Building Solidarity across Asymmetrical Risks: Israeli and Palestinian Peace Activists

Coalition‐building and the forging of solidarity across difference and inequality

“…Alongside shared neutral space, ongoing interaction, and the presence of social ties and/or bridge-builders, studies find that deliberative practices and processes are necessary at the coalitional level to foster trust, commitment, and ultimately solidarity across divides (Gawerc, 2016(Gawerc, , 2018Smith, 2002;Wood, 2005). Most notably, the following is viewed as critical: uniting around shared principles while engaging difference; acknowledging and managing inequalities; making space for each other; giving attention to conflict management; and undertaking actions that confirm the shared commitments and the negotiated identity.…”

“…Meanwhile, Wood (2007) stresses the importance of recognizing the differential risks that members of various groups face, given that asymmetrical risks have been found to complicate the process of cultivating solidarity due to underscoring differences between activists. To offset the impact of uneven risks on solidarity, Gawerc (2018) argues that it is critical for more privileged group members to respect the boundaries of their more at-risk compatriots and take actions to defend and support them.…”

“…Hirsch (1990) and Gamson (1991) both illustrate that the 8 of 14 -GAWERC knowledge of others being similarly emotionally invested, committed and willing to share the risks, is key (see also Hunt et al, 2004). In contexts of inequality, as literature maintains, dominant group members, particularly, often need to prove themselves (e.g., Gawerc, 2017Gawerc, , 2018Golan, 2011;Myers, 2008), given that they tend to face less risks (Wood, 2007), and, often, have less to gain from a successful campaign (Bernstein, 2008). Ackelsberg (1996, p. 97) noted, "We have not looked as carefully as we might at the places where people from a variety of identity categories have actually engaged in real-life political struggle and resistance."…”

Diverse social movement coalitions: Prospects and challenges

“…In the case of the former, it is clear that peoples' sense of agency and empowerment tends to differ dramatically as a result of varying social locations (Gamson, ). And uneven risks further confound attempts at cohesion as they underscore differences between activists, hinder the ability of more at‐risk individuals to identify with those less at‐risk, and provoke fragmentation among differing identities (Gawerc, ; Wood, ). In a range of social movement alliances, such inequalities have led to claims that the more privileged dominate leadership roles, are paternalistic, and condescending, producing tension and conflict (Munkres, ; Wood, ).…”

“…This is striking given the long‐expressed desires in the peace movement, environmental movement, and other movements to diversify their memberships, and at the same time, the numerous studies highlighting the tremendous challenges of forming and sustaining coalitions across racial, ethnic, and class divides (Brooker & Meyer, ; Bystydzienski & Schacht, ; Reger, Myers, & Einwohner, ). Indeed, with little consideration of the value of diverse coalitions, it is hard to know if they are worth the time and energy that inevitably comes with working across difference (Beamish & Luebbers, ; Gawerc, , ; Wood, ), let alone the increased risks for misunderstandings and conflicts, which can undermine both commitment and movement efficacy (Gamson, ; Walker & Stepick, ). Ideological and cultural similarities between partners have been deemed particularly important for effective collaboration (Dixon, Danaher, & Kail, ; Hathaway & Meyer, ; Isaac, ; Van Dyke & Amos, ) and yet, neither considerations can be assumed for coalitions that cross racial, ethnic, class, and national lines.…”