Settler attack on Tuwani averted
So I've just 3 days of travel getting from Tuwani to Baghdad. On route I've bumped into various friends (including finally meeting the elusive Azzam, the "capitalist dad" and only non-blogging member of the Jarrar family) and I've been on tender hooks worrying about Jenny facing attacks from Israeli settlers.
In Iraq the controversy continues over Saddam's trial and the referendum results. The violence also continues. This morning I got a call from a very close friend in great distress as there had been an explosion at his younger sister's school in Mansour. The scale of violence in Iraq today is so vast that this incident, which in any other country might have been headline news for days, didn't warrent a single dedicated news article focusing on it, only a few lines reporting that a mortar killed two a child and wounded four others. Thankfully his sister was ok. Rumours at the scene were that it was an American missile. Either way the school was probably not the target but an unfortunate miss.
Last night, as I was in Baghdad airport, Jenny had just texted me that 6 busloads of settlers drove through their village and that the settler's security guard had threatened that they were coming to hurt them and the villagers. The Israeli army and police said the situation was too dangerous for them to intervene, and so they were going to abandoning CPT and the Palestinians to the mercy of the settlers. I spent most of the night praying for them in the military chapel in Camp Striker, Baghdad airpot (a very unusal habitat!) and, hamdulillah, I learnt this morning that the attack was averted, or at least delayed. Jenny and team did a phenomenal job putting pressure on the Israelis (with dozens of internationals and Israeli activists phoning army officers) and so they finally turned up. However the IDF has refused to continue escorting children from the neighouring village of Tuba who have to pass close by the settlement in order to get to school in Tuwani. This violates a system established by order of the Knesset last year after CPTers were severely beaten by settlers while escorting the children, highlighting the issue in the international media. The upside of these new threats of violence is that once again both the Israeli and international media are taking an interest, and this may force the Israeli government to curb the settlers and ease the restrictions on the villagers.
Two final things (a lots's been happening today)...
Firstly many mutual friends have been asking after Joe Carr. He is recovering in Ramallah hospital after suffering a ruptured spleen. I was with him on Friday at the demonstration against the Apertheid Wall in Bil'in. Here is his report of trying to protect Palestinian childrenfrom rubber bullets and subsequently being grabbed and used as a human shield by an Israeli soldier and hence being hit in the ribs by a rock. I travelled to Ramallah hospital with him in a Red Cresent ambulance and as he lay there it was clear that for Joe, who saw his friends Rachel and Tom killed by the IDF in Gaza in 2003, to suffer this injury in the struggle for Palestinian rights was a very minor thing. We differ significantly in our politics and ethics, but Joe's courage and committment continuously inspire me.
Secondly it turns out that Kirsten Dunst will be playing Marla in the film about her life being produced by Marc Platt for MTV films. I wish that she was around to see it.
2 comments:
"On Sunday we received word that 3 settlers had been killed in a drive by shooting on the road from Hebron to Jerusalem. The crime was hideous and was claimed by a Palestinian group."
"Israel better understand that if it will break the popular and essentially non-violent resistance, it will only encourage a more violent and brutal resistance."
Speaking only about the non-violent resistance: "people are finally returning to popular resistance."
Based on countless interviews and reports that I've read from ISM and CPT activists in Palestine and Iraq it's obvious that many of them are genuinely concerned about the plight of others, well-intentioned and dedicated activists. What is also obvious, unfortunately, is that MANY of them fall woefully short in their analysis of the popular resistance movement and their understanding of the concept of self-determination.
The comments that were quoted above, and countless like it, portray the armed struggle against occupation in a negative and reactionary light. A major mistake in this analysis is assuming that the non-violent struggle is the only form of popular resistance. The military aspect of Palestinian resistance is also a legitimate part of the popular struggle and has always been a part of the popular struggle. Ever since the days of the 1936 revolt, and even during Ottoman rule of Palestine, armed resistance was a tactic, albeit only one tactic, in the popular struggle. The same political organizations (whether factions of the PLO or pre-PLO, independent formations) that engaged in non-violent resistance (political education and leadership development, civil disobedience, rallies, marches, general strikes, violating curfews, etc.) also had their respective military wings. The political and military sectors worked, and currently still work, hand in hand, and it's been that way since the beginning of the Palestinian liberation struggle. This amalgamation was at its most successful during the Intifada that began in 1987.
