On 20 April, Caabu hosted an event in Parliament on popular unarmed resistance in Palestine, with academic and co-author of Popular Protest in Palestine: The Uncertain Future, Marwan Darweish.
The event was chaired by Andy McDonald MP, who introduced proceedings by recalling his illuminating visit to Palestine in February 2016 with Caabu and Medical Aid for Palestinians. He described some of the human rights abuses he witnessed, such as Bedouin communities in Susiya being forcibly removed from their homes, and called upon the international community to apply further pressure on the Israeli government’s entrenched position.
Marwan Darweish, who recently co-authored a book titled Popular Protest in Palestine: The Uncertain Future, set out his talk by raising questions about the nature of unarmed resistance in Palestine, the many challenges it faces as well as its prospects for the future. He put the subject into context by citing the rich history of popular protest in Palestine, from the 1936 Revolt to the 1987 Intifada, and his briefing would focus on the resurgence of popular resistance since the construction of the separation barrier in 2002, and also help to explain the current wave of violence since autumn 2015.
Carrying out extensive field work from among over 120 activists and academics across the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Israel, and those in the Diaspora, Darweish posed the question as to what is the aim of their resistance. While ending the occupation and all forms of discrimination is the ultimate goal, perhaps because of the scale of this challenge such resistance firstly seeks to spread awareness of the occupation, create a culture of resistance and enforce some form of leverage on Israeli government and society.
He identified three main types of civil resistance. The first involves offensive kinds, such as protests, weekly demonstrations, and targeted confrontations against the wall and expanding settlements. Alongside this are more defensive forms of resistance, which include the monitoring of human rights abuses, solidarity and forming protective shields on the ground. Such resistance incorporates both international and Israeli NGOs, and he noted the particularly vital role which Israeli activists can play, who are often “twice marginalised”, from both Israelis and Palestinians, but whose involvement is ultimately pivotal in terms of creating “co-resistance”.
He also described “constructive” resistance, i.e. building alternatives and entirely new realities across a wide range of fields, from health to agriculture. He found that Palestinian public opinion is largely in favour of these forms of civil resistance, with polls indicating that 70% consider it an effective strategy and 63% believing that it could impact Israeli public opinion.
Israeli Jewish citizens on the other hand were more skeptical that such resistance could have much of an impact on Israeli society. Darweish discovered a widespread lack of awareness or apathy regarding the occupation, summed up by an Israeli activist saying ‘people live with it’. 52% felt that only international pressure on Israel would encourage change, highlighting two of the factors which underpin the occupation, international support and acceptance from the Israeli public. Ultimately Israelis must see the interests in ending the occupation.
As to why these forms of resistance are no longer mass movements in Palestine, like they were during the First Intifada for instance, Darweish offered various explanations. Firstly, the Hamas-Fatah split has proved a hindrance, polarising Palestinian society and aggravating the physical Gaza-West Bank divide. He argued that reconciliation is surely necessary, the main question being not if but how best to engage with Hamas.
Secondly, he argued that the Oslo Accords of the 1990s served to “imprison” the Palestinian elite, creating a form of dependency in which much of the PLO became bound to Israel in a self-serving settlement. Evidence of this dependency can be seen by the fact the PLO spends so much of its budget on security, often enforcing the Israeli security apparatus.
And of course the occupation itself poses huge challenges to resistance, both in terms of the physical violence committed by settlers and a highly sophisticated Israeli army, as well as the structural attacks in the form of permits, work and checkpoints, limiting the space in which to resist and creating further political fragmentation.
Given the challenges of such resistance, and its impact so seemingly limited, why do they still resist in this way at all? Some do turn to violence, increasingly so since September 2015, a trend which Darweish found lay in a deep sense of hopelessness, as well as an incompetent Palestinian leadership. He argued that Israelis are in fact more comfortable dealing with violence than unarmed resistance. Such forms of unarmed resistance are much more effective in terms of tapping into the international solidarity movement, an important development given the ingrained status quo on the ground. Darweish described it as a “boomerang process”, a chain of influence linking local protest to international solidarity networks and ultimately to international and Israeli policy makers and public opinion. He pointed to the progress that has been made over the last 50 years in this regard, but argued that there is a still a much greater role for the international community to play.
