September 25, 2013

 

Imagine democracy in action: a group of Arab youth engaged in a structured debate on the pros and cons of the separation of church and state – or in this case, mosque and state.

 

At the Al-Midan Theater in Haifa on the evening of Wednesday, September 24, that is exactly what happened. With funding from the Hanns Seidel Foundation and in co-operation with Baladna, an Arab youth association, I’lam held its latest activity as part its program “Palestinian Citizens as Constituents of a Debating Society.” 

 

Young people in Arab society lack spaces where they can dispute and reflect on sensitive issues that directly impact their lives. In this case, the question at hand was whether religion should have a place in politics. Whether audience members supported or rejected this notion, they benefitted from seeing the speakers’ argue in a way backed up by logic, persuasion, and critical thinking.

 

These three skills are just a handful of the assets that program participants gain when they receive training from Najwan Berekdar, one of the leading debate experts in the Arab world, who also moderated the discussion. At the beginning of the event, she explained the rules, and throughout the evening posed ready-made and improvised questions to each team. 

 

Berekdar explained that the participants learn “how to improve and develop [their] logic, how to build arguments, and how to refute these arguments. This is what develops their critical thinking and analysis skills, and these are the most important benefits that we want to add to our community. Plus of course they gain knowledge, public speaking skills, and listening skills.”

 

In regards to the audience, Berekdar said, “For them it’s a new experience because they’re used to lectures and dialogue sessions in which there’s no equality for the speakers. We teach them to vote based on what they have actually heard, not their own opinions. They also listen to something new because we don’t just provide slogans; the speeches that political or social leaders usually make are all about big words and big sentences, but they don’t really specify the guarantees to actually achieve the success. In [our] debates, the speakers are obligated to show their strategy and to show logically how they got to this result. This is something new for the audience which indirectly teaches them about accepting the other.”

 

Audience members also commented on the impact of this event. Kosai Abo Foul, who studies political science and history in Jerusalem, said, “I think the issues I’lam raises in these debates are very important in the Arab society, especially after the Arab Spring in which Islamic parties gained a lot of power. These debates benefit the youth because they get to see two perspectives and express their opinions.”

 

Muna Abu Baker, a resource development coordinator at the Haifa-based organization Al-Mashgal: The Arab Center for Arts and Culture, served as a judge. When asked what the attendees would gain from the event, she replied, “It will give them an opportunity to know how to argue better, how to express themselves better, how to listen to the other side as well, and I think this is an important value that we still lack in the Arab society here.”

 

Programs such as these debates are indispensable to fostering open dialogue in civil society, especially that of the Palestinian community in Israel (PCI). Although strong, the PCI struggles to maintain an atmosphere of cohesive public discussion around issues that its members deal with on a daily basis. Genuine investment in the future of the region’s youth means participatory, democratic education, which I’lam continuously strives to provide.