Palestinian nonviolent resistance
Palestinians and nonviolence resistance to Zionist violent colonization
Copyright by Mazin Qumsiyeh
(selected sections of an upcoming book)
Introduction
"Cowardice asks the question - is it safe? Expediency asks the question - is it politic? Vanity asks the question - is it popular? But conscience asks the question - is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular; but one must take it because it is right." Martin Luther King, Jr.
There is now wide recognition of the centrality of the question of Palestine not only to peace in Western Asia but to peace around the world. The destabilizing effect of this conflict extend in ripple effects to issues like the attacks of September 11, 2001, to the US government declared "war on terrorism" which was used to illegally attack and occupy Iraq, to the nascent revival of advocates of the doomsday scenarios of "clash of civilization", and to the mistreatment of Muslim and Arab minorities in Europe, North America, and Australia. In countless books and articles, there has been no shortage of discussion of the history of this conflict. In more than half the books published on the subject there is also misrepresentation of the history. Thousands of books are support Israeli colonialism by distorting facts, outright lies about history, and distorted logic based on false assumptions. Other books articulate the varied visions of peace based on justice, human rights, and international law. But there are few books that address the amazing progress in Palestinian and International nonviolent resistance. Those that do are fairly limited in scope. For example, Mary Elizabeth King wrote an excellent book (with Introduction by Jimmy Carter) titled "A Quiet Revolution: The First Palestinian Intifada and Nonviolent Resistance" (Nation Books, 2007). But as the title shows it is limited to that period of Palestinian resistance to the Zionist colonization. A book with a more ambitious title is Nonviolence and Israel/Palestine by Johan Galtung (Institute for Peace, University of Hawaii Press) is also rather limited in scope and since it was published in 1989 leaves the last 20 years uncovered (these are the pivotal years in development of Palestinian and more importantly International nonviolent resistance to Israeli colonization).
Palestinians have engaged in nonviolent resistance to colonization and occupation efforts for over 100 years. Yet, the western media under Zionist pressure refuse to report on these things and when some reporting is done, it is biased and distorted. Israeli terrorism is ignored while any Palestinian violent resistance is magnified, highlighted, and portrayed as irrational and unlinked to the occupation and colonization of our homeland.
Western media coverage in the more liberal New York Times is a good example. As Patrick O'Conner wrote:
"The New York Times and the US media more generally almost never report on what 99.5% of Palestinians have done every day of their lives for the last 38 years, nonviolently resist Israeli occupation. Over the last three years the New York Times has published only three feature articles on Palestinian nonviolent resistance. This despite the fact that Palestinians have conducted hundreds of nonviolent protests over the last three years throughout the West Bank against Israel's construction of the Wall on Palestinian land,... The most recent of those three Times articles, last Saturday's 'At Israeli Barrier, More Sound than Fury' by the Times' Jerusalem Bureau Chief Steven Erlanger is a good case study of how Israel/Palestine is typically misrepresented by the US media, and how Palestinian nonviolence is marginalized. Only six words in the 1,138 word article are quotes from Palestinians, though the article centers on a Palestinian-led protest against Israel's construction of a Wall cutting through the West Bank village of Bil'in. Erlanger seems to instead let Israeli protesters speak for the Palestinians. Nonetheless, he still quotes twice as many words from Israeli soldiers in Bil'in as from the Israeli protesters. Consequently, as is too often the case in US media, the explanations of the Israeli military dominate. A seemingly good-natured and oft-quoted Israeli General is the only individual who readers can get a feel for. Palestinians from Bil'in simply serve as scenery, and are never heard....If allowed to speak, Palestinians would have cited evidence showing that Israel clearly is violently repressing peaceful dissent in Bil'in and many other villages. Tens of protesters from Bil'in have been arrested, including protest organizer Abdullah Abu Rahme. Abu Rahme was arrested three times for a total of 35 days, and has now been banned by an Israeli court from attending protests." http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=8950
Outlets like US News and World Report, Fox, and CNN do not even report on the nonviolent struggle. I remember as a Palestinian Christian how the media was manipulated in the US about the Israeli siege of the Church of Nativity in 2003. Priests were shielding fellow Palestinians and trying to tell this to the media when the Israeli occupation army insisted that "terrorists" have taken over the Church and held priests hostage. Some local Palestinians and Internationals sneaked in to bring food and provide further protection to the besieged Palestinians (priests and others). While European Media interviewed these activists and reported extensively on this issue, the US media was rather silent. In one instance a picture shot by the Israeli army of its soldiers near a nun who left the Church and passed by Israeli soldiers besieging the Church. This was misreported as soldiers "rescuing the nun” when soldiers actions threatened all in the church. One Palestinian altar boy (13 y.o.) was killed in another episode while he was in the courtyard of the Church.
In this work, I will try to summarize nonviolent resistance to Zionist colonization from its inception in the 19th century till its meteoric rise in the last 20 years (1987-2007). Because this struggle is global in nature, it is also necessary to also review the resistance by non-Palestinians to plans and actions that resulted today in the largest remaining refugee population in the world (7 million of the 10 million Palestinians are refugees or displaced people).
I will try to bring issues relevant to Palestinian and International nonviolent resistance specifically to bring peace with justice to this critical part of the world. This would highlight the histry of nonviolent Palestinian resistance from the 1890s till today and not only in Palestine but globally. The text also highlights example of the International/global actions for peace in Palestine that involve direct actions (such as boycotts, divestments, and sanctions). I will not try here to define nor to articulate the arguments in favor of nonviolent resistance. There are literally hundreds of excellent books on the subject. It might be useful here to just quote from an article by Mubarak Awad, a Palestinian who was exiled by Israel for advocating nonviolence:
"Nonviolence is based on certain assumptions: First, non-violent struggle is a total and serious struggle, nothing short of a real war. There is no assurance that the enemy will be non-violent. On the contrary, there are great sacrifices we should expect in the non-violent struggle. Martyrs and wounded will fall, and Palestinians will suffer personal losses in terms of their interests, jobs, and possessions. .. Second, non-violent struggle is not negative or passive. It is an active, affirmative operation, a form of mobile warfare. It will re-enlist all resources and capabilities. It requires special training and a high degree of organization and discipline. Secrecy must be maintained in planning, organizing, and coordinating the different operations and campaigns. Most non-violence activities will be illegal according to the laws and military orders presently imposed on the population." (http://pinv.org/article2.html)
People who participate in revolutions against oppression are always diverse: some support violence, some support nonviolence, and some who support both. But even then this is not a clean division since within those three groups extensive differences exist. Among those who support violence there are always arguments about what kind of violence is justified. Among those who support nonviolence there are arguments about what exactly is nonviolence (e.g. would damaging property used for oppression be considered violence or not?). Also, it is clear that people can and do change their positions on these issues. For those of us in the nonviolence camp, we are always encouraged when previous combatants lay down their arms and begin to work for peace (e.g. see Combatants for Peace, http://www.combatantsforpeace.org) or army soldiers refuse to serve (see http://www.refusersolidarity.net/ and http://www.yeshgvul.org/ ). In fact taht is the point of nonviolent resistance, to allow your oppressors (those who consider themselves your enemy) to abandon their oppression and join in recognizing common humanity.
