An increase in positive emotions towards an outgroup is often taken for granted as a necessary step for conflict resolution. Evaluative studies of intergroup encounters between Israelis and Palestinians generally measure the success of these programs through their ability to increase participants’ positive feelings towards each other. Several recent studies however have complicated these assumptions. For example, while empathy appears to decrease aggressive attitudes during times of violent escalation in Israel/Palestine, it does not appear to predict support for a negotiated resolution to the conflict. Scholars have also noted the productive role of “negative” emotions such as anger in intergroup encounters. In line with these findings, a growing number of researchers and practitioners have explored the benefits of a more confrontational approach to dialogue programs that forgoes some immediate positive feelings in order to cultivate a deeper recognition of structural violence and inequalities. This study examines the role of sympathy in motivating political thinking and actions among dialogue program participants in order to clarify the role of empathetic emotions in mobilizing Israelis and Palestinians against injustice. Participants in an immersive dialogue program were surveyed before and after the program to assess its impact on participants’ feelings towards each other as well as their political attitudes and behaviors. Respondents included 55 Israeli and Palestinian teenagers who participated in a two-week interfaith dialogue program run by the non-profit organization “Jerusalem Peacebuilders.” Pre- and post-program survey data were analyzed to determine whether those participants who experienced significant increases in sympathy towards each other also experienced changes in their political attitudes and behaviors. Specifically, this paper addresses whether increased levels of sympathy predicted changes in participants’ political ideology, empowerment, commitment to peace, as well as the types of political actions that participants supported. My findings complicate the assumption that changes in sympathy towards an outgroup translate into political attitudes and actions that advance social justice. By demonstrating the range of relationships between sympathy and certain political views and forms of mobilization, this paper calls for a deeper understanding of the ways that intergroup dialogue contributes to a just peace.