Spaces for Dialogue in a Segregated Landscape: A Study on the Current Joint Efforts for Peace in the Israeli‐Palestinian Conflict

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21169
• Published date: 01 August 2016
• Date: 01 August 2016

C R Q, vol. 34, no. 1, Fall 2016 57

© 2016 Association for Confl ict Resolution and Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/crq.21169

Spaces for Dialogue in a Segregated Landscape:

AStudy on the Current Joint E orts for Peace

in the Israeli-Palestinian Con ict

Silvia Hassouna

 e construction of the fence barrier between Israel and the West Bank

has progressively eroded spaces for dialogue between Palestinians and

Israelis. Mobility restrictions are a crucial aspect of the confl ict as well

as a serious constraint to peace initiatives in the region.  erefore, the

research investigates the impact of the wall and consequent mobility

restrictions on the creation and maintenance of spaces for dialogue by

local civil society organizations (CSOs), specifi cally focusing on the work

of Israeli-Palestinian joint organizations.  e research is grounded on

qualitative interviews with members of local NGOs collected during a

two-month fi eldwork in Jerusalem.

S ince the beginning of the Israeli-Palestinian confl ict, territorial bound-

aries have been contested and continuously reshaped.  e construc-

tion of the separation wall, which started in 2002, has progressively eroded

spaces for encounter and dialogue between Palestinians and Israelis. As

I argue in this article, the wall exacerbated the confl ict and contributed

to the emergence of a segregated landscape (Khamaisi 2007b ; Salem and

Kaufman 2006 ; Sorkin 2004 ). In reaction to the increasing disruption of

joint endeavors during the second Palestinian uprising, known as the sec-

ond Intifada, two opposed positions on how peace should be achieved have

risen among civil society organizations (CSOs): the “antinormalization”

framework and the “partner on the other side” framework.

 e antinormalization movement is achieving increasing consensus

among the Palestinians as a result of the stagnating political situation (Bara-

kat and Goldenblatt 2012 ). It is challenging the dialogue-based approach

58 HASSOUNA

C R Q • DOI: 10.1002/crq

aimed at promoting cooperation between the two sides, holding that joint

activities serve to normalize the confl ict. In light of the criticisms posed

by the antinormalization paradigm, this study investigates whether joint

activities can bring major steps toward peace in spite of the lack of free

movement within the region. In fact, policies engendering segregation are

weakening the positive impact of dialogue-based activities and are ulti-

mately impeding the achievement of common ground (Hermann 2006 ).

 is article also investigates how geography and structures of sepa-

ration aff ect civil society ’ s cooperation across the divide by focusing on

the “geographical expression of inequality” (Smith 2000 , 3). Space plays

a central role in the analysis of complex geopolitical contexts and is cen-

tral to the future of Palestine and Israel (Calame and Charlesworth 2009 ).

Concretely, geographical barriers determine the quality and frequency of

spatial interactions and contacts among people on a daily basis (Gaffi kin,

Mceldowney, and Sterret 2010 ; Khamaisi 2007a ).

 e study is based on two perspectives that are deeply interconnected:

one related to the role of collective narratives in shaping the confl ict, the

other related to the spatial dimension and development of spatial identities

in the confl ict (Kaplan 2000 ; Paasi 1997 ).  e literature on dialogue in

confl ict resolution has generally overlooked the importance of spatial plan-

ning in contested spaces.  erefore, the research question that informs the

study is this: How does the separation wall aff ect the creation and main-

tenance of spaces for dialogue between Palestinians and Israelis by local

CSOs?  e research answers the following subquestions:

1. What are the main challenges to the work of joint organizations in

Jerusalem?

2. What strategies were put in place by the joint organizations to coun-

ter the increasing distance among people?

3. Are spaces for dialogue a feasible tool to overcome physical and social

barriers, and bring major changes toward peace?

 e fi ndings are the result of qualitative research conducted in Jerusa-

lem in April and May 2015 and can improve the work of practitioners in

the peace camp.  e work included ten qualitative interviews with mem-

bers of local nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and complementing

fi eld studies drawing on participant observation and the analysis of offi ce

documents.  e scope of the study is limited to Jerusalem and comprises

the main urban centers of the West Bank. Due to constraints ascribable to