Israel-Palestine
The
need for a just peace
By Kai
Frithjof Brand-Jacobsen, TFF Antenna
Director ICL/Praxis for Peace & Coalition for
Global Solidarity
icl@c2i.net
October 18, 2000
Anger and
frustration should be no surprise
Discussions and analysis of recent events in
Israel/Palestine by peace workers, journalists, human
rights activists, and others have been cause for both
encouragement, and a great deal of concern.
The situation in Israel-Palestine and throughout the
entire Middle East today is very alarming, but it is in
no way surprising. Anger and frustration at one of the
most oppressive and exploitative structures of violence
in the world is exploding. A system which Nelson Mandela
once referred to as "worse than apartheid" is itself
being met with counter-violence in the form of
stone-throwing and protest. The cycle of violence,
recriminations, fear and anger on all sides is growing,
and, given the complete absence of any real attempts at
peace on the parts of the leadership on both sides, can
be expected to continue. Any 'peace' which would be
accepted today on the terms put forward by the Israeli
government and the United States would not be peace, nor
would it be a solution to the causes and structures of
the conflict in Israel-Palestine. Instead, it would be
acontinuation of war by other means.
To protest against the violence which has now exploded
in Israel-Palestine, to seek to come up with creative and
non-violent ways of transforming the conflict, and to
work actively for the promotion of peace are necessary
and vital. To do this, without trying to understand what
really lies behind the conflict, or without trying to
address any of the injustices or inequalities behind the
violence, is to perpetuate a war which has continued, in
one form or another, for over fifty years. Peace must be
inclusive. It must be open to participation by all actors
and all parties, and include recognition of the basic
humanity and dignity of all involved. But it cannot be
blind.
Peace between
equals?
And this is where we fall into a terrible and very
unfortunate trap. For in our efforts to promote peace we
are willing to see both sides as 'equal victims.' To
recognise the crimes and injustices committed against
both sides, the people working for violence, and those
working for peace, on both sides. Yet the conflict in
Israel-Palestine is not between two equal sides. Indeed,
the very basis for all Israeli 'peace' efforts over the
past decade has been to solidify a structure of
domination and inequality. From Cairo, to Oslo, to Wye
River, Paris, and back to Cairo again, the 'peace'
process of the past decade has addressed none of the
underlying causes of the conflict, it has promoted
solutions which themselves further enforce the structure
of violence, and has sought to ensconce the hegemony and
domination of one of the parties to the conflict. As
Tacitus once said of the Romans, "They have created a
desolation, and called it peace." To paraphrase
Clausewitz, 'peace' has become the continuation of war by
other means.
To be in favour of peace we must be honest in our
attempts to understand what lies at the root of violence
and the conflicts behind it. When we think back to the
situation in South Africa we recall how vital it was for
many people in the world to support the struggle of the
ANC and black South Africans (with a few courageous white
South African friends and comrades) against the evils of
the apartheid system. Part of this struggle was the very
recognition that apartheid itself was 'evil.' Is this the
same as Reagan's calling the Soviet Union the 'Evil
Empire'. No. Instead, it is more similar to Gandhi, who
himself said that "It is necessary to struggle against
the evil system, not the evil man."
And in South Africa, this is what was done. Apartheid
as a system was opposed by the anti-Apartheid movement
within South Africa and internationally. The whites of
South Africa were recognised as an integral part of the
nation, and the future of the country is being built upon
a spirit of reconciliation. Yet it was necessary first to
call for an end to the Apartheid system. To recognise
that, yes, many white South Africans were afraid of what
would happen to them under a 'black' government, and it
was necessary to allay these fears, to build a future
South Africa which recognised the dignity and humanity of
all its citizens. This, however, is not what is on offer
in the Middle East. In fact, it is the very antithesis of
Israeli-American proposals.
That Arafat is a corrupt, authoritarian and frequently
dictatorial ruler, yes, I completely agree. One of the
reasons the Oslo Accords were signed between the State of
Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (for
there has been no 'peace' accord between Israel and
Palestine), was because Arafat himself had become
dependent upon his support from Israel in order to
maintain his position within the PLO and Palestine, to
prevent a new generation of more legitimate and
democratic leaders from developing.
