WEDO Response and Questions

I remember at the end of last semester when I attended a group meeting whose sole purpose was to watch a movie starring the orchestra lead by Daniel Barenboim and then discuss both pros and cons of the progress the movie might provide for future relations between Palestinians and Israelis. I would estimate that around 15 or so students participated in this get together to meet and discuss about the movie. I also believe if I am correct Professor Horowitz; that a guest speaker came in that was native to the region experiencing the turmoil. I can not recall her name, but she, in my opinion gave a very biased account of her experience in Israel. The movie was incredibly long, but at the end, several comments were made incorporating both my viewpoints from one speaker and the other. The woman that was from Israel argued tenaciously to defend her point that the movie representing the orchestra did not have any long lasting effects on the populations of people from both Palestinian and Israeli sides of the conflict. As she described, the outcome from the video was not effecting, in her opinion, any portion of the conflict in any positive way. Although I agreed with her on this issue, I pressed the importance of giving more valid points when I spoke. "Peace can't solve everything." It is a good first step to introducing the issue. But from what we have seen through statistics and facts, is that the Israeli government will not subdivide its region into smaller less economically deficient sectors for the creation of a new state. In fact it would be foolish to do so, unless forced under particular circumstances. I have to say, I liked the message though that Daniel Barenboim and his orchestra presented. When his best friend, Edward, died, i think it gave fire to the musicians that gave motivation and determination to get a very clear and strong point across. I believe as a side message it instilled, "we can overcome death," and grow stronger, but only if we fix what was done. By the end of the trip when all of the individuals that were part of the orchestra met up in Ramallah after extensive planning, it was clear that they were going to have the performance of a life time in front of a diverse audience that held hatred for one another. Daniel was much more than a peace keeper. He established an identity of similarity between the two groups that works to further slowly but surely, better relations amongst the two peoples. After the orchestra was finished, and a successful, safe night was behind them, cheers and crying filled the grounds where they parted ways into their own cars. This excitement I wouldn't say was fully because of the work that Daniel Barenboim created, but a result of each performer being so close with one another to the point where they may have disregarded the issue at hand and friendship became important above all else which is both a good and bad thing. I think by doing this, he strayed the group away from the main message at the end that was intended. The procedures and goal that Daniel had was important to keep in mind. It is the safest way to go about the issue, but not the most effective. It is time consuming to realize his goal and accomplish safely what needs to be done. Overall, fantastic film, but critical errors need to be pointed out.these errors include the prolonged effect of the peace process on the military establishment of Israel and how it works. I think Barenboim mentions issues with the security of Israel.