We are realistic in recogizing that there are no examples of completely nonviolent revolutions for freedom. Neither Mahatma Gandi's India nor Martin Luther King Jr.'s USA were free of violent resistance. But, those of us who promote nonviolent methods believe that such direction is essential for successes that maintain our common humanity. Both violence and nonviolence co-existed in Algeria under French rule and in South Africa under Apartheid. Many of us believe that the extensive nonviolent resistance and solidarity perhaps (at least partially) explains the much less violence post-revolutionary success in South Africa as compared to Algeria.
A more important aspect to realize is that Zionism is a world wide phenomenon (unlike apartheid in South Africa or France's colonization of Algeria), and has agents who push for it in powerful countries around the globe (e.g. the Israel lobby in the United States see Mearsheimer and Walt). Since traditionally nonviolent organizing requires targeting areas of friction with the oppressors, it was natural that friction also occurs around the world whereever Zionists try to muffle free speech, suppress the truth, and divert national resources to serve the perceived Israeli interests (see for example Paul Findley's book "They Dare to Speak Out"). More and more people realize taht the liberation of Palestine is tied to their own liberation and thus act on it. Some even lost their lives in the struggle (e.g. Rachel Corrie, Tom Hurndall etc). Others lost jobs (e.g. Cynthia McKinney, Norman Finkelstein, Tom Nagy, myself). Thus, I also included in this book assays on the growing global solidarity and nonviolent resistance.
History of Palestinians nonviolent resistance
In this, the largest section of this book, we will review nonviolent Palestinian struggle from the period of the Ottoman rule in the 19th century through British, Jordanian, and Israeli eras. It might be worthwhile first to enumerate some of the over 100 nonviolent methods used by Palestinians over the past century: demosntrations, strikes, boycotts, sanctions, obstruction, refusal to work with/for the occupiers, refusal to appear when summoned, refusal to obey orders, refusal to use imposed bureacracy, writing articles, distributing leaflets, arguing, developing alternative sources of income and other institutions, refusal to pay tax, ostracizing collaborators and traitors, mutual aid to people impacted by the occupation, going to school, going to clinics, bypassing barriers (checkpoints and apartheid walls), praying on one's lands, praying at checkpoints when prevented from going to Churches and Mosques, die-ins, and other acts of civil disobedience.
Period of Ottoman Rule
Palestinians were mostly farmers and peasants (few nomads and city dwellers). They were allowed to elect their parliamentary representatives under Ottoman rule but those elected representatives served in a parliament of an empire in which the Palestinian representatives were a handful among hundreds. The representatives further had no real political power on the ground which was held by Turk military officers who encouraged native Palestinians to develop feudal systems dependency and a patriarchal authority that depended more on family and tribe rather than nation. This was the case not only in Palestine but also in most of the so-called "third World" under colonial rules. Unlike other nascent countries facing colonial rule, Palestine had the added and incredible weight of the Zionist program to settle the place and make it a Jewish state.
Yet, even as early as the first settlements in Palestine by the Zionist movement around the end of the 19th century, two classes of Palestinians shared a distrust and antagonism to this movement. These were the intellectuals (including the representatives elected to the Ottoman Parliament) and the peasants (known as the fallahin, singular fallah in Arabic).
Some 418,100 dunums (Dunum= about 0.25 acre) of land were acquired by Jewish Europeans in Palestine before 1914. 58% of this was purchased by Zionists from absentee land lords who were not Palestinians, 36% from Palestinian Absentee landlords and the remainder 6% from local landlords and fallahin (Rashid Khalidi, Palestinian Identity: The Construction of modern national consciousness. Columbia University Press, New York, 1997, p112-113 and references therein). This was made possible by the Ottoman empire changing land ownership laws and insisting that traditional communal land ownership be abandoned in favor of private ownership. The British and Zionist pressure on the Ottoman empire facilitated this change in laws in the late 19th century. It was no accident that the push by the British Empire to spread the notions of private ownership and laws to protect that around the world coincided with the pressures exerted on the British government by Zionists like the Rothschild's and the Weissman's. Adam Smith's book "The Wealth of Nations" was peddled as the ideological justification for these efforts.
The biggest resentment was by the fellahin (farmers) who have farmed these communal lands for many generations and assumed de facto ownenership to later find out that Turkish or British laws were used by corrupt elite landlords to register large parcels in the names of a few individuals who were then free to sell them for handsome gains. The dispossessed fellahin **had great resentment and antagonism and turned their anger at the new owners (pioneering Zionists). In fact, the famed Martyr Shaykh Iz al-Din Al-Qassam had lived amond displaced fellahin for years in the poor slums of Haifa where he understood their pain and initially tried in vein to help their cause through the existing Ottoman system (S. Abdullah Schleifer, 1979. “The Life and Thought of ‘Izz-id-Din al-Qassam: Preacher and Mujahid” Islamic Quarterly 22(2): 61-81, p. 70).
Khalidi (Rashid Khalidi, Palestinian Identity: The Construction of modern national consciousness. Columbia University Press, New York, 1997) discusses the attempts by Palestinians to modify Ottoman rule and laws to protect their land from the danger they saw inherent in the ideas of Zionism. The Ottoman Parliament discussion of 1897 are cited as examples of how such concerns were dismissed. Khalidi also cites an editorial in May 1914 published in the popular newspaper "Filastin" (Palestine) in which the editors of this fiercely nationalistic paper defend their position. The editors attacked the central Ottoman government for its attempts to shutdown this newspaper because the newspaper portrayed Zionism as a threat to the Palestinian nation (Al-Umma Al-Falastinia) (Khalidi, p155). But these small pro-Palestinian stirrings were no match for great power plays that were to completely redraw the Middle East landscape.
"In 1902, the inhabitants of three Palestinian villages - al-Shajara, Misha and Melhamiyya - held a collective peaceful protest against the takeover of 70,000 dunums (7,000 ha) of agricultural land by the first European Zionist settlers." http://www.palestinemonitor.org/spip/spip.php?article49
The events leading up to the support of Britain and France for Zionist aspirations occurred well before these countries divided control over the Arab world parts that were under the Ottoman Empire,. This came in France first with a letter sent from Jules Cambon, Secretary General of the French Foreign Ministry to Nahum Sokolow (at the time head of the political wing of the World Zionist Organization based in London) dated June 4, 1917:
You were kind enough to inform me of your project regarding the expansion of the Jewish colonization of Palestine. You expressed to me that, if the circumstances were allowing for that, and if on another hand, the independency of the holy sites was guaranteed, it would then be a work of justice and retribution for the allied forces to help the renaissance of the Jewish nationality on the land from which the Jewish people was exiled so many centuries ago. The French Government, which entered this present war to defend a people wrongly attacked, and which continues the struggle to assure victory of right over might, cannot but feel sympathy for your cause, the triumph of which is bound up with that of the Allies. I am happy to give you herewith such assurance (Jules Cambon June 4, 1917 letter is posted at the "Zionist Exposition" of the World Zionist Organization http://www.wzo.org.il/home/politic/balfour.htm. Translation kindly checked by Jean-Christian Rostagni)
Some five months later, on November 2, 1917, the British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour conveyed to Lord Rothschild a similar declaration of sympathy with Zionist aspirations. It stated that:
His Majesty's Government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
Palestinians and others in the Arab world were immediately alarmed and engaged in vigourous discussion and effort (no violence) to try and halt this trend of colonization. The declaration was issued when Britain had no jurisdiction over the area, and was done without consultation of the inhabitants of the land that was to become a "national home for the Jewish people." The declaration also wanted to protect "rights and political status" of Jews who choose not to immigrate to Palestine. However, the native Palestinians are simply referred to as non-Jews and their political rights are not mentioned but only their "civic and religious rights". Lord Balfour wrote in a private memorandum sent to Lord Curzon, his successor at the Foreign Office (Curzon initially opposed Zionism) on 11 August 1919:
For in Palestine we do not propose to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants ... The four great powers are committed to Zionism and Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long tradition, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land (Quoted in Christopher Sykes, Crossroads to Israel 1917-1948, reprinted Bloomingtron: Indiana University Press, 1973).