What Oslo promised
was not peace
Yet Arafat's corruption has been entirely supported
and encouraged by Israel and the United States, while his
massive security apparatus itself is a response:
i) to Israeli and American calls that he 'clamp down
on terrorism', and
ii) a vital instrument in suppressing any authentic
democratic, peace, and human rights movements from within
Palestine.
It is worthwhile to note, however, that even Norway
has refused to offer any support to groups critical of
the Oslo Accords. What is interesting, is that these
groups are not critical of the Oslo Accords because they
are against peace. Quite the opposite. They are critical
because they are for peace, and they recognise that what
is promised by Oslo is exactly the opposite.
Yet focus in the media on the corruption of the
Palestinian Authority is itself too simplistic and
contributes to a false portrayal of the conflict. It is
like focussing only upon the corruption of a local
henchman or gang leader (for this is what Arafat, in a
particularly contemptible way, is degenerating into),
without recognising the violence of the Emperor. The
scales cannot be compared, and the extent towards which
we have almost completely ignored Israel's systematic
violence against Palestine borders on propaganda, if not
the criminal. Istvan Meszaros once wrote: "Blindness in
intellectuals is not a natural calamity that simply
befalls them as a matter of unavoidable destiny but a
self-induced condition." Let us not allow this to be a
condition which we enforce upon ourselves.
Some figures:
- the Wye River Agreement significantly reduced the
amount of territory, from 30 to 13 per cent, to be placed
under Palestinian control. Israel failed to fulfill even
this condition of withdrawal.
- since Oslo, more than 600 Palestinian homes have
been demolished and 140,000 dunums of Palestinian land
confiscated (1998 figures; the numbers since then have
increased dramatically) reflecting Israel's continuing
determination to grab as much land as possible before a
final settlement is reached.
- between 1994 and 1998, according to B'Tselem, a
leading human rights organization in Israel, 356
Palestinians were killed compared to 251 Israelis.
Current and historical casualty imbalance (Palestinian :
Israeli) is closer to 20:1
- since Oslo, and resulting from frequent Israeli
'closures' the Palestinian standard of living has fallen
by nearly 40 per cent, with 30 per cent of the workforce
unemployed and 40 per cent of the population now living
at or below the poverty line
- a year after Oslo, Israel's control of West Bank
land reached about 75 per cent, up from 65 per cent when
the Accords were signed, while water supplies to Gaza had
been cut in half
- in the West Bank, for every litre of water available
to one Palestinian, one Israeli settler consumes 876
litres.
These are only a few of the figures. The actual
situation is much worse. As Gandhi recognised, "Economic
equality is the master key to nonviolent independence...
a nonviolent system of government is clearly an
impossibility so long as the wide gulf between the rich
and the hungry millions persist." This is true in the
case of Israel-Palestine, and equally true of the
situation in the entire world today. Peace through
violence, peace through exploitation and the denial of
the 'other's' humanity, is not real peace. Let us not be
part in this crime.
The "peace workers"
and the US as mediator
Barak made no concessions, and gave nothing away in
Camp David. The entire farce itself was arranged to put
the blame for any failures upon Arafat and the PLO and to
remove the rising barrage of criticism which had been
falling upon Israel from the EU and the vast majority of
countries in the world. By making proposals which were
clearly impossible for Arafat to accept, the entire
failure of the meeting was placed upon the Palestinians'
shoulders. If Arafat had accepted, he would have forever
given up on the hope of Palestine ever becoming
independent. By refusing, he provided the Israelis with
the opportunity to say "Look, we wanted peace, he
refused. How can we possibly be blamed for what happens
next?"
Let us not reproduce the myth that Barak was willing
to make peace, but Arafat missed an historic opportunity.
No. Arafat was asked to say that Israel owed nothing to
Palestine, that Palestine should accept never being a
state, that Israeli control and domination of Palestine
should remain unchallenged, and that Palestinian police
should continue to police, terrorise and abuse
Palestinian people for the security of Israel. I do not
accept Arafat's credentials as a 'peaceworker', not
because he is not willing to meet the demands of the
Israelis, but because he has too often betrayed his own
people, and has prevented any true peace movement from
developing in the region.
This perhaps, is one of the difficulties for
international supporters of peace as well. Arafat is no
Mandela, therefore, how can the cause of the Palestinians
be as noble as that of the South Africans? Shall we let
an entire population suffer because we, rightfully, do
not believe in the integrity of its authoritarian ruler?
