|
Once again a top spokesperson for Sharon has accused the Palestinian Authority of teaching hate anfd violence to its children: on CNN this evening. Here is a detailed study that refutes that claim and puts it into a realistic perspective.
ABSTRACT OF STUDY ON PALESTINIAN TEXTBOOKS:
Prof. Nathan Brown
George Washington University
November 2001
For Complete Study, see:
Democracy, History, and the Contest over the Palestinian Curriculum
A study by Prof. Nathan Brown, Georgetown University
In 1999 and 2000, I conducted research on the establishment of the new Palestinian curriculum by collecting documents, textbooks, and interviewing Palestinian educators. Since that time, I have continued the research by surveying new textbooks and following discussions of educational issues by Palestinian educators. This research was supported by a Fulbright grant through the United States-Israel Educational Foundation (USIEF) and another grant from the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). The conclusions of the research are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views either of USIEF or USIP.
My research—and the attached paper—focus primarily on the role of democracy in the new curriculum. Nevertheless, I could not ignore the international controversy surrounding Palestinian textbooks and the many claims that they incite violence and racial hatred. I was therefore surprised to find books that were far less incendiary than portrayed; most were perfectly innocuous.
Most accusations against the books are based on reports from the 'Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace' (CMIP). Although that organization presents reports that are tendentious and misleading, few independent reviews have been conducted. Therefore CMIP reports--which seek to obscure rather than highlight the very significant changes that have been made--are not frequently challenged. I hope that my own review of Palestinian textbooks can assist those interested in a more impartial assessment.
General Background
Upon assuming responsibility over Palestinian education in 1994, the Palestinian Authority (PA) restored the Jordanian and Egyptian curriculum in their entirety as an interim measure. This included the use of books that contained sharply anti-Israeli and even anti-Semitic material. It is based on these books that the strongest charges have been levied. Criticisms of that decision are fair, but must be viewed in conjunction with the following facts:
* The PA determined from the beginning to replace these books and formed a curriculum development center to draft a new set of books. This decision came not as a response to international pressure but instead was a Palestinian initiative (though some international funding was available). The plan developed by that center has proceeded according to schedule.
* The PA issued a series of National Education books for grades 1-6 to supplement the Egyptian and Jordanian books while the new books were being written. Those books were devoid of any anti-Semitic or anti-Israeli material.
* Oddly, Israel allowed the offensive Jordanian books to be used in the East Jerusalem schools but barred the innocuous PA-authored books, probably fearful that use of the PA books would be an implicit recognition of sovereignty.
* The new curriculum is now going into effect. The first and sixth grade textbooks were introduced in 2000. The second and seventh grade books were introduced in 2001. Books for the remaining grades will be introduced two at a time until the entire school system has switched over.
In short, the PA should be credited with removing racist and anti-Semitic material from the curriculum, not for maintaining it. And international assistance has supported replacement of the offensive material, not its composition.
More specific comments on the new (2000 and 2001) books:
* History
The Palestinian books strive to create a strong sense of Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim identity in students. This dominates their treatment of history. Thus, they concentrate on trying to demonstrate a continuing Arab presence in Palestine. Though they do not deny a Jewish presence, they do not dwell on it. In Islamic education, the books have to confront Muslim-Jewish conflicts (in the early days of Islam) and Muslim-Christian conflicts (during the Crusades). The books clearly are partial to Muslims in both instances. But they also clearly support peaceful relations (for instance, by lauding Saladin for insisting that people of all faiths should have access to Jerusalem). The books do not treat Jewish history in any comprehensive manner, positively or negatively.
* Present
Perhaps the most difficult issue is how to present Palestine in the present, since almost all matters (statehood, borders, Israeli settlements) remain unresolved. The books deliver no consistent message. Sometimes they seek to avoid the subject (for instance, a group of schoolchildren takes a trip from Gaza to Jerusalem; the books make no mention of the fact that checkpoints and closure make such a school trip impossible). Sometimes they convey the Palestinian national consensus (that Jerusalem must be their capital, that Israeli settlements harm Palestinians) while bypassing other issues. In general, they are base their presentation on an implicit distinction between 'geographic and historic' Palestine and 'political' Palestine. Thus they sometimes discuss (generally briefly) some areas within Israel's 1967 borders. But each book also contains a foreword describing the West Bank and Gaza as 'the two parts of the homeland.' In short, political realities are confusing and difficult for educators to describe to children. It would be unfair to describe such confused treatment as 'delegitimization of Israel.'
* Violence
Similarly, the books do not encourage violence. They do urge students to be willing to make self-sacrifice for the religion or nation (as most schoolbooks do), but they do not urge violence in that regard. One book does contain a poem praising the children who threw stones in the first intifada, but at the same time praises Gandhi at some length for non-violence.
Conclusion
The efforts to discredit Palestinian textbooks have already caused some damage. Many leading Palestinian educators have argued that the new curriculum should be designed not only to promote national identity but also the skills of democratic citizenship. Stung by international criticism, education officials tend to be less open to such contributions than they were in the past. The hyperbole of the charges against the books has led textbook writers to become less responsive, not more. The cause of educational reform has thus been obstructed by the harsh and unfair international criticism.
Schoolbooks are products of the broader political situation. An example is the role of Hebrew in the new curriculum. The original plan (produced in 1996) involved the introduction of Hebrew-language instruction as an elective in secondary school. But the deterioration of the broader political context has taken a toll. In 2000, a first-grade book had a picture of a coin from the era of the British mandate with Palestine written in both Hebrew and Arabic. In 2001, after a year of the second intifada, a picture of a Mandate-era postage stamp erased the Hebrew.
The Palestinian curriculum is not a 'war' curriculum. Neither is it a 'peace' curriculum. While some improvements in the existing books might be made, a real peace curriculum will follow, not precede, a comprehensive peace.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to the Foundation for Middle East Peace main page.
|
|