The Normalization of Academics

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

The list published in Jordan of the names of participants in the Dead Sea development meetings stirred the indignation of some university administrations and academics, Palestinians in particular. Some administrations defended themselves by arguing that attending such meetings, with Israeli participation, does not constitute normalization, and that participation gives Palestinians the opportunity to defend their rights and raise their sovereignty-related issues.

The subject of normalization with the Zionists has been raised many times in conferences, articles, and the declared positions of parties and factions; it has been discussed thoroughly, and those committed to the Palestinian cause consider it impermissible conduct that must be avoided. But for the sake of clarification, I offer briefly the following:

The Definition of Normalization

The word “normalization” as currently used, within a socio-political dimension, is a translation of the English word normalization, which, if we seek greater precision, means “becoming habitual.” In short, it means turning a novel behavior — whether mental, psychological, or social — into a habit, such that it comes to appear as an inseparable part of a person’s ordinary public and private life. In this sense, the word “normalization” can be accepted as the transformation of novel or new behavior into something resembling the natural, so that it becomes an inseparable part of a person’s life. Unnatural behavior cannot become natural, but it can become habitual, as though inseparable from what is natural. That is, in the relationship with the Zionists, normalization means establishing relations that lean toward the natural pattern that governs relations among people, such that they become habitual in mutual acceptance and dealing.

In Arab heritage, however, especially in the heritage of the people of Sham, the word appears in the sense of taming, whereby novel or new behavior becomes acceptable to the master, or to the one who holds the upper hand. But the premise that normalization is a description of a relationship between master and subject remains valid — a relationship through which the subject submits himself (or is forced to submit himself) to the master, turning into a tool serving the interests of others. Means of enticement and intimidation are often used to keep the relationship in the shape the stronger party deems suitable.

If the first meaning is combined with the second, we can define normalization as a habitual relationship, or one leaning toward the natural, between two parties of unequal power, such that the weaker is subjugated to serve the interests of the stronger.

Normalization in the Zionists’ Interest

…acceptance of Israel’s existence relieves it of the anxiety of disappearance, and feeds into the logic of others defending its existence and continuity, and assures it that the Arabs will not mobilize ancient history to shape their present conduct, so that the past turns into mere memories with no way of intervening in the present or the future.

Psychological Softening

Many are those who say that, in their meetings with the Zionists, whether through international institutions or otherwise, they work hard to affirm Palestinian rights, and that their presence in such activities serves the Palestinian interest. Here I note that the charge of treason is not automatic, and no one claims that everyone who approaches the Israelis is careless with Palestinian rights. On the contrary, there is confidence that most Palestinians try to confront the Israelis and expose the practices of the occupation. But the matter, in truth, is far removed from this, because normalization has to do with gradually softening the Arab psyche so that it accepts the Zionists and comes to regard Israel as an inseparable part of the region.

To illustrate, I mention America’s insistence on the necessity of Syria’s foreign minister giving an interview to Israeli television, so that Syria might prove it was serious about the path of peace with Israel. Syria yielded to the demand, knowing full well that the aim was media normalization, not the extraction of a political concession. Normalization, in the end, comes bundled with concession. The foreign minister repeated Syria’s positions on the Zionist screen without conceding anything, but he was aware that the concession lay precisely in giving the interview, which had a great psychological impact on Syrians and on all Arabs. Media normalization, by the way, is widespread in Palestine.

We know full well what our young men and women do when they go out on normalization trips under foreign sponsorship. They clash with the Zionists, but this is only the first step toward taming. We clash today with our hands, tomorrow with words… and the day after with cordiality. Psychological softening is gradual and does not happen all at once. This applies to scientific activities as well. For this reason, a pressure group was established, led by a woman working at Birzeit University, to stand against academic normalization, and more than 500 Palestinian academics from all over the world now belong to it.

There is a difference between academic normalization and drawing on the scholarly knowledge of others, the enemy included. It is our duty to seek scientific truth in the various fields of life, even if the enemy is its source; but those scholarly activities that put me together with him in a restaurant, a lounge, or the like are not to be classified as a search for truth, but rather as the subjugation of the Palestinian people.

Sovereignty:

In political science, there is no such thing as theoretical sovereignty. There is only realized sovereignty, and it is relative, not absolute. No state possesses absolute sovereignty. But how can I defend sovereign rights at a Dead Sea conference when I, as a Palestinian, am not even able to sit on its shore? I must first achieve sovereignty, and only then can I say that I am defending it. In other words, what is required of me is a different path altogether — the path of achieving sovereignty, not attending conferences with Israelis to affirm a sovereignty that does not exist. And if the Europeans and the United Nations genuinely cared about Palestinian sovereignty over part of the Dead Sea, the path would not be the path of normalization.

For this reason, talk of defending sovereignty remains a piece of political sophistry meant to justify political conduct, and it is entirely inconsistent with any scientific or logical argument. Had I been in the position of a university official, I would not have raised this subject in this manner, so as not to place myself in an embarrassing scholarly position.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “تطبيع الأكاديميين” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.