Period of British Mandate
The Palestinian weakened political initiatives and leadership following centuries of Ottoman rule where exacerbated in the British rule which was predicated on helping stem national aspirations of the Palestinian natives to fulfill the aspirations of Zionism. In 1919, the Paris Peace conference was considering the future of Palestine had no Palestinian delegates or representatives. The Zionists were there, jockeying for implementation of the Balfour Declaration, but British forces prevented departure of a Palestinian group who merely wished the delegates to know of the wishes of the native Arab inhabitants of Palestine. There was this symbolic act of resistance when Palestinians tried to leave the port of Jaffa on a ship and were prevented by the British. For the following decade, from 1919 to 1929, Palestinians at every level of society entered into the economic and political life of the British Mandate and tried to influence its policies in many ways and mostly non-violently. However, the appointment ofa Zionist Jew (Samuel Herbert) to lead the mandate forces occupying Palestine also led to widespread resistance in many forms (including some violent).
In 1921, he British appointed the first Zionist ruler of Palestine: Herbert Samuels. Palestinians responded by mass resignation from government jobs, by strikes, protests, petitions, and pleas for chjange. All fell on deaf ears and instead, the British ruling Zionist viceroy instituted forced segregation of communities. Samuelxs allowed the Yishuv/Jewish Agency to establish independent Jewish schools, Jewish colonies, Jewish industries and so on. This signalled the first official apartheid system (before that and since 1880, the Yishuv has done it in secret or out of the limelight and without official recognition). When Palestinian non-violent resistance was met with neglect and later by violence (arrests, detentions, beatings, forced opening of shops etc.), violence erupted in late 1921.
The British rule included collective punishment for Palestinians, preferential treatment of Jewish settlers (arming them also), assignment of land deeds, and changing status and access to holy sites like the Western Wall and Waqf lands (these are lands deed to Islamic religious use). Cupled with the refusal to fulfill of the basic human rights of the locals, including the right to self-determination, these policies engendered resentment and resistance. The British policies at the time were classically similar to those elsewhere in the British colonial world: brutal and calculating and divisive. Thousands were arrested over the years for nothing more than voicing opposition or establishing political parties taht challenged the colonial rule. Those who resisted violently were hunted down and killed. Hangings were common. The lines between the colonial Zionist settlers, the British occupation, and even local Jews who were being benefitted but not involved continued to be blurred. There were isolated incidents of horrific violence on all sides.
But the main theme remained: between 1919 and 1936, the ruling British supported unlimited Jewish immigration and unfair practices of transferring land ownership effecting tens of thousands of fallahin (Palestinian villagers). By 1936, things had gotten so bad for these villagers and for most other Palestinians that they all declared a general strike accompanied by boycotts of all British and Zionist institutions. The strike lasted seeveral months and crippled commercial activities in Mandate-ruled Palestine. The strike was met with extreme physical force and resulted in a popular uprising (some of it violent, some by demonstrations). The uprsing was eventually crushed, leaders killed or deported, thousands of Palestinians were killed or injured, and hundreds of homes demolished in collective punishment. But the mayhem resulted in the British white paper of 1939, which recognized and attempted to address some of the grievances. Unfortunately, the White Paper was too little, too late to effect a long-term move toward peace. Britain had created a huge problem by supporting teh Zionist program and it was not possible to draw back. Further, historical events such as the Second World War, Nazi atrocities, and the establishment of the powerful Yishuv (Zionist settlement movement) with British support, all added up to continuing the Zionist project full force.
Palestinian society in the 1920s was riddled with problems. Having gone through the dramatic changes from four centuries of Ottoman rule to British rule was the biggest and perhaps least investigated aspect of the shifts in power and allegiances in the Palestinian society. Yet, this new British rule was unique. For, in addition to being a colonial rule, it had a distinct new twist: to fulfil the Balfour declaration of creating a "Jewish homeland" in predominantly Arab Palestine.
People who were affiliated with any aspect of the Ottoman rule were now discredited. People who fought on the side of the British were given positions and prestige. The class of elite Palestinians continued to prosper. Meanwhile, increased Jewish immigration and unfair British land laws squeezed Palestinian peasants. The latter is particularly worthy of note. The British believed in a capitalist system and individual land ownership. Palestinian peasants having farmed their lands communally as Hamoulas (extended families) were not impressed with the idea of assigning specific ownership to specific individuals. Many had to comply and pick one or a few individuals to receive new titles to the land (these were usually the elders and traditional Hamoula leaders or Mukhtars). This fit well with British colonial schemes utilized in other British colonies (e.g. finding people who will take responsibility for managing the restless natives from among the natives themselves). Many Palestinians refused to comply but eventually, the British managed to transform a system of village ownership of land with at least nominally individual ownership of lands. In many of these villages, the farmers or peasants (called Fellahin in Arabic) continued to do their farming on lands they farmed for ages even though now it may have been registered in a name of a particular individual or "leader." These leaders thus received new powers they never had and soon did not feel bound by tradition or culture and started to exercise power including preventing the Fellahin from using their own lands that they farmed for hundreds of years or even worse to sell it to the Jewish Yishuv.
