wfn.org | (no subject)

[JerusalemRelOrgs@aol.com]

A Call for a non-violent resistance strategy in Palestine
(Jonathan Kuttab is a Palestinian human rights lawyer and peace activist. 
Mubarak Awad is director of Nonviolence International). 

Overview: The Palestinian people have a genuine chance to achieve their 
national goals, in spite of the enormous gap between them and their foes, if 
they pursue a conscious, organized strategy of non-violent resistance to the 
occupation on a massive scale. Such a strategy would provide a role for the 
entire Palestinian people, both inside and outside of Palestine, and would 
include the Arab world, the international community, and even genuinely 
peace-loving Israelis. It would focus the energies of the entire nation and 
move the struggle into an arena that maximizes our natural advantages and 
neutralizes much of the power of our opponents.

For this strategy to succeed, it must be adopted on a massive scale by large 
segments of the Palestinian population and by the Palestinian National 
Authority (PNA) itself. It must involve a strategic, long-term commitment and 
not simply be symbolic or episodic in character. To achieve this commitment, 
we need broad public discussions involving unions, students, civil society 
institutions, and the local Palestinian media. Political discussion within 
the community must be revived so that participation is universal and everyone 
has a voice instead of a gun.

To this end, we must call for immediate national elections, even if it means 
that Hamas and other extremist groups win many votes. The armed factions must 
be transformed into political parties, and a new Palestinian Social 
Democratic party must be established to provide a political home for those 
who are dissatisfied with the current factions. Elections have to be planned 
and carried out regularly, instead of being one-time affairs as in the past. 
If the Israeli authorities try to block such elections, the elections 
themselves will become a battlefield for the non-violent struggle as the 
Palestinian's peaceful struggle for democracy, is pitted against the might of 
the occupation's war machine.

International Support: The role of the Arab and Muslim worlds is crucial. 
Non-violence, in the form of boycotts, protests, and diplomatic pressure, 
must be applied to translate their support into concrete pressure on Israel. 
Fiery speeches and futile threats of war against Israel are 
counterproductive. A principled campaign of non-violent support, however, can 
bear results. Massive marches toward the borders in support of the Right of 
Return must be planned. While the governments in neighboring Arab states can 
easily prohibit armed incursions across their borders, they would be very 
hard pressed to stop Palestinians from attempting to peacefully return to 
their homeland.

The international community, especially churches, should be enlisted in the 
struggle, focusing on the settlements and the occupation. The Palestinian 
cause is just and is based on morality and international law. Every 
opportunity should be taken to frame the question in these terms and to 
challenge the illegal nature of the occupation. The past year has yielded 
numerous instances of war crimes for which Israel and specific commanders 
should be held accountable before war crimes tribunals. We must insist that 
the UN take action on these issues.

Those who support occupation and its crimes must be shamed and challenged 
everywhere. This creates a worldwide arena for a non-violent struggle based 
on morality and international law. South Africa's apartheid regime faced such 
a fight and ultimately collapsed. Israel is far more vulnerable because 
it is highly dependent on the rest of the world, particularly Europe and the 
United States, and cannot afford to ignore these voices. Massive boycotts of 
Israeli products and services, as well as cultural, sports, educational, and 
diplomatic activities, should be conducted. These protests must be linked to 
specific individuals or to specific policies. Each activity or event can 
become a focus for protest and a pressure point. Broad general boycotts that 
oppose all Israelis are unfair and unworkable.

Such a campaign would set the struggle in its proper context and enlist the 
participation of people of goodwill all over the world, including many Jews 
and others who would support Israel as a victim of violence, but contest its 
oppression of Palestinians and its occupation and settlement policies.

Obstacles to a Non-violent Approach: One problem with convincing Palestinians 
to adopt non-violence is the "Hezbollah argument." Under Hezbollah, the 
Lebanese resistance successfully ended the Israeli occupation of southern 
Lebanon by armed resistance, which made the continued occupation too costly 
for Israel. Hezbollah's satellite television channel Al Manar constantly 
reminds Palestinians of this success and urges them to follow Hezbollah's 
example. However, the Israelis never considered south Lebanon part of Israel 
and they did not settle it. For them, the occupation of south Lebanon could 
easily be abandoned once the cost in lives was too great and outweighed the 
military benefits of its continuation. On the other hand, the Palestinian 
armed struggle is often interpreted as a threat against Israel itself, and 
not only its occupation and settlements.

When the issue is the existence of the state of Israel itself, Israelis and 
their supporters abroad will present a united front and fight with no regard 
to cost and the number of casualties. However, if the issues are the 
settlements and the occupation, more than half of the Israeli population may 
be flexible. Only 30 percent of all settlers are ideologically motivated. The 
other 70 percent are attracted to the financial advantages of 
settlements. A fight against the hardcore 30 percent of settlers is winnable, 
but a fight against all Israelis, afraid that their very existence is being 
threatened, may not be.

Some may argue that the goal of armed resistance is not to destroy Israel, 
but to end the occupation, but that is unconvincing to Israelis, particularly 
when average Israelis are being killed and wounded, and when military 
activities spill over into Israel itself. In contrast, a non-violent struggle 
cannot be misunderstood as a physical threat to Israel. Large masses of 
Israelis who truly yearn for a just peace can be enlisted in a non-violent 
struggle against occupation and settlements, while there is almost no chance 
of enlisting them in any armed Palestinian activity.

It must be understood that Palestinians would ultimately choose non-violence 
as a practical and useful tool to fight occupation and not in order to 
appease Israeli liberals or the United States. Although Palestinian armed 
struggle against the occupation is both morally and legally legitimate, it 
may be ineffective, futile, and counterproductive. If Palestinians choose 
non-violence, it would only be because they are convinced that it can achieve 
results. It must be engaged in as a serious, militant, and difficult choice 
in favor of resistance and struggle. Submission to occupation and surrender 
is not an option for us.

What are the chances that such an approach will work? There is no more 
assurance of ultimate victory in a non-violent struggle than in an armed 
struggle. However, in an armed struggle, the Israelis have overwhelming 
military superiority and would restrict the battle to the military arena, far 
away from the limits imposed by law, morality, and principles. The Israelis 
know how to fight against an armed antagonist, but have no understanding of 
how to deal with non-violent resistance. They expect, and need, the 
Palestinians to be either submissive or violent. A non-violent approach would 
neutralize much of Israel's military might.

In the early 1980s, Mubarak Awad was able to convince many Palestinians as 
well as other Arabs and Muslims that non-violence can work and that it is 
more powerful than any other weapon we have. Because of his work, the 
Israelis considered him dangerous and he was arrested and subsequently 
deported. Nonetheless, there continues to be a great interest in 
non-violence. What is lacking is an overall strategy and commitment to do it 
on a massive scale. People are still trapped in the rhetoric of armed 
struggle, and many, especially abroad, would rather applaud the armed 
struggle from afar than actively engage in non-violent struggle and take 
responsibility for the future.

Jonathan Kuttab is a Palestinian human rights lawyer and peace activist. 
Mubarak Awad is director of Nonviolence International. The above text may be 
used without permission but with proper attribution to the author and to the 
Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine. This Information Brief does not 
necessarily reflect the views of CPAP or The Jerusalem Fund. Jonathan Kuttab 
can be reached at jkuttab@alqudsnet.com. Mubarak Awad can be reached at  
mawad@nyap.org.