2008 Mary T. Hall Seminar Report
By Angela Lee
Featured in the Fall 2008 issue
On July 10th, 2008, members of the United Nations Association of Greater St. Louis gathered to attend the annual Mary T. Hall Seminar on the United Nations and the Middle East. The Mary T. Hall Seminar was founded to commemorate and honor the life and work of longtime friend and member of the UNA, Mary T. Hall. In attendance at this year’s seminar was Mary T. Hall’s son, Fred Tompkins. The seminar focused on Israel and presenter Robert A. Cohn, Editor-in-Chief Emeritus of The St. Louis Jewish Light, spoke on the history of conflict in the Middle East and the effects and nature of the United Nation’s involvement. Respondent Repps Hudson, Chair of the Department of Communications of the University College at Washington University in St. Louis, then offered his own knowledge, wisdom, and expertise to serve as the opposition, and expressed his differing views. Mediator John-Robert Leguey-Feilleux, Professor of Political Science at St. Louis University, gave his remarks and opened the floor to the members for a question and answer dialogue.
Bob Cohn began by providing a historical background of the situation in the Middle East, touching on the particular role that the United Nations has played. The Middle East is comprised of Arab states who comprise of 22 members of the Arab League, non-Arab states such as Israel and Iran, and various non-state actors such as Hamas and the Hezbollah. The U.N. plays a large role in in Middle Eastern Affairs and what was once the “cradle of civilization.” The the Middle East has gone through six major wars, and the United Nations has intervened in all of them by sending peacekeepers, organizing ceasefires and armistices. Recently, Israel celebrated the 60th anniversary of its declaration of independence and two competing narratives come into play. Israel no doubt sees this as crowning evidence of the persistence and survival of its state, despite still being surrounded by sites and groups committed to its destruction, thus something to rejoice. Palestinians would see this as a commemoration of national catastrophe, since the declaration of independence has resulted in the death or exile of over 500,000 Palestinians.
Repps Hudson disagrees about the importance of the U.N., especially in regards to the conflict in the Middle East. He points out that in his experience as a visiting journalist, Israelis have little love for the U.N. Most do not trust the United Nations, in part because they do not have a seat on the Security Council and in part because of a general sense that the U.N. is against Israel. In his own travels to Israel, he has seen how the U.N. was set to monitor traffic in south Lebanon and proved to be ineffective. In his view, the U.N. may facilitate peace after installation of a bilateral treaty, but often fails to bring about long lasting peace. Although the U.N. blesses existing peace, it fails to stop terrorism, for example, or monitor Palestinian education.
Mediator John-Robert argued that we must not be idealists and have unrealistic expectations of the U.N. Many people do, and as a result will blame the U.N. for failures they would not otherwise even think of blaming state governments. Problems are rarely solved by simply granting independence or forming new countries. There needs to be a desire to change from within the country itself, action taking place on both a national and grassroots level. As such, the U.N. can only do so much and needs the cooperation from individual countries and their people. One thing the U.N. does do very well is promote the idea of diplomacy. The U.N. has had quite a number of successes, although people are more likely to remember its failures. That is why people remember how it failed in Darfur more than how it succeeded in Cambodia.
Finally, a recurring theme throughout the discussion of the history of the Middle Eastern conflict has been the importance of timing. Agreements with the exact same terms have been rejected at one point in history, while accepted at another time because of the courage and will of leaders involved and because of recent occurrences. Groups that have recently been soundly defeated may decline to negotiate until they have had their “revenge” and “redeemed” their honor. As such, the situation in the Middle East is not a simple problem that can be resolved with one perfect solution. Rather, it is a complex situation with a rich context that is necessary to grasp before even attempting to think on a path forward.