The middle and lower class members of the Palestinian society thus came under tremendous pressures and they rightly blamed the tripartite cause of their misery to: the Palestinian elite, the Jewish settlers, and the British overlords. Worsening economic situation across the globe in the early 1930s made this an even more volatile situation. Thus, was born the first truly grass-root rebellion/uprising by Palestinians in 1936. On May 7 1936, a conference of 150 delegates representing all sectors of the population calls for a general strike and refusal to pay taxes to the British occupation authorities. Later, peasants form resitsance units and hide in the mountains. The resistance wants immediate halt to Zionist immigraton and colonization, prohibition of the transfer of the lands possessed by the Palestinians to European Zionists, and establishment of a democratic government. In June 18 1936: A large section of Jaffa is destroyed by the British leaving 6000 residents homeless. (see France-Palestine 70 years of resistance http://azls.over-blog.com/)
It originated from the young people who have by now established groups like the Young Men's Muslim Association, scouting organizations, and Hizb Al-Istiqlal (the Party of Independence), a radical progressive organization. Flare-up of clashes with the British forces in 1934 and 1935 were small and contained. In November 1935, a leading figure in many of the radical movements was killed in a clash with British forces. This was Shaykh Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam ( a young preacher from Haifa). His death (martyrdom) was a rallying call to the masses. On April 19, 1936, a riot broke out in Jaffa in response to increased Zionist activity, British oppression, and unfair laws by the British Mandate government. the British immediately and violently put this down and imposed curfews and emergency regulations throughout the country. Palestinian leaders in response called for a general strike which lasted till October and essentially paralyzed economic life. The British underestimated the level of resentment at their policy and attempted to undercut the growing revolt by some statements that were not consistent with their actions on the ground (severe repression of the natives and increased support for the Zionist program between 1922-the late 1930s). At one point, the British proposed dividing the country to a small Jewish state and a larger segment of Palestine to be incorporated under Britain's puppet government of Jordan. This proposal touched off more demonstrations and continued uprising, which the British were not able to completely suppress until 1939.
For the Palestinians, the results were devastating in losses. The British killed over 5000 Palestinians and, as collective punishment, demolished whole sections of Jaffa and many other places. The best fighting men were either killed or imprisoned (approximately 10% of adult males thus included). On the social and political level, the impact was also devastating. The Arab high Commission was now more divided than ever, the Mufti gained more power at the expense of the demolished progressive and grassroots organizations. The British were able to split the Palestinians further into factions squabbling over everything from remaining and dwindling resources to tactics to philosophy (Rashid Khalidi, "The Palestinians and 1948: the underlying causes of failure", pp. 12-36 in "The War for Palestine: Rewriting the History of 1948", E. L. Rogan and A. Schlaim, eds., Cambridge University Press. 2001)
Period of Jordanian Occupation
Little documentary evidence exists of the non-violent resistance to Jordanian rule in the West Bank. There was a period of non-cooperation and direct resistance between 1950-1956. The revolt in 1956 was put down ruthlessly. It is well known that thousands were imprisoned for challenging King Hussain’s rule (one of them was my uncle). King Hussain’s going along with Nasser on issues of Pan-Arabism is attributed by many researchers as due in part to this resistance. After all, the Zionist leadership was involved in a tacit agreement with Hussain’s grandfather Abdullah who was assassinated by a Palestinain national for this collusion. According to this agreement, Abdullah would take that part of Palestine allotted to the Arabs west of the Jordan Valley according to UN Resolution #181 (II) of November 29, 1947. This part later became to be known as the West Bank. The rest of Palestine was to be left for the "Exclusive Jewish State". Documented with intriguing details of this agreement are reported in Avi Shlaim's book (Avi Shlaim, Collusion Across the Jordan, King Abdullah, the Zionist Movement, and the Partition of Palestine, New York: Columbia University Press, 1988, p. 139.).
Thousands of Palestinians (including my uncle) spent time in Jordanian jails for simply speaking out. The height of the Jordanian army atrocities came in 1955-6 when the young King sent his Bedouin soldiers to make sure no one spoke up against the jordanian rule. With prodding and support from Britain and the US, King Hussain especialy targeted socialists and communists. Most have only been engaged in speaking out for labor rights or for the return of refugees. The pogroms that followed are still remembered vividly by all Palestinians of that generation. Hundreds were tortured and thousands were jailed including in remote facilities in the Jordan Desert (at AlJafr and other camps) where many succumbed to diseases and starvation diets. This mini-Palestinian uprising was little eported in Western media.
Period of Israeli Occupation
Israeli tanks rolled into the West Bank in the Blitzkrieg that became known as the "Six-day war of 1967". Not much later Israel started to build settlements in the occupied areas on confiscated Palestinian lands. Israel also annexed East Jerusalem (in 1968) contrary to International law. The four decades of brutal occupation commenced in full gear. For Palestinians and other Arabs, nonviolent, grassroots action was learned “on the job” and commensurate with the onset of the occupation. Accoding to the previous mayor of Al BIreh:
"Nonviolent resistance demands strong leaders. In the first days of the occupation in 1967, eh Palestinian nonviolence movement had a surplus. A dynamic voluntary work movement sprag up under the guidance of democratically elected municipal councils. This movement created jobs, uilt schools, established youth clubs, and created public libraries. Seven years later, in 1973, the establishment of teh Palestinian national Front provided much needed central leadership with representation from all the occupied territories. Its goal was to collectively confront the Israeli occupation by nonviolent means... Over the next ten years, the Israeli Occupation Authority dissolved Palestinian municipal council, deported some of their elected leaders, and attempted the assassination of others." (Abdul Jawad Saleh, the Palestinian Nonviolent Resistance Movement, pp. 49-52 in "Live from Palestine: International and Palestinian Direct Action Against the Israeli Occupation" Edited by Nancy Stohlman and Laurieann Aladin (2004, South End Press).
Forms of resistance included simple spontaneous protests and refusal to abide by military orders. These efforts were crushed ruthlessly. Demonstrations in 1968 and 1969 were met with force. In 1970, large demonstrations erupted in Gaza that scared the Israeli army (because of the number of people participating). Ariel Sharon was sent in to suppress the resistance (both violent and non-violent resistance). He became known as the Bulldozer because f the way he got his way: strong and aggressive). Home demolishings, massive shelling, killing of innocent civilians became his hall mark. These atrocities led to reactions of desperate attempts by few Palestinians to get the world to notice their plight. Palestinian violence in teh 1970s was analogous to the violence of the Haganna, Irgun and other underground organizations in the 1940s against British and Palestinian interests and civilians.
But in parallel, Palestinian non-violent resistance continued to fluorish. In the early 1970s demonstrations against the occupation were common. The PLO was illegal and so was flying any Palestinian flags. Yet, nationalist feelings were very strong. In 1976 and after four years of unrest, Israel thought to try a new strategy: allow municipal elections and push for collaborators to run. The strategy backfired as Palestinians overwhelmingly chose people who are highly respected and who spoke strongly against the occupation. Israel engaged in a policy of assasinations and deportation. Two mayors were severely injued by planted Israeli bombs (Mayor Bassam Shaka of Nablus lost both his legs). The mayors responded by forming the national guidance committee and emphasizing that teh PLO represents all the Palestinian people. Israel forced most of these Mayors out of office and deported others. Israeli occupation authorities then established the "Vilage Leagues" in the early 1980s, a network of collaborators to administer the occupation on its behalf. Residents were forced to go to the appointed village league collaborators for any needs like permits to leave the country, electric and water issues, land arbitration etc. The league members were armed and trained by Israel and did not hesitate to kill, maim, and beat those who stood in their way. Palestinians showed incredible resiliance and resistance to these schemes by actions ranging from boycotts, public satements, church and mosque leaders shunning these people (in some cases priests excommunicated members of the church who collaborated or committed other crimes). Families openly denunciated members of their own families.
