New Identities, Old Boundaries: Multiplicity in the Middle East – Dr. Salim Tamari

Dr. Tamari’s explanation of the shifting of Palestinian identity was fascinating. He explained that there has been a history of plurality in the Middle East, and that based on the changing religio-political contexts of the region, and depending on who is asking the question, layers of affiliation rise and fall. Historically, local affinities (Bethlehemite, Hebronite, Jerusalemite) have been the primary identifier for people, with neighbourhood, clan, religious and family ties further differentiating or uniting people. In the 20^th century, Palestinian identity has shifted from Ottoman, to Syrian, to Arab, and to Palestinian, as political scenes and boundaries shifted, and as the need for new ideas about identity emerged. For example, the emergence of a pan-Arab identity among Palestinian refugees after 1948, when they were seeking support from and refuge in neighbouring Arab states.

Dr. Tamari remarked that it was a “sign of the times” that 20,000 people would show up in support of the reinstitution of the Ottoman Caliphate (defunct since 1923), but demonstrations in support of contemporary political figures like Mahmoud Abbas draw almost no one. This is a huge change from 1967, when themes in Palestinian political culture were secular, nationalistic and class-based.

Around the time of the British Mandate, there was unity between the Christian and Muslim communities, in opposition to Zionism. However, more recently, with the apparent failure of the peace accords with Israel, the efficacy of Palestinian nationalism as a way toward resolution has been questioned, and inter-religious competition or struggle has emerged again.

Dr. Tamari also talked about comparisons between Israel/Palestine and the situation in South Africa, but noted that he felt that a more valid and productive comparison could be drawn with the former Yugoslavia (Croatia and Bosnia). After the bulk of the conflict was over, these two countries were able to move away from territorial conflict by thinking of themselves as part of a larger whole, the European Community, with all of the economic and political implications thereof. With this larger frame of reference, leaders began to think not of how they needed to compete with each other but how they could compete on a regional level, and this became sort of a “back door solution” to what was a very bloody and traumatizing conflict. Similarly, if Israel and Palestine were able to step back from territorial conflict and see themselves as a part of the Eastern Mediterranean region, and if other regional partners were able to make suggestions or apply pressure for things like water sharing, ecological covenants and fair trade practices for goods and services, this could lead to real progress.