Vol. XVI, No.3 Spring, 2002
ARTICLES
The
Don't Rules in Societal Trauma and Its Healing
The Nightmare Must End
Toward a New Palestinian Strategy
Is the 'War on Terrorism' Repeating
Major Errors of the 'Cold War'?
From the Washington Watch column.
Permission of author given to republish.
January 28, 2002
TOWARD A NEW PALESTINIAN STRATEGY
Dr. James J. Zogby
©
President of the Arab American Institute
There is a desperate need for a new Palestinian
strategy. What is now being done is clearly not working. More
of the same will only produce more suffering, more tension and
ever deepening disaster.
A reassessment is long overdue. To begin
such an effort, it is important to outline some of the constants
that define the parameters of the current situation.
The first of these, I believe, is the
simple fact that the Sharon government is unwilling to make peace
on terms that provide the Palestinians with their basic rights.
This government's current objectives appear to be:
-the military defeat of the Palestinians;
-the dismantling of the Palestinian Authority and the delegitimization
of its leadership; and
-the end of the Oslo process and the imposition of "peace"
on Israel's terms.
Secondly, it is clear that given the
reality of U.S. politics, the Administration will not intervene
to restrain Israel's aggressive behavior. They are not pleased
with Israel's actions and would like to see a negotiated settlement
to the conflict on the terms outlined in Secretary Powell's Louisville
speech. But they will not act in a public or decisive manner
to pressure Israel. Therefore, despite the fanciful hopes or
the insistence of some Arabs, there will be no U.S.-led Kosovo-style
rescue, or Kuwait-style liberation-nor will there be a U.S.-imposed,
or even U.S.-supported peacekeeping or protection force sent
into the occupied lands.
In fact, there will not even be a U.S.-supported
U.N. resolution that calls for the formation of any of the above.
Given the absence of any possibility of any outside rescue effort-it
is important to look elsewhere.
Thirdly, not only are Palestinians losing
on the ground, but they are losing the information battle in
the U.S. There is no organized Palestinian information effort
in the U.S. Israel and its well-funded supporters, therefore,
have a clear playing field which they use to their advantage.
They have succeeded in defining the terms of the current debate
and in demonizing the Palestinian Authority, its president, Yasser
Arafat, and in portraying themselves as the victims and the Palestinians
as the aggressors.
Fourthly, there will be no European rescue.
The EU, as well as other international players: the Russians,
Chinese, the non-aligned, OIC, etc. will express concern or condemnation
and pass an occasional resolution, but they will not act. They
have no real leverage-or better, no interest in using whatever
leverage they do have, since they do not wish to force an open
confrontation with the U.S.
Fifthly, even the Arab states, though
deeply distressed and even angered at the unraveling situation,
will not be able to be the external force that can rescue the
situation.
Finally, back to the Israeli context,
it is important to recognize that the collapse of the peace process
and the resumption of violence has hardened Israeli opinion.
As a result, Sharon's hand has been strengthened and the Labor
party has been weakened to the point of collapse.
I am eager to debate any or all of these
six observations. Not whether they are "just"-- clearly
they are not "just"-- but whether they are correct
in describing the set of circumstances we face, as I believe
they are.
Complaining about what is unjust not
a strategy. Politics is not a whine. What is needed is to identify
what can be changed and to lay out a path to produce that change--
that is what politics is all about.
If these observations are correct, then:
-going to the U.N. with yet one more
proposed resolution will not produce change;
-making more appeals for international solidarity will not make
real
change;
-and more violence against Israelis (whether soldiers, settlers
or innocent civilians) will not make change.
I can hear someone complaining right
now, about the right to "armed struggle
against occupation". And it reminds me of a story. In 1979,
while I was running the Palestine Human Rights Campaign, here
in Washington, DC, I had the pleasure of hosting the late Tawfiq
Zayyad, Mayor of Nazareth. At one town meeting we organized for
him, he received a hostile question from a young man who challenged
Zayyad's criticism of PLO-led guerilla attacks from Lebanon.
The questioner ended his remarks, reminding the mayor of the
"inalienable" right of an occupied people to use armed
struggle to resist occupation.
Zayyad responded "it is correct
that you have the right to armed struggle. But when you use that
right as badly as you have used it -- then you forfeit the right
-- and have to find a better way to liberation".
I believe that is where we are today.
The suicide bombings in Israel and this bizarre effort to turn
the West Bank into South Lebanon by introducing new weapons systems
are destructive and, I might add, stupid. They have resulted
in increased suffering and done great damage to the Palestinian
cause.