Mubarak Awad, established the first "Palestinian Center for the Study of Nonviolence" in Jerusalem in 1983. Awad was influenced by pacifist Mennonite traditions and by translating Islamic writings on nonviolence (e.g. those of the Muslim colleague of Gandhi's, Abdul Ghaffar Khan). Deportation proceedings against him were initiated before the uprising of December 1987. The deportation order was signed by Yitzhak Shamir on 6 May 1988. Israel's ambassador to the US felt it important to explain the deportation of Awad (who happened to be also a US Citizen) in an op-ed in the NY Times June 17, 1988. Robert Holmes "Nonviolence and the Intifada" pp.209-248 in "From the Eye of the Storm: Regional Conflicts and the Philosophy of Peace, edited By Laurence F. Bove and Laura Duhan Kaplan, 1995, Rodopi.
In the 1980s, the Palestinian tradition and practice of nonviolence grew dramatically. Among the first methods employed in the effort to effect change, and still in use today, were boycotts of Israeli products and services, refusal to obey military orders, burning Israeli ssued ID cards, refusal to vacate confiscated properties, and self-reliance. During the Palestinian uprising that started in 1987 these tactics were put into widespread use. Gardening in backyards, educating children in clandestine classrooms when schools were closed by the military, and countless other methods were developed and expanded. In one instance, a clandestine dairy farm in Beit Sahour was the subject of massive "hunt for the cows" by the Israeli military. My friend and fellow biologist Jad Ishaq was jailed for helping foster gardening skills among our people.
These tactics spread over time and more importantly adapted to changing circumstances on the ground. My own hometown of Beit Sahour engaged in a tax revolt which became a poster case for nonviolent resistance to Israeli occupation. All town residents refused to pay taxes to an occupation army that was using our taxes not to build us schools and clinics but to fund its occupation army and to build Jewish-only settlements and roads on our lands. On 21 September 1989, the Israeli army tried to break the tax revolt by laying siege to teh twon, arresting 40 people for tax resistance, and then massive confiscation of valuable property from the town (everything from cars to furniture to TVs and other electric devises were stolen). Representatives of a number of European countries and church leaders attempted to visit the town while it was under siege (for 42 days during which food, telephones, electricity etc were cut). They were turned back by the Israeli army taht then surrounded the town (“Envoys turned back on road to Beit Sahour” The Globe and Mail, 7 October 1989, p. A9;
“Israeli Troops Bar Western Envoys” Los Angeles Times 6 October 1989, p. 1)
The UN Security Council considered a resolution asking Israel to lift the siege and return the confiscated property but the US vetoed the resolution (supported by most other UNSC member states) (“U.S. vetoes UN resolution that Israel return property seized in tax revolt” The Montreal Gazette. 8 November 1989, p. A14). After failing to break the will of the people, the siege was finally lifted six weeks later.
In the October 20, 1989 edition of the Guardian (London) Ian Black reported on this tax revolt:
"Hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of goods - including manufacturing equipment, domestic appliances, cash and jewelry - have been carted off by Israeli bailiffs escorted by armed soldiers. ... Beit Sahour, a neat and relatively prosperous town of 12,000 in the 'Christian triangle' centering on Bethlehem, has been singled out for economic punishment by the authorities in a controversial operation that now appears to be intensifying. .... The confiscations have become routine: the entire town is a closed military area with nightly curfews imposed and telephone lines cut off. Earth ramparts have been bulldozed into position at the entrances and soldiers patrol the streets. The Israeli Defense Minister, Mr. Yitzhak Rabin, insists that the raids were carried out with full legal authority, although some experts dispute this. .... The latest attempt to crush the Intifada shows no sign of being any more successful than the other punishments that the Israeli authorities have been using in the West Bank and Gaza Strip for the past 22 months. .... The people of Beit Sahour line the streets and watch anxiously as the Israeli convoys set out from Camp Asaf. Many tell stories of brutal searches and of outright theft by the taxmen... the pastoral tranquility of the town, with its solid red-roofed stone villas, well-tended gardens and picturesque churches, is a far cry from the dark alleys of the Nablus casaba or the warren-like refugee camps of Gaza. But the tax revolt is Beit Sahour's proud contribution to the uprising. ...Some may well give in under pressure, but the majority, like Nader Qumsiyeh, will probably carry on. 'Taxes are paid by people to their own legitimate political bodies,' a leaflet explained when the Israeli raids began. 'The services provided to the Palestinians are opening new jails and building new settlements.' " ("Israeli bailiffs enlisted to crush Palestinian tax revolt: Refusal to pay rates turns 'Christian triangle' into symbol of resistance." Guardian 10/20/1989)
A good report on that tax revolt in Beit Sahour is found in Anne Grace's article: “The Tax Resistance at Bayt Sahur” (Journal of Palestine Studies 1990).
During that same Intifada (uprising) of 1988-1993, 1100 Palestinian civilians were killed while engaging in non-violent resistance or not even resisting (shot in homes in schools etc). Thousands were injured. Injuries accelerated when Rabin issued orders to break the bones of children who through stones at Israeli military vehicles or personnel. In some cases homes were demolished for such small infarctions as participating in a demonstration. But this largely unarmed uprising went on despite the Israeli army brutality. It only subsided because of teh issues of eth Gulf War and its aftermath in terms of Arafat acceding to Israeli desires to police the Palestinians under the agreements signed in 1993 and 1994: the Oslo accords. That uprising became famous for how Palestinains developed tools to deal with closing of schools (schools assembled secretly in private homes) and lack of food (e.g. growing tehir own backyard foods) and so on. But the Oslo process was to bring increased settlemet activities (doubling the settler population to nearly 400,000 by 2000), increased restrictions on movement, increased land confiscation, and so on. The only difference was a cosmetic issue of having some Palestinian policement taking on traffic and Palestinian authority dealing with roads, garbage and sewage (admittedly an improvement over Israeli army which did not engage in such tasks). So by 2000, people were fed-up. Barak gave his ultimatum to Yassir Arafat to sign a final deal that would leave Palestinians in large bantustans. Arafat rejected and the negotiations continued (Israel withdrew from these negotiations in January 2001 at Taba). But the straw that broke the Palestinian back was the visit of Ariel Sharon, surrounded by 1000 armed Israelis to the holy Muslim site of Al-Aqsa in late September 2000. The Al-Aqsa intifada (uprising) started 28 Sept. 2000 and continues till today. In the first 6 weeks of this uprising dozens of Palestinian Children were killed. No Israeli civilians were killed in that period. But the world kept silent as more Palestinains were massacred. An Israeli general told Haaretz that one million bullets were used in teh first two weeks. The Israeli Army was apparently intent on ensuring this uprising becomes violent quickly and effectively (unlike the uprising of 1988-1993) so that it puts an end once and for all to Palestinian aspiration for freedom and self-determination.
In the intervening seven years since the start of the latest Intifada, nonviolent resistance mushroomed with actions in every major Palestinian city. Any search of the internet will yield hundreds of examples. We will cite here a few relevant examples.
