs and
themselves. The only domains in which they relax and do not erect
such a border are food, dance and music.
* For some of the underprivileged youth, violence is often a mode
of expression or a way of attracting society's attention, and it is
to a certain extent a way of life. Therefore, peace (the opposite
of violence), is a threat of social death. It is not violence that
frightens these youth, but to be rejected and discarded by society.
Violence reminds society about the very existence of peripheral
youth. Some of the underprivileged youth regard it as less grave to
die, or to be hurt, than to die socially. Therefore, violence is
often a solution and peace is seen as a danger. Furthermore, peace
does not provide the young people with the possibility of
transferring their pain, hatred and suffering elsewhere. Violence
does.
* Underprivileged youth need a scapegoat and Palestinians are the
perfect victim. Since these youngsters are constantly rebelling
against their society and are reprimanded for their misbehavior,
they need to throw back at someone those very screams so often
directed towards them. These difficulties are further exacerbated
for the youth by the challenges that go along with their particular
stage in life. Childhood can be an easier period of life to deal
with one's anger as, at this age, there are several objects on
which to transfer hatred (such as dolls, toys, etc.). For adults,
items like cars and mailboxes or even human beings might become the
objects of violence. A target is needed for returning the
humiliation that they perpetually absorb. Palestinians are the
perfect subjects onto whom to transfer their feeling of rejection.
To the Palestinians they can say: "I am home and you are not,"
though, in fact, they themselves do not feel accepted and suffer in
their own lives from not feeling at home anywhere.
* In the eyes of these youth, peace tends to be viewed as the
aspiration of the elite. They associate peace with the left wing
and with Ashkenazi goals. Most suffered, or witnessed their family
and others suffering discrimination at the hands of the Ashkenazi
elite. They believe that, since the early years of the State of
Israel, immigrants of Sephardi origin have been relegated to the
status of an underclass by the governing Ashkenazi elite. Many of
the Sephardi youth see a correlation between their poor
neighborhoods of today and the downtrodden immigration camps of the
1950s. They attribute their present poor socioeconomic situation
and the lack of access to power, to the suffering of their parents
and grandparents and the failure, in the past, of Ashkenazi Zionist
society to absorb them as equals. Because of this historical
prejudice, their association of the Ashkenazim with peace
automatically negates the subject of peace for them.
Rabin's Death - A Turning Point
Though one should be wary of generalizations, it can be said that
the death of Yitzhak Rabin was a turning point in some
underprivileged youths' perception of peace. Youth in the Beit Ham
club located in the center of Jerusalem and catering to a varied
population, live in a violent world where they are at one and the
same time victims and perpetrators of violence. Prime minister
Rabin's death transformed his image to that of a victim. The very
fact that Rabin, who had been adopted by his peers as a role model,
faced the most extreme form of violence, led to their acceptance of
him by many underprivileged youngsters. With his death, Rabin, the
man of peace, became one of them: a person facing violence.
For these youth, Rabin's death not only changed his image, but
simultaneously transformed the conception of peace as a symbol.
Before Rabin's murder, peace was unacceptable to many, and violence
was one of the only modes of expression. The story of Rabin is that
of a soldier who chose the peace camp and died because of his
choice. As a soldier, he survived great dangers, and it was only
after laying down his arms and beginning the battle for peace, that
he was killed. One might think this would push these youth even
farther away from peace. On the contrary, Rabin's death transformed
the territory of peace into a territory of battle. Peace was no
longer perceived as giving up the fight. Instead of being a synonym
for social death, representing the end of the revolt against the
Establishment - peace becomes a perilous and heroic endeavor. For
underprivileged youth, often playing with life and death through
drugs and violent games, suddenly peace was no longer associated
with weakness and it began to look more attractive.
Facing New Preoccupations
Recent changes in the traditional path of teenagers in Israeli
society (and in the world) are also a contributing factor to the
new relationship youth have with peace, and to their perception of
Palestinians. Teenagers try to build their own relationship with
society. They strive to break the parental shield that protects
them, searching for bridges to forge their own way forward. But
today, many of the traditional values such as sexual identity, work
and ideology have crumbled; these developments have complicated the
situation of the youth, compelling them to redefine their place
within a changing social reality. Peace, Zionism, and the fight
against external enemies are no longer a major preoccupation of the
youth today. Youth in general, and underprivileged youth in
particular, are facing different preoccupations in the new
post-modern world.
One of the traditional bridges helping the youth build their own
connection with the world is their relationship with the opposite
sex. However, the new status of women and the danger of AIDS have
complicated the matter. Neither can the youth assert its identity
through work, because the fear of unemployment among the poorly
educated is growing.
Belonging to a national group is another traditional bridge in
transformation, but patriotism is becoming an archaic concept and
the era of ideology is over. The new era focuses on individualism,
capitalism and consumerism. As the youth of today follow this new
trend, it diverts interest from the Palestinian problem, the peace
process and traditional reliance on a strong identity in a powerful
country.
In addition, the propagation of a global culture tends to narrow
differences between groups. Common ground arises between
Palestinians and Israelis, transforming the "enemy" into a person
with similar interests and tastes. Beit Ham's recent encounter in
Brussels between Israeli and Palestinian youth and adults is a good
example of the influence of global culture in the perception of the
Other. In the first days of the encounter, traditional methods of
debates and discussions attempted to bring the youth together, but
it wasn't until the idea of building a virtual state on the
Internet was suggested that they really began to come together and
work as partners. It was new technology and the concept gleaned
from the Internet that they could build a new life, which gave them
the enthusiasm to interact.
The changes in underprivileged youths' perception of Arabs is also
the result of more mobility and physical interaction than in the
past. For example, when Beit Ham opened a club in downtown
Jerusalem, several educators noticed that when the youth visited
areas frequented by both Arabs and Jews, this had an impact on some
who had not previously had the opportunity to leave their
neighborhood. Today's modern youth have discovered that they share
many common interests with Arabs, such as music, clothes, movies,
etc. Realizing that such similarities exist often leads to a
process of humanization of the enemy, and to the breaking down of
stereotypes that these youth have had in their perception of
Arabs.
Downtown Beit Ham is a good example of the way in which diversity
and cultural exposure can help to change perceptions between
underprivileged youth and Palestinians. Indeed, this is the club in
which youth have the most moderate views, and in which diversity in
terms of gender, ethnic and social origin is more pronounced. In
the last few years, in order to change the perception of its youth
towards their so-called "enemy," Beit Ham has organized a number of
encounters with Palestinians.
Promoting Trust
The latest encounter, called "The Village of Tolerance," was held
in July 1999 at Giv'at Haviva, the Kibbutz Artzi seminar center,
under the auspices of the French Ministry of Education and Sport.
French, Palestinian and Israeli underprivileged youth, as well as
new immigrants, met for a week in an attempt to bring them together
through music, drama, and art. These modes of communication
revealed themselves as the most successful in promoting trust
between formerly skeptical young Israelis and Palestinians. Today,
as a result of these encounters, a joint music band has been
created to tour Europe as a demonstration of the success of
cross-cultural exposure and of the fostering of common
interests.
The experience of the Beit Ham centers shows that underprivileged
youth, although initially more reluctant to favor peace than
mainstream youth, are moderating their views. In the rapidly
changing political climate in the Middle East, the global culture
trend also makes the youth of today more individualistic. However,
this is not, as some observers might think, an obstacle to
peace-building. Rather than changing yesterday's active citizens
into apathetic subjects, it is moderating the views of formerly
more reluctant sections of Israeli society, and it is capable of
bringing together - around shared interests - groups that yesterday
had nothing in common.