Another dangerous assumption that could be made, based on the comments above, is that the "unpopular" armed resistance is not supported by the Palestinian people. Nothing could be further from the truth, but this allows the international community to see the armed resistance as a negative phenomenon (or carried out by isolated, marginalized Palestinian elements) as opposed to the hugely popular force that it is, and that it's always been. And the reason that it's always been a popular force in Palestinian society is because the Palestinians have always had to defend themselves from violent Israeli military occupation, and they feel strongly that the concept of self-determination gives them that right. It's easy to say that the Palestinians should be peaceful and only use non-violent forms of resistance, but the Israelis don't care if you're chanting slogans in a rally or peacefully standing in front of bulldozers to protect your home or field. They shoot at you anyway, and of the almost 4,000 Palestinians who have been killed since the September 2000 Intifada, the vast majority of them have been civilian women, children, and men.
So, although this analysis may play the role of pitting armed struggle versus non-violent resistance, it only does so in the minds of the international community and the governments that represent those communities. This contradiction does not play out in Palestinian society itself because Palestinians acknowledge that both components are essential to liberating Palestine from Israeli apartheid.
Lastly, and maybe most importantly, characterizing the armed resistance as "unpopular" and posing it as independent of the overall struggle for Palestinian self-determination/liberation gives credence to those who want to criminalize and marginalize it. Like saying that the armed resisters don't represent the Palestinian people and that they are all "terrorists." Some have posited that the repression of non-violent resistance will only encourage a more "violent and brutal resistance," as if 57 years of occupation is not enough to encourage and justify any and all kinds of resistance. Armed resistance is not a reactionary response to the "failure" of non-violent resistance, it is a natural complement to non-violent organizing and part of the holistic popular movement.
We, as solidarity activists, must have the courage to defend and uphold the right to fight back and resist by any means necessary, as is the international right bestowed upon occupied peoples fighting against military occupation. We should support the resistance to occupation in all of its forms and never allow the zionists or liberal-pacifists to dictate the terms of struggle.
And when it comes right down to it who are a bunch of privileged, white, middle class college kids (or college age) from imperialist nations such as the U.S. to pronounce judgement on the means by which the Palestinian people choose to wage their anti-colonial/anti-occupation struggle and exert their right to full self-determination?
Two Suggested Readings:
HOW NONVIOLENCE PROTECTS THE STATE
By Peter Gelderloos
People working for social change face plenty of difficult questions, but sometimes matters of strategy and tactics receive low priority. Among many North American activists, the role of nonviolence as the default mode of struggle bears little scrutiny. Is nonviolence effective at ending systems of oppression? How is nonviolence connected to white privilege? Is militancy naturally macho, or does pacifism reinforce the same power dynamics as patriarchy? Ultimately, does nonviolence protect the State? How Nonviolence Protects the State brings existing criticisms of nonviolence, and several new ones, together into one book, in an attempt to illuminate one of the most severe roadblocks to social change today.
PACIFISM AS PATHOLOGY
Reflections on the Role of Armed Struggle in North America
By Ward Churchill with Mike Ryan
Pacifism, the ideology of nonviolent political action, has for years been at the centre of debate in contemporary North American progressive politics. Pacifism as Pathology is a startling and provocative work that dares to ask uncomfortable questions. It has been the spark for much spirited discourse around the world. An essential read for anyone interested in the WTO protests in Seattle and the future of grass-roots activism.
Churchill goes on to argue that while the ideology of nonviolent political action promises that the harsh realities of state power can be transcended through good feelings and purity of purpose, it is in fact a counter-revolutionary movement that defends and reinforces the same status-quo it claims to oppose. Churchill debunks the claims of historical pacifist victories, and proposes ways to diminish much of the delusion, aroma of racism, and sense of privilege which mark the covert self-defeatism of mainstream dissident politics. An important intervention, intended to generate badly-needed debate about the issue in the progressive community.
And while you're at it check out:
http://www.akpress.org/2005/topics/armedstruggle
Post a Comment