The hilly areas south of Hebron have been the location of repeated settler and army attacks on Palestinian residents because the land was coveted by the Zionist state. Amos Gvirtz wrote in an email October 5, 2007
“Settlers from the area of Havat Maon, in the South Hebron Hills, continue to attack Palestinian residents of Tuba, in order to expel them from their village and land. On Sunday, 23rd September, 2007, in the late afternoon, ten settlers entered Tuba and started to attack the villagers. For nearly an hour, they threw stones at them, their homes and property, and hit a woman and her son. At 17:30 human rights activists summoned the police to the village. The police only arrived at 19:30, long after the attackers had left. On Tuesday 25th September, 2007, clerks of the Ministry of Internal Affairs again came to the village of Twail Abu Jarwal, and delivered demolition orders to all the houses there. Meanwhile, the Green Patrol has demolished, again, the tent of Nuri ElUqbi. Since Nuri started his protest on his village land, the authorities have demolished his tent numerous times. Nuri is determined to continue his struggle so his people regain their land.”
In Tel Rumeida in the same general area, Palestinians try to survive against incredible odds and attempst at their removal. TYhey are helped by Internationals including the Christian Peace Maker Teams. For details on actions carried in the past few years and until this date, visit http://www.telrumeidaproject.org/ and http://www.counterpunch.org/levy09122005.html.
And in the village of Bil’in near Ramallah, residents have engaged in a weekly nonviolenmt demonstration and other creative nonviolent direct actions for years. The weekly demonstration after Friday prayers bring people from around the world for support. See http://www.bilin-village.org
The commitment to nonviolence gained momentum in the past seven years with the onset of the latest Palestinian uprising (intifada) in 2000. Here are just a few of the examples of these efforts:
- The Palestinian Initiated International Solidarity Movement is launched and expands activities to brting International to witness and work for peace in Palestine. http://www.palsolidarity.org/
- The Open Bethlehem initiative works through media and politicians to effect a lif\ting of the siege on Bethlehem area residents (see http://www.openbethlehem.org
- Palestinians initiated an expanded oral history project http://www.PalestineRemembered.com/OralHistory
- An international campaign to free the imprisoned Christian Peacemaker Team members in Iraq was launched in 2005 and while one was killed (Tom Fox), the others were released.
- Birzeit University and others launch Right To Education Campaign (http://right2edu.birzeit.edu)
- Palestinian Film Makers make an impact nationally and internationallyh with films like “Paradise Now” and “Jenin, Jenin”.
- The Palestinian Grassroot anti-apartheid wall campaign was initiated with direct actions ranging from demonstrations to media work to soliciting international support (see http://stopthewall.org
- Palestinian Theater Groups tour in Europe and North America humanizing Palestinians and bringing stories of life under occupation. This includes Alrowwad Chjhildren Theater (Dheiwheh Refugee Camp http://alrowwad.blogspot.com/
- Palestinians launch Right to Enter Campaign http://www.righttoenter.ps
Religious foundations of Nonviolent Resistance
Jesus was born in a place named Palestine and spoke Aramaic a semitic language that gave rise to the Arabic alphabet. He preached nonviolence and himself was killed for speaking truth to entrenched power. The power of the Jewish Pharisees and Scribes and the power of the Roman Empire. His radical departure from the Old Testament thinking is ignored by those who now claim to follow his teachings. Take for example these statements:
“Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5: 5-10
"You have heard that it was said, 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'. Bt I say to you, do not resist him who is evil; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also." Matthew 5:38-39
"You have heard that it was said,'love your neighbor and hate your enemy' But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven" Matthew 5:44-45
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others.” Matthew 23:23
And when Islam was embraced by the inhabitants of Palestine in the 7th century, the notion of nonviolence was not diminished but actually strengthened. Christians, Muslims, and Jews lived in relative harmony for centuries until the crusaders came. People forget that we can find in the traditions of all religions statements of support for justice, for peace, and for speaking truth to tyrant rulers (the essence of nonviolent resistance). Here are just a couple of quotes from Muslim traditions:
“O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah (God), even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest you swerve, and if you distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily Allah is well-acquainted with all that you do.” Holy Quran, 4:135
"The best jihad is when a person speaks the truth before a tyrant ruler." --The Noble Hadith (sayings and doings of the prophet Muhammad, PBUH)
“Whoever among you sees something abominable should rectify it with his hand; and if he has not strength to do so; then he should do it with his tongue; and if he has not strength to do so, then he should (abhor it) from his heart, and that is the least of Faith.” Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him), Sahih Muslim
And is should be remembered that “Yakrah ul-Munker” is a saying in Islam meaning “hating the evil deeds”. Note that like in Christianity it is not hating those who do bad things/evil but the evil ACTS. Love your enemies does not mean love their acts of injustice. In all other religions (Buddhism, Judaism etc.) you find similar sayings. The tradition of Mahatma Ghandi and other pacifists also state the same: challenge bad deeds but leave the option and the door open for those who do bad things.
As pointed above, the Holy Land of the three Monotheistic traditions had a rich history of nonviolent resistance. Unfortunately, and as in other parts of the world, the history of violence gets documented in history books and people ignore and with generations passing forget what was done nonviolently. Someday I hope someone goes back to find the misplaced resources and texts and materials on nonviolent resistance between the time of Jesus and the 19th century. Books can be written on those. Considering that we want to bring peace to this troubled land today, it would seem important here to focus on the ideological and political conflict today with its roots in the 19th century (the advent of European interventions in Palestine including the European Ashkenazi concepts of political Zionism). The question to ask is what was the role on nonviolence in the struggle against Zionism and what might we expect in the coming years?
Islamic religion and traditions and non-violence (audio of lecture): http://www.aupeace.org/node/2726
And the struggle continues
The history sited above (and links and resources appended at the end of this chapter) shows that nonviolent resistance was frustrated by decades of violent suppression and ethnic cleansing and decades of being ignored or villified in the western media which had filters to ensure that only violence is reported and given no explanation for this violent. It is thus inspiring that this nonviolent movement continued to exist and actually grow.
Palestinians resist by simply living in their homes, going to school, eating and living. That is because this colonial occupation wants all Palestinians to give up and leave teh country (to giev Israel maximum geography with minimum native demography). When the Palestinian Shepherds in Atwani village continued to go to tehir fields despite repeated attacks by settlers and even the attempted poisoning of their sheep, that is non-violent resistance. When Palestinians walk to school while being spat on, kicked and beaten by settlers and soldiers, that is non-violent resistance. When Palestinians have to spend hours at check points to get to hospital, their farm land, tehir work, their schools, or to visit their friends, that is non-violent resistance. Palestinians have resisted by countless other ways.
Activists on the ground derive strength from support by thousands of individuals all over the world. Those who could not go and join them are working hard in their respective countries to educate people about the violence of the occupation, an occupation that is fast becoming the longest military occupation still standing. On June 8th, women in 150 cities around the world held vigils calling for an end to the occupation. Demonstrations continue to be frequent in hundreds of cities around the world. International networks like the International Solidarity Movement are expanding in every city, state and country. Other projects utilizing non-eviolence and educating on non-violent solutions are growing in scope. The most productive that I was involved in is the Wheels of Justice bus tour http://justicewheels.org. Collectively these international campaigns will continue to grow and accelerate until Palestinians achieve their national and individual human rights. The success of the movement is attested to by the vitriolic attacks it had received from groups like Israel Resource News Agency (David Bedein).
