By Stephen Cooney

“The Future of Israel and Palestine,” was the intended debate Wednesday between Richard Himelfarb, a University associate professor of political science, and Mazin Qumsiyeh, a professor of genetics and director of Clinical Cytogenetic Services at Yale University School of Medicine, during the fifth annual Day of Dialogue, sponsored by the Center for Civic Engagement. Missing from the event was the debate itself, and along with it, the discussion of the future.

Both men presented their perspective in debate style, but Qumsiyeh seemed to talk around Himelfarb’s positions on every issue-except the walls dividing Palestinians and Israelis.

Himelfarb took the podium first and delivered a pro-Israel argument. He detailed the political make-up of Israel and the constant threat the region experiences, adding an explanation of the difficult relationship between Palestine, which he referenced detrimentally, and Israel.

“It is difficult to make peace with people who recruit teens, mothers, women as suicide bombers,” Himelfarb said.

Himelfarb said the Palestinian government rejected offers of peace made by the Israeli government, citing those offers as “exceedingly generous” and accusing Palestinians of blaming Israel for hindering peace processes. Himelfarb quoted a statement that read, “Palestinians are so busy hating that they never miss the opportunity to miss an opportunity,” regarding Palestine’s rejection of peace offers.

Qumsiyeh relied heavily on visual aids for his contribution to the debate and focused on the history of Palestine, referencing colonial thinking as the basis for Palestinian displacement. “It is classic colonial thinking that native people do not belong,” said Qumsiyeh. “Literally, Palestinians were pushed into the sea and forced to the refugee camps.” He concluded his argument with an allegation that the U.S. government makes the Israeli position possible.

Himelfarb then gave his rebuttal to Qumsiyeh’s argument, explaining the origins of the state of Israel and the idea that Jews always lived in what is now present-day Israel.

“Jews bought the lands from Palestinians,” Himelfarb said. “They did not steal them.” Himelfarb also indicated the Israeli government improved the lives of Palestinians, including those inside the refugee camps. He concluded since walls have been built that divided Israelis and Palestinians, violence has decreased within the nation.

Qumsiyeh disagreed as to the benefit of the wall dividing the groups, rebutting Himelfarb’s claim that the wall improves the quality of life. He said the wall was an instrument of division of economic classes, not violent peoples. “Walls do not provide security,” Qumsiyeh said. “My family moves around the walls with ease, with cars even.”

The future of Israeli-Palestinian relations was not as central to the debate as the title implied, only referenced briefly by Himelfarb once. The only discussion about it was brief and in response to a question from an attendee. “The future of Israeli and Palestinians relations are bleak,” Himelfarb replied, summing up the atmosphere of the debate.