Discussing the Israel-Hamas war? Here’s what you can do to bring down the temperature

Thousands of kilometres from the Israel-Hamas war, the conflict is sparking intense emotions and volatile scenarios in Canada on campuses, within workplaces and and even in confrontations with strangers on the street. 

At the University of Toronto, a court injunction was needed to remove a pro-Palestinian encampment this week as negotiations between protesters and the university reached an impasse.

Protesters complied, saying they did not want to endure police violence but have vowed to use other means of protest until the university listens to their demands.

Similarly tense scenarios have played out on other campuses, including the University of Calgary and McGill University in Montreal.

And the tension isn’t confined to campuses. Erin Mackey, one of the spokespeople for the encampment at U of T, said she’s been yelled at and made “uncomfortable” by people who’ve recognized and approached her away from the encampment. Mackey says it was clear they weren’t looking to have a conversation.

As the war in Gaza continues and universities start planning for the return of students this fall, what can institutions and workplaces do to resolve such deeply contentious and emotionally charged situations?

CBC News spoke with two mediation experts who offered some practical tips for navigating such difficult situations.

Early intervention

First thing’s first: Don’t back away from conflict. When people intensely disagree, it’s important to address the issues head-on, said Alicia Kuin, a mediator and conflict management practitioner in Toronto.

“It’s much better to deal with them right away,” she said. “The longer you wait, the more difficult it gets to navigate conflicts.”

Kuin said California State University at Sacramento had “fantastic outcomes” dealing with student encampments because the administration engaged protesters early.

The school, also known as Sacramento State, said it created a policy on socially responsible investment in response to protesters’ demands that “does not rely upon us benefiting from companies that profit from ethnic cleansing, genocide or human rights violations.”

The protesters remained peaceful and disbanded days later. 

Taking steps such as forming committees and dialogue circles, hiring mediators, bringing in others who have a stake in the issue but may not be directly involved in protests or counterprotests and creating educational opportunities made it possible to have constructive conversations there, Kuin said.

Finding a ‘zone of potential agreement’

Two common approaches to conflict are mediation and dialogue. 

In mediation, a practitioner helps parties navigate conflict toward a desired outcome or resolution. Practitioners come up with a “zone of potential agreement” and determine what needs to be done to achieve it.

This approach would likely work best in an institutional setting, such as a school or workplace. At the University of Windsor, pro-Palestinian protesters who have been living in an encampment since May engaged with the administration through a mediator in June in the hopes of reaching an agreement; protesters at the University of Toronto, on the other hand, rejected an offer that included mediation.

“Caucusing” – when the mediator privately meets with each party – can help the process. This approach allows each side to feel heard without triggering anyone, and it can help separate emotions from the people they’re in conflict with, said Bruce Ally principal mediator at A Place for Mediation. The mediation service, based in Toronto, specializes in family, civil and employment mediation.

Exploring viewpoints through dialogue

Dialogue, on the other hand, aims to increase understanding without necessarily reaching a solution. One objective of the dialogue process is helping participants learn how to sit in discomfort and manage disagreement productively, Kuin said.

“That’s never a goal in dialogue, to agree. It’s not to come to a solution, especially on this topic, that would be incredibly unrealistic,” she said. 

“If you can create the space for people to engage in dialogue, then it’s up to them what they want to do with that space.”

Respect is the key to the process. Kuin recommends that people dealing with conflict consider what their trigger words are – such as anti-Semitism, Hamas or genocide in the Gaza case – and what their response is when they hear it.

She also suggests people consider how they’ll respond to being activated while remaining engaged in conversation.

She suggests using “calling-in phrases” instead of calling people out for what they said, by saying things such as, “I’m activated by something I just heard. Can we go back to explore it?” 

“You’re able to name what’s happening for you, you’re acknowledging the emotion, then you’re inviting them to delve into it,” Kuin said. 

People typically accept the invitation, she said.

Making space for venting 

Mediation experts agree that people need space to express their views and emotions authentically. 

If that involves yelling or ranting, it can actually be helpful, Ally said. He pointed out that venting to a intermediary can help people de-escalate because it allows clients to feel heard and get their frustrations out without people screaming at each other.

Venting can help de-escalate conflict, said Ally.

“If venting will not affect the other side and will actually lead toward movement that can get us to a solution, how can it be facilitated in a safe manner?” he said, explaining what mediators must ask themselves before using this approach.

The president of Sacramento State, for example, seemed to understand the importance of allowing students to express themselves. The school’s president told the campus press that the encampment could remain on campus “as long as it continues to be what it is, which is a positive demonstration of free speech.” 

Protesters took down the encampment a few days later and are still demonstrating in other ways, such as blocking buses.

Respect and managing triggers

Kuin said it’s important to consider taking a “trauma-informed approach” to dialogue on issues surrounding the war given how profoundly personal they can be for many people – especially those who have fled to Canada from the conflict zone or those with family and loved ones directly impacted by the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, and the resulting war in Gaza.

Some people are exhausted and traumatized from their experiences, she said.

Empathy is at the heart of this approach. That means “listening to people’s subjective realities and truths,” she said. It involves trying to understand how people’s past experiences affect them.

“It means building trust and relationships so that difficult conversations are entered into with some established empathy for the other person,” Kuin said. 

Ally says a victim-martyr complex often comes into play when people are in dispute.

“At least one of them thinks of themselves as a victim,” Ally said. “The victim feels disempowered, unheard and that they need to tell their story.”

Kuin says this feeling is tied to people’s “fundamental desire for respect, recognition, belonging and safety.” 

Trust is crucial for connecting with others, but there’s often a lack of trust between opposing sides. Kuin says it can be established through a combination of credibility, intimacy and reliability, meaning both parties will follow through on the things they say.

Telling people that they belong is a great start, she said.

“When you can tell somebody that they belong here, regardless of differences, what you’re doing is fostering connection.”

Kuin says people can benefit from using mediation and dialogue tools in their everyday interactions about this contentious issue to improve relationships with those they disagree with even without the formal process.