Violence, in any form, at this point,
only begets more violence. As one Palestinian leader noted a
short while ago, "When we use stones, they use guns. When
we use guns, they use tanks", and so it goes. If this is
the case, and it is, then what possible good would rockets be?
And with Israel's domination in information
control, they have been able to transform the reality of every
event to meet their political needs. The stonethrowers become
violent criminals and assassinated young men become "ticking
bombs" -- with no evidence presented or needed to make their
case.
It is, therefore, critical to find a
new way. To begin, however, it is vital that the violence must
end. This will be hard to do. Anger is deep and real, and passions
are high. Furthermore, Israel's brutally aggressive behavior
continues and only seems to deepen this anger and heighten the
passion. But it must, nonetheless, be stopped -- even if it is
done at great cost to the Palestinian Authority.
It must be stopped because this violence
is totally counterproductive. What good has it brought? What
has it yielded other than death -- for Israelis and, in retaliation,
for even more Palestinians?
Not only has it not produced any good
and only brought increased repression and more suffering for
Palestinians -- but this violence has repeatedly sabotaged the
efforts of the Palestinian Authority to negotiate and create
more favorable conditions on the ground.
It has been politically disastrous as
well. The bombings and killings have damaged the Palestinian
cause, and have allowed the likes of Sharon and Netanyahu to
transform their public personas in the West from the brutal bullies
that they are into defenders of a beleaguered people.
With the violence ended, the Palestinian
people can then begin a full-scale campaign designed to change
the political dynamics in their favor. The two arenas most in
need of change and potentially most responsive to change are
the publics and their opinions both in the U.S. and Israel.
There is currently at work in the occupied
territories a small and courageous group of young people engaged
in civil disobedience against the occupation forces. Their efforts
should be supported and become massive. Large scale and completely
peaceful demonstrations and sit-ins and disruptions of traffic
can occur in Jerusalem, on West Bank roads and at check points.
Only if they are preceded by a period of peace, and are themselves
completely peaceful, can these actions have their desired impact.
As Martin Luther King and other practitioners
of such tactics have taught, the genesis of this approach is
that it is like "jui-jitsu". When facing a more powerful
foe, never play into his power, but attempt to turn his power
into his weakness.
A peaceful march of tens of thousands
of unarmed Palestinians converging on the city of Jerusalem from
all points in the West Bank, carrying banners that read "Let
my people pray" or "Let my people go home" would
tie the hands of the Israeli military. If they use violence-they
would lose. If they allowed the march the Palestinians would
find new power and win.
A key point here is to empower the Palestinian
people and to enable them to regain their victim status and to
strip the Israelis of their mantle of self-defense.
There are hundreds of similar little
tactics that could be developed into a comprehensive campaign.
They should be explored.
All of this must be complemented by a
political peace initiative launched by the leadership and proposed
to the people of Israel. It should hold out the terms of a comprehensive
peace-based on terms that meet the legitimate needs of all parties.
And it should be realistic. For example, while the Barak offer
was clearly unacceptable, it appears that the Clinton offer,
especially after the parties narrowed their differences at Taba
in January 2001, was more acceptable. To be able to put this
Clinton "plus" back on the table, coupled with a period
of peace and a campaign of non-violent protest -- might have
a transformative impact in Israel and in the U.S. It would certainly
cause Sharon some great discomfort. He needs the violence to
survive -- a real peace campaign would weaken his hold.
These are but some ideas, borne out of
my frustration with the current situation. I realize that the
anger in Palestine, today, is so great and the pain is so deep,
that it may be hard to find a new way. But we must discuss a
new approach. Vengeance is destructive and counterproductive.
And the current path has led to a dead end.
I look forward to a debate.
For comments or information, contact
jzogby@aaiusa.org or
http://www.aaiusa.org
Top
of Page
These articles and opinions
of the authors do not constitute the endorsement of Nonviolent
Change nor its publisher, Organization Development Institute,
or any of its staff, nor of CirclePoint which is housing the
Nonviolent Change Journal.
©2002. All rights reserve. The Nonviolent Change Journal
is published by the Research/Study Team on Nonviolent Large
Systems Change - an interorganizational and international project
of The Organization Development Institute.
Permissions:
Reposting and reprints are encouraged, as long as proper source
acknowledgement is given. Please let the author of the above
article know that you are reprinting or electronically reposting.
Thank you.
|
