The discussion attempted to avoid the political sticking points that remain in the Middle East and instead allow an airing of the different groups' feelings.

"It's not like we get together to try to debate a resolution to the conflict or anything, because that's clearly out of our league," Hamad says.

But those who participated in the discussion say the ongoing conflict made it difficult to reach any sort of consensus, despite the willingness of the sides to listen to each other. "There wasn't some blindingly clear light where we said, 'Oh, God, we've all been so wrong,'" Perl-Rosenthal says.

Participants say the discussion was often tense and passionate because of the strong positions and beliefs on both sides.

"Many people had basically gone into the room knowing what they know and believing what they believe, and nothing really changed," Yasin says.

But while the groups say they know that it is difficult to reach any breakthrough, they also acknowledge that dialogue should still continue.

"If people keep discussing how they feel about the issue, after one or two hours or four hours, or a whole week of discussion, people are still going to feel frustrated," Hamad says. "But I don't think that's any reason why the discussion should be stopped."

And Brody says the discussion helped make the competing claims more than just a distant, ideological battle.

"There were obviously some things said that made me upset, but I think it's important to put a face and heart behind the opinions with which you disagree with," Brody says.

And while HSI says they have always been in favor of open dialogue, some say that trust must first be formed in order for any sort of positive relationship to begin.

"A lot of it is mistrust," Perl-Rosenthal says. "I think once you've developed a level of trust, you can really be willing to take some risks, but right now there's not a lot of willingness to take risks and talk to the other side."

Trying to bring groups together only when there is a major crisis will not help build a stronger relationship between those on different sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict, Perl-Rosenthal adds.

"If you wait until there's a crisis, of course you're going to have lousy interactions, because that's when everyone's feelings are the strongest, and with good reason," he says.

And just as in the Arab-Israeli conflict, the groups at Harvard recognize that no solution will come automatically.

"This issue has been going on for the last 53 years, and it's not going to just stop now," Hamad says.

"I would love it if someone could wave a magic wand and we could have no problems, but the issues are very deeply rooted," Perl-Rosenthal says. "Everything that goes on here is a reflection of the conflict itself."