the private universities have received a proposal based on the desire of the ‘members of parliament’ to include the topic of ‘arab-israeli conflict’ as part of the curricula.
the word ‘conflict’ is defined as a situation in which states, groups, or individuals find themselves in a particular position on a subject. the subject of the conflict may be a difference in opinion or on the idea of ownership of wealth or land, and each party seeks to use various means to assert its right.
the conflict will continue as long as the parties to the dispute have not found a satisfactory solution acceptable by both sides.
i do not think that what is happening among the palestinians and israelis can be called a struggle in the literal sense of the word, and if it does exist, it is a conflict confined among them, and the relationship of the arab states with this conflict weakens with time while recognizing the pursuit of the palestinians of what they believe is a right that has been usurped by the israelis has not weakened over the past ninety years as long as there is ‘someone’ out there who feels and believes he/she has been denied of his/her full rights.
the issue is crystal clear, but what is not clear is the decision to request the private universities in kuwait to include the topic of the ‘arab-israeli conflict’ in their curricula.
for the material to be healthy, it requires a great deal of frankness and transparency, which many people, especially those concerned with the issue, may not accept.
what will the professor reply when confronted by his students and demand explanation why or what made some arab countries to recognize israel and establish diplomatic and commercial ties with this entity? moreover, several arab countries have allowed israel to establish commercial offices and embassies on their land, although not recognized by the plo and some of the major islamic countries?
from this point of view, the subject will confuse the university which will opt to teach this subject and confusing to the student who will study it.
the conflict with israel is one thing, and imagining that there is a conflict between a ‘bloc’ of arab states or even part of it, and israel is another, which is something which cannot be accepted from the scientific point of view especially in light of the public and secret ‘contacts’ that we often hear.
take for example what was recently leaked by some sources that three iraqi delegations paid a visit to tel aviv and of israeli officials visiting arab countries, most notably the sultanate of oman.
in the absence of any arab vision or a strategy to deal with israel, normalization of ties with israel will increase, and the qatari foreign minister has stated that many arab countries choose to normalize relations with israel before the palestinian issue is put at rest and that he does not see any full normalization with israel will make a difference.
nabil sha’ath (the senior palestinian official) has also stated there are decisions that have been taken by the arab and islamic nations that normalization of ties with israel cannot happen before an agreement is reached between the disputing parties on the basis of the arab peace initiative and the decisions issued by the international community, but what is actually happening is the other way around.
and netanyahu (benjamin netanyahu is an israeli politician who has been prime minister of israel since 2009, having previously held the position from 1996 to 1999. netanyahu is also the chairman of the likud – national liberal movement) had previously visited the sultanate of oman, which is the second visit of an israeli prime minister to muscat, since yitzhak rabin visited it in 1994.
the bottom line here is to enter into a conflict with others to defend our rights is one thing and to delude or imagine something and teach it to our students in a university is completely a different thing.