It is truly a grassroots movement for nonviolent resistance to occupation and oppression. As pointed out by many writers: this (is a struggle, and sacrifices will be made. There is every likelihood that nonviolent resistance will be met with violence. History shows this to be the case, and sacrifices under this model may be equal to or even greater than sacrifices under the model of violent resistance to injustice.
For more on Palestinian nonviolent resistance, visit
http://www.middleeastwindow.com/article1124.html
http://samiawad.wordpress.com/2007/05/28/we-will-play-on-our-land/
http://samiawad.wordpress.com/2007/05/29/israeli-army-in-full-force-to-stop-nonviolent-action-aimed-at-preventing-a-sewage-dump-from-being-created-on-farm-land/
And here are links to some videos
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=emadbornat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZB_hlziDKQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEaVXbRLy5s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBKRcLNrvM8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Zf9_39HFKg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5fFSycyMsc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMXEWTbqMGc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZfiLQY8hpE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uINvtpM2ag
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkVDyfuvhDE
Exhibit 1. Letters from Gila Svirsky on non-violent actions against the occupation
Letter From Gila Svirsky
June 15, 2001
The residents of the Palestinian village of Dir Istya have conducted another courageous act of nonviolent resistance together with Israeli and international allies in the face of ongoing provocations by the Israeli army and settlers.
Dir Istya is a small village surrounded by four Israeli settlements (Yakir, Emanuel, Nofim and Barqan). While farming is the main source of livelihood, this has become increasingly difficult due to recent appropriations of land, the bulldozing of olive-tree orchards, and the proximity of settlers, who impede access to the remaining fields and orchards.
Within the past two months, Dir Istya has been the scene of several acts of nonviolent resistance in an effort to protect the orchards and prevent an incipient new settlement (4 caravans so far) from taking root. In April, two young women -- Neta Golan (a Jewish Israeli) and Yasmin Khayal (a Palestinian-German) -- chained themselves to olive trees in an effort to prevent the trees from being bulldozed. And in early May, several hundred peace activists protested peacefully there, to which the Israeli army replied with tear gas, stun grenades, and rubber-coated bullets, ending in the wounding of one journalist and several fields catching fire.
Today's action was sponsored by the Palestinian residents of Hares and Dir Istya in coordination with the International Solidarity Movement, Reut-Sadaka (Jewish-Arab Youth Movement), Rabbis for Human Rights, CPT, and the Coalition of Women for a Just Peace.
About one hundred participants gathered inside the village this morning, roughly half-Palestinian residents and the other half mixed Israelis and internationals. As the activists headed out of the village toward the caravans to protest their presence, the Israeli army blocked their progress, announcing that the area was now a "closed military zone", and demanded that the activists return to the village. Settlers who stood near the soldiers were not asked to leave the closed military zone. In the best nonviolent tradition, the peace activists refused to turn back and peacefully tried to proceed, now with linked arms and chanting. The soldiers tried to prevent their progress and forced some of them to the ground. The activists responded by remaining seated on the ground, which the army also could not abide. Power, after all, demands to be expressed. After further scuffling, soldiers plunged into the group and began to haul off those they believed to be ringleaders.
Twelve activists were brought to the police station in Ariel, a site that has become familiar to many. This group included three Palestinians from Dir Istya - Dr. Nafez Mansour, who is mayor of the village, Suleiman Mahmoud Shimlawi, and Ahmad Tayil Faris, a student at An-Najah University. The other nine included five Israeli Jews -- Liad Kantorowicz (23), Shelly Nativ (28), Dorit Tadir (19), Arik Ascherman, and Micky Fischer -- and one Palestinian citizen of Israel -- Jamal Attamneh (29), who is the director of Re'ut-Sadaka. Also arrested were Bob from CPT-Hebron and two German internationals.
At the police station, the three Palestinians from the territories were separated from the others and booked on criminal charges. The others were interrogated and told to sign release orders and leave. They refused to sign the papers unless the Palestinians would also be released. The police threatened to evict them forcibly, and did drag Liad out of the station. Eventually, though, the police released all 12, who by now are on their way home.
One more point. After the 12 were arrested, someone opened fire on the activists who remained behind and an 18 year-old Palestinian boy was shot. We are trying to ascertain his condition, and initial reports are that the injury is not serious. The shot, by the way, may have been fired by a settler, a policeman, or a soldier, but we will never know whom. This is not the sort of thing that the Israeli authorities bother to investigate when the injured party is a Palestinian.
Thank you, attorney Yossi Wolfson, for your efforts on everyone's behalf. Well done, those of you who were there.
From: Gila Svirsky
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 12:45 AM
It�s almost midnight in Israel, and I just got off the phone with Neta Golan who described today�s events, which I hereby report. I�m missing some details, but I don�t want to call Neta back, as she�s in pain and needs to rest.
Al-Khader is a small Palestinian village near Bethlehem, which has the bad fortune to be located near the Israeli settlement of Efrat. For years, Efrat settlers have coveted the land belonging to al-Khader, and, in recent months, settlers set down 3 mobile homes on a hilltop to �establish ownership�. The Palestinian villagers decided to stage a nonviolent protest march today, and invited Israelis and internationals to join them.
Because of yesterday�s killing of an Israeli not far from al-Khader, several peace organizations decided it was too dangerous to participate in today�s action. As a result, only 20 or fewer brave Israelis and internationals decided to participate in the action. The low number of Israelis and internationals made it even more dangerous for them and the 200 Palestinian villagers who turned out.
The Palestinian, Israeli, and international peace activists all gathered near the disputed hill, and began to slowly walk up it toward the incipient settlement. The decision made in advance, and kept, was that they would not push past wherever they were stopped by the security forces - police from the Efrat settlement. This was not exactly an �objective� force. The police stopped the marchers and gave them 10 minutes to disperse, which the activists decided to use to make some speeches.
Neta says the speeches were excellent. A Palestinian speaker said that all Israelis who come in peace are �welcome, welcome, welcome�. Rabbi Arik Asherman of Rabbis for Human Rights, said that �by justice�, this land belongs to the Palestinians, and that justice ultimately will prevail. Arik also addressed the soldiers surrounding them: �I know that you are doing your duty here, but I hope that your witness of this event will prove to you that it�s possible for Palestinians and Israelis to work together in coexistence.�
After the speeches, the activists started to move down the hill and away from the settlement, but it was taking longer than the police had ordered. So the police swooped down on them and began to swing their clubs. Neta approached a policeman and asked, �What are you doing?� and he started to beat her. When Neta refused to duck or run away, he became incensed and continued to strike her. Then he twisted her arm behind her back and began to drag her up the hill. Neta did not resist, but walked with the policeman. At some point, he handed her over to a policewoman, who grabbed Neta by the hair and began to drag her up the hill, even though Neta continued to cooperate. Someone else took over the twisting of her arm behind her back, and this person continued to twist, harder and harder, until she heard the crunch of the elbow breaking. Neta felt terrible pain and told the police she needs medical attention, but they continued to drag her by the hair and arm up the hill. Anita from the Christian Peacemakers Team (CPT) ran over to ask them to ease their handling of Neta, but they began to beat Anita as well.
