"The end and a new beginning!!"*
By: Dr. Eyad El-Sarraj
28 Jan. 2002
A dear friend drew my attention to what Dr. Jamal Abdel Jawad wrote in "Al-Ahram Files" on 11 January under the title of "The Limits of the Military Option in Palestine."
The Palestinian struggle, as Dr. Abdel Jawad says, is going through a very sensitive and critical stage. I dare to add that the Palestinian issue as a whole is going through a very dangerous period but full of possibilities. In this time we may witness to an end of a defeated old stream and the birth a new one belonging to the modern time, the age of science, awareness, freedom of expression, solidarity with justice-not blind solidarity-and being armed with the power of public opinion.
The Palestinian issue is one of the most important in our times. It is the issue of a people who were robbed their rights and land, and have become refugees all over the world, looking for their livelihood and searching for identity. A grave injustice that should have enlisted world opinion in support of the issue had their been the leadership and the intellectual capacity to develop the means of the struggle and renewing them in accordance with the local, regional, and international developments, and in line with the human principles supporting justice.
Zionists have tried, and succeeded in, portraying themselves a victim defending itself from Palestinian "terror" and Arab "aggression" that want to throw Jews in the sea. They achieved this at a time when the favorite Arab weapon was slogans and fiery talk about fighting to the death for the land. Arabs did not understand that the world took their shouting seriously, and Zionist propaganda used it as proof of Arab violence and barbarism against "poor" Israel.
Dr. Abdel Jawad says that the first Palestinian Intifada succeeded in imprinting the picture of Palestinian victims in world opinion. Indeed that Intifada was the first time in history that the Palestinian people felt morally victorious over Israel, as some soldiers refused to serve in the Israeli army moved by feelings of guilt and consciousness. However, that Intifada reached its inevitable end when armed factions transformed it from the struggle of the oppressed for freedom into a resistance by military order. After it was abducted by the gun, the Intifada became a burden on the people, awareness was dimmed, and the world became alienated. The first intifada was a lesson for those paying attention; and we've had more than enough lessons pass us by.
The current Intifada was not to erupt had it not been for many objective reasons going back years. Palestinian performance was faltering in institution building as well as during the revolution. It depended on factions, arms, and turning a blind eye towards corruption, if not encouraging it to a degree that the "national project" became a business investment aiming to accumulate wealth and power for some at the expense of the people.
The causes behind the Intifada definitely include increasing conviction in the failure of the Oslo process, as well as the arrogance and stubbornness of the Israeli government. Sharon's visit to Al-Aqsa was the last straw!
Sharon had a plan with specific objectives. The first objective, which was behind the visit to Al-Aqsa, was to attain power. In this he depended on a conclusion reached by Israeli experts, "provoke Arabs to become violent by killing a number of them. This transforms them into armed rebels shooting Jews. Feelings of fear and historic paranoia will face Jews to seek the 'powerful' father to protect them with brute force." This is how the Israelis chose to elect Sharon.
Sharon's second objective was to go back on all agreements and take the Palestinian issue to the pre-Oslo days. This would not have been easy had he not known that by continuing to provoke Palestinians they would seek vengeance by killing Israeli civilians and shooting more bullets. Sharon succeeded in his second objective and received world support-when in the past the world hold him responsible for the Sabra and Chatilla massacre-who viewed him as someone defending Israel's right to exist and the security of its citizens, especially after the events of 11 September 2001.
The Palestinian movement could not absorb the ramifications of these events. Some even were adamant as if saying that "we are also Taliban." So it was easy for Sharon to convince the world that Palestinians belong to the terrorist camp that the whole world is fighting.
Thus, Palestinian bullets were a very important factor taken into consideration by the Israeli military establishment, a factor it utilized to portray Palestinians as terrorists.
This brings back to memory painful lessons such as the coalition by Haj Amin Husseini with Nazi Germany during the second world war, when the whole world was against it. Likewise, supporting Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait. It seems that Palestinians were insistent on being in the wrong camp.
We can also learn from other experiences in seeking freedom. Ghandi was able to liberate India. Mandela liberated South Africa. Martin Luther King liberated the blacks in the US. They achieved freedom by resorting to the most powerful arm: not resorting to arms. Empires could not withstand their strategies that depended on the human principles of preserving life and rejecting killing.
This doesn't not mean that armed resistance is illegitimate. What we're saying is that armed resistance alone devoid of clear thinking, vision, insight, morality, and democratic enrichment turns into an enemy against its advocates. Look at the experiences of Algeria and Palestine. Since the first day of its establishment, others and I have written and asked the Palestinian Authority to respect democracy and the rule of law as well as adopt the principles of separation of power, pluralism, and accountability. But above all we stressed the need to collect illegal arms before they turn into armed militias threatening Palestinian national security. Our demands and advice fell on deaf ears for reasons known only to the people in power during this dark period in Palestinian history.
The indiscriminate use of Palestinian arms and the monopoly of arms in the hands of militias turned the majority of the people who are taking the brunt of the pain into marginal witnesses unable to express their pain or criticize as talking about the detrimental effect of arms is viewed as something against national security, national unity, and national interests. Violence is feeding on the cultural background of the Palestinian and Arab society, which is ruled by a tribal mentality advocating revenge and blood as the only way to wash the disgrace and humiliation of the nation.
There is an absence of Israeli readiness to submit to the truth, admit its guilt, and apologize for its crimes in order to pave the way for peace, the only guarantee of its security. In addition, there is a steady decline in the morale of the Palestinians as a result of repeated defeats and the increasing sense that the world is conspiring against them. Therefore, the use of arms has become the means to die and be free of this world, and to take vengeance against the enemy and the whole world. It was the choice of the desperate. I have been a firm believer in that the best choice for the Palestinian people in their just struggle toward freedom and independence is that of peaceful resistance that holds to all our rights firmly. It doesn't sacrifice friends, but unites with them. It doesn't disregard world opinion, but is armed with it. It doesn't enforce opinions but reaches consensus through democratic dialogue.
I do not see any possibility for decisive Arab intervention on behalf of the Palestinians. Some Arab regimes have become middlemen renting out their countries. I do not expect international intervention enforcing justice upon Israel. Of course, I do not expect American intervention on to deter the aggressor and establish justice.
The only choice for the Palestinian people is to depend on themselves, develop their capabilities, renew their cadres, rise with their youth by holding on to national and human principles. They have to respect morality and the law. They have to organize themselves into a progressive movement deriving from its roots, its eyes on the future, connected to world cultures. Such a movement would receive friends and supporters from the rest of the world. It would depend on knowledge as a means to renaissance. It would establish democracy as the system of government. It would hold on to the higher moral ground.
*¨ Translated from an article published in the Arabic daily newspaper "Al Quds" on 27/1/20
