Despite police presence and rumored threats of violence, Daniel Pipes' speech to a packed crowd in Dartmouth Hall was a relatively civil affair. The controversial scholar of Middle-Eastern studies spoke on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict Thursday afternoon.
Safety and Security greeted attendees at the doors, and members of the Al-Nur Muslim Student Association distributed pamphlets slamming Dartmouth for allowing Pipes to speak and challenging his position as a scholar.
The event, however, turned out to be tame, with the only outburst occurring during the question-and-answer session following Pipes' lecture. A member of the audience angrily asked Pipes about his website, Campus-Watch.org, and alleged that it attacked academics who were in opposition of his views.
Students expressed surprise with the relative civility of the event, which was rumored to occur amid terrorist threats and potential protests.
"I figured there would be more outbursts," said Allan Jackson '07, who attended the event because of his interest in the conflict and participation in Chabad.
The lecture itself focused on what Pipes saw as the failure of the 1993 Oslo Accords to establish peace in the Middle East. The Oslo Accords promoted conflict, Pipes said, by giving the impression of Israeli weakness and fueling the Palestinian radical element.
"As a result of Oslo, of Israeli weakness, Palestinian confidence went up," Pipes said.
Pipes said Palestinians are to blame for the conflict in the Middle East. Unlike the Israelis who are fighting for Palestinian acceptance, Pipes said, Palestinians are fighting to destroy the state of Israel.
Pipes' argument centered on his assertion that a majority of Palestinians needed to accept an Israeli nation before any progress toward peace could be made.
Dale Correa '06, president of Al-Nur, disagreed with Pipes' statements. She said she felt only a minority of Palestinians want to destroy the Israeli state.
"I do not believe the Palestinians are entirely at fault or want to destroy the Israeli state," Correa said.
Despite disagreeing with Pipes, Correa said she was glad Pipes came and that his speech kept strictly to the issues.
Others, including Jackson, expressed agreement with Pipes.
"I thought he was wonderful and spot-on," Jackson said.
Pipes argued against the notion that the conflicts in the Middle East were the result of small terrorist sects, arguing instead that it is the result of widespread Palestinian attitudes towards Israel.
"I think this is about war -- not terrorism," Pipes said. "Each of us must choose: do you want Israel destroyed or do you want it accepted?"
Peace is dependent on a Palestinian change of heart, Pipes said as he drew parallels between the Germans and the Palestinians and said the radical attitudes prevalent in 1930s Germany are similar to those today and that the threat of weapons of mass destruction could result if attitudes were not changed.
Pipes steered clear of proposing any solutions to the problem, but he did say a adjustment must be made. A change in the Palestinian attitude would benefit the Palestinians more than the Israelis, Pipes said.
"Whereas Israel is a functioning society, Palestine is not," he said.
The event was sponsored by Chabad, the Judaic studies department, DIPAC and the Ufurazta campus fund.