There were no media present, which contributed to the feeling of the security forces that no one was �watching�. I don�t know if anyone was using the video cameras that we now have in the field, and I don�t want to call Neta back to ask.
Everyone was treated very roughly and six were arrested: Arik Asherman, Neta Golan, Sergio from the Alternative Information Center, Liad Kantorowicz, Anita from CPT, and a �young guy� whose name Neta could not immediately recall.
Meanwhile, while Israelis and internationals were being arrested, the police chased the villagers not only down the hill, but also directly into their village. On the way, they tore down the temporary structure that the villagers had set up at the foot of the hill. When the police entered the village, the Palestinians began to throw stones at them to get them out, but the Israelis opened fire. Five Palestinians were wounded. Neta believes not seriously, but I don�t have confirmation of this yet.
In the police station, Neta asked to see a doctor, but her requests were ignored. An army medic was called in, who said that it looks like a break and she needs to get to a hospital, but the police kept her waiting. There was a lengthy interrogation and they told her they would release her as soon as she signed a paper that she agrees not to enter a �closed military zone� again. She refused to sign it. �If it really hurt you, you would sign,� they said to her. They don�t know Neta. Finally, four hours later, they let her out and then freed the others.
The six were released into the settlement of Efrat, where the police station is located, and they walked the distance to the main road. By then, other demonstrators had returned to pick them up. They brought Neta to Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem, where she was released after 10 p.m. The doctors were shocked that someone had twisted her arm so badly that they broke it at the elbow.
Neta asked me to write that this new settlement was built after Sharon was elected, and that he promised the US he would dismantle it. He did not yet. She said that it pained her to see settlers roaming the hills at their pleasure, while the Palestinians, who wanted to demonstrate nonviolently, were being suppressed with violence.
She asked me to say that the suppression of nonviolence only makes people become violent. That�s the story of today�s action at al-Khader. Activists plan to return until the settlement is removed.
In a related incident from today�s Women in Black vigil, two women were physically attacked by Kach members. The police refused to arrest them, but the women went to the police station to file a complaint.
Gila Svirsky
Jerusalem
Rabbis for Human Rights
info@rhr.israel.net
Tel. 972 2 563-7731
Exhibit 2: An article by Jonathan Kuttab "Nonviolence: A Powerful Alternative"
The events of September 11 have created a new reality requiring the Palestinian Authority to abandon, and even to combat, manifestations of armed resistance to the Israeli occupation. In fact, the PNA has already announced its acceptance of a unilateral ceasefire, and President Arafat has declared that Palestinians will not shoot even if fired upon. Furthermore, he has declared the military wings of all factions to be illegal and is trying to enforce that policy in the face of blatant provocations by Israel including assassinations and incursions into Palestinian areas. If the ceasefire is not holding, it is not for lack of effort by the PNA.
Does this mean the end of resistance to the occupation and acquiescence in continued subjugation of the Palestinians, or is there another method for an oppressed people to continue their struggle? For those who think only in terms of armed struggle, it must be a frustrating dilemma: Either bow to the pressure and accept the occupation or continue armed resistance, which may be counterproductive and injurious to the cause.
Yet this should not be the dilemma facing Palestinians. In my opinion, the road is now wide open to engage in a massive campaign of nonviolent resistance to the occupation. the lessons of the past, as well as of the second intifada, clearly point in that direction.
To begin with, Palestinians never were, and are unlikely to be, a match for the Israelis in terms of brute violence and firepower. While this intifada has shown them capable of inflicting losses on the other side and rendering many outlying settlements insecure, they cannot (alone or even with the support of the Arab armies) hope to defeat Israel in an open military confrontation. To the contrary, open warfare provides the justification for Israel to use the full array of its military might and unites the Israeli public behind the settlers and the right wing. It
places the Palestinians in an impossible dilemma, since the more casualties they inflict on Israelis, the less likely their cause is to prosper internationally and, hence, the less pressure there is on Israel to accede to their just demands.
By contrast, during the first intifada, Palestinian unarmed tactics effectively neutralized the superiority of the Israeli military and split the Israeli public down the middle. Those tactics also generated effective international pressure on behalf of the Palestinian cause, and helped reverse hateful stereotypes and images of the Palestinians.
More importantly, the use of nonviolent tactics allowed all sectors of Palestinian society to participate in the resistance rather than just the armed few, which released the creative energies of the people in a beautiful, unifying, and uplifting struggle full of hope and promise. To be sure, there were many casualties and much suffering, and the occupation did not end; yet neither did the present intifada, which also created many martyrs and much suffering. The difference was that the nonviolent struggle highlighted the justice of our cause, which rests on morality, international solidarity, and international law rather than on brute force and overwhelming military superiority. To insist on waging the struggle only in the military sphere is, therefore, doubly foolish
because it deprives us of our natural advantages and allows the conflict to play out in an arena of military violence where our enemies are vastly superior.
Why, then, does the Palestinian leadership not move into a nonviolent struggle? I believe there are several reasons for this.
First, while we as a people have often used nonviolent resistance and tactics, the language and philosophy of nonviolence have remained largely unknown in our communities and political discourse. Although most of our struggle against the occupation has been political, such tactics as strikes, demonstrations, human rights advocacy, non-cooperation, boycotts, insistence on national symbols, and unarmed resistance to land confiscations have also been used. Even stone throwing, which while potentially harmful and therefore violent, was mostly utilized as a form of defiance and rejection of the occupation rather than as a serious weapon. Note, for example, how Edward Said used it in South Lebanon. Yet we have never defined these tactics accurately as methods of nonviolent resistance.
By contrast, we idolized and enshrined the language of "the gun" and made it central to our political culture despite the fact that the vast majority of the Palestinian population has never touched a weapon. The presence of the PNA, with its experience in Lebanon and structure of a traditional Arab regime, only exaggerated this trend and foolishly suggested that we now actually have a military force and a military option.
Additionally, there is a misunderstanding of how nonviolence works. Nonviolent resistance does not guarantee that the other side will refrain from violence or that there will be no casualties. It simply creates a new paradigm, and uses "moral jujitsu" to handicap the enemy and turn his superior military force against himself as he brutalizes a nonviolent opponent.
In my opinion, the main obstacle preventing the widespread adoption of a nonviolent strategy by Palestinians is the popular confusion of nonviolence with passivity, timidity, and acquiescence to injustice. In reality, nonviolence requires greater courage, more discipline, training, and sacrifice, and can be very militant and proactive. Therefore, as the Palestinian Authority responds to the new reality by suspending or combating manifestations of legitimate armed resistance, it would do well to consider the option of nonviolent resistance. If it does not, then ordinary Palestinians may well consider this as the only viable alternative, since acceptance of continued occupation is not an option.
Jonathan Kuttab is a Palestinian lawyer based in Jerusalem. Distributed by Common Ground News Service (CGNews). Copyright permission has been obtained for publication. cgnews@sfcg.org
OTHER RESOURCES
Islamic religion and traditions and non-violence (audio of lecture): http://www.aupeace.org/node/2726
|