Two U. views on Mideast accord

and PETER MORRISON Samer Zureikat and Adam Schaffer have been bombarded with the rhetoric for their entire lives. They've listened to the rallying calls of stern presidents and the vengeful diatribes of radical clerics and rabbis. But as the Middle East begins to accept the possibility of a new peace, Zureikat, a Wharton junior from Jordan, and Schaffer, a College junior from Maryland, have started to look beyond old conventions to a new understanding. They hope that, somehow, the hate might stop. "I think that as Jews, a lot of us were raised with that 'us and them' mentality," said Schaffer, treasurer of the Jewish Social Action Committee. "But, as you grow up and mature in the world, you realize there is a certain rationality to both sides of the argument." Zureikat, who was born in Beirut and has lived in Jordan, Egypt, and Greece, said he also is hopeful about the peace process. But, as a first-hand observer of Middle East politics, he cautioned that, "you're always pleased but very skeptical. It's way too fast. You can't erase all this history in a few days." The peace plan, which will be signed today at the White House, calls for mutual recognition of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization and an end to institutionalized violence in the region. It also calls for Palestinian self-rule in some of Israel's occupied territories. Political events are developing at such speeds, Zureikat said, that citizens of the Middle East are themselves unaware of the latest events. "I called my father [in Jordan] while he was watching the news," Zureikat said. "And I asked my parents what was going on ... and they don't even know what's going on." No one, not even Zureikat's uncle – a Jordanian negotiator – is sure of possible treaty details. But Zureikat foresees a better Middle East in the future. "Finally, Palestinians and Israelis can begin talking to each other without denouncing one another," he said. Schaffer, who said recent events were "unthinkable" a few months ago, added that it gives him "hope for the world." "The current euphoria will dissipate," Political Science Professor Ian Lustick said. "Future struggles may be fierce and bloody, but a historic settlement is within reach. The Middle East is hurtling toward logic." He added that the plan's strength is that it is "rooted in political necessity." The accord's weakness is that "it postpones difficult, delicate issues" Lustick added, however, that Arafat's position is much more "precarious." Political Science Professor Alvin Rubinstein said he does not believe both camps have dealt adequately with the disputes that caused the turmoil and added that they have not completely detailed the methods to ensure peace. "The developments over the next five years will hopefully open the way for a reconciliation between Palestine and Israel," he said. "Hopefully, the United States will play an important part." "All we have seen is the bare outline," he added. "We don't know who will be in charge of security, who will handle civil disturbances. What happens if an Israeli kills a Palestinian or if a Palestinian harms an Israeli?" At the University, the peace will have a different meaning – it will mean that professors will have to revamp the courses they teach. "I guess we'll all have to get some new notes," Rubinstein joked.