Or shall we recognise the vast injustice and crime being
committed against the people of Palestine, and demand,
and work for a peace based upon the equal recognition of
the rights and needs of all sides, while also recognising
that security for one cannot be based upon the mass
impoverishment and denial of humanity of the other. This
has always been a recipe which leads to war. It is doing
so now.
Israel's unbridled arrogance in promoting its
domination throughout the entire region has been one of
the main factors behind the current conflict. Its refusal
to make even the slightest authentic efforts towards
peace has continuously fuelled aggravation and the loss
of hope within Palestine, some of the major factors
behind today's explosion of violence. It is not enough
for Israeli 'peaceniks' to say that they are for peace,
without criticising the horrendous structural violence
which is practised against the Palestinians, or while
continuing to serve in the Israeli Army.
What we can be for
- and not only against
By saying this, it does not mean that I am for either
'side' of the conflict. I am for peace. I am for
humanity. I am for the right of Israelis and Palestinians
to grow up and live together in peace. I am for democracy
in Palestine, and an end to the Israeli enforced
apartheid system. I will not tell the slave to love his
master, or believe that the slave should stop rebelling
because the master wishes to make his control more
effective. There can be no peace between slaves and
masters, neither should there be.
Does this mean the 'master' should be killed? No.
Gandhi would have agreed. But he would also recognise the
necessity for the slave to struggle for his/her freedom
and independence. Palestine's struggle for freedom
against one of the longest occupations in the post-World
War II periods must continue. Its aim, however, should
not be to 'beat' or 'win over' Israel, but to create a
free and independent Palestine. Oppression and violence
should be opposed on all sides with the force of
non-violence, and commitment to human dignity and
dialogue.
I would not agree, as some have suggested though, that
the 'silent majority' are working for peace. As we have
seen all too often in history, to be silent is to condone
the violence being committed, as many Jewish individuals
and intellectuals will tell you when confronting German
silence in the years leading to the Holocaust. I am very
confident that most Israelis do not support the policies
of the extreme right (bordering on fascist) of the
Israeli settlers and many politicians. Until they are
willing to struggle against it, however, and until they
are willing to work for active nonviolence and to address
the structures of the conflict, they are themselves
helping to perpetuate the system of violence. "To accept
violence is also violence" as Johan Galtung once
said.
The root
contradictions of this conflict - and what we ought to do
now
Let us look at the attitudes, behaviour, and the
structures, the root contradictions, of the conflict. If
we are not willing to do this, let us not pretend to be
willing to work for peace. Let us echo Edward Said's call
for mass non-violent struggle in Palestine, and to
welcome true solidarity between Israelis and Palestinians
committed to building peace on the formula "no
exploitation, no surrender", the catchwords of Gandhi's
struggle for swaraj, home rule. Let academics,
intellectuals, school children, and every single
individual and human being who professes to be concerned
with the situation in Israel-Palestine act to try to
understand what is really behind the conflict, and to
understand the attitudes, hopes, fears, dreams and
insecurities of all the actors on all sides. Let us be
critical, as necessary in order to be honest, but let us
also be creative in coming up with solutions and
suggestions for what can be done. Let us demand equality
of Palestinians and Israelis, and recognise that equality
cannot be built on oppression or exploitation. Let us
protest against the killings, and also against
international support for the State of Israel's apartheid
system, for US Congress funding of the building of
settlements, for the betrayal of even the Oslo Accords,
themselves a horrible prescription, promoting a
foundation for violence, not peace. And let us reassert
the authority of the relevant UN resolutions.
Finally, let us call for an end to the newspeak, to
the culture of violence and racism, the propaganda, and
the belief that one or the other side is "less than
human" that has so often been at the heart of
war--whether fought through economic or military means.
Peace is a struggle. It is not something that will simply
fall into our laps or appear because we close our eyes
and wish the violence will go away. For too long our eyes
have been closed. This is why we are seeing the violence
that is exploding today.
My one question, as experts, journalists, politicians
and `peaceworkers' fill the pages of newspapers and
journals with their articles and analysis, is why has it
taken this long? Why did we wait, why did we ignore the
violence, the daily killing of Palestinians over the last
many years, the destruction of homes, the situation in
the refugee camps? Why did we wait, and how now can we
believe ourselves to be satisfying our conscience,
because we respond to the sight of children being shot,
buildings being blown up with missiles, and stones being
thrown? The number of Palestinians that have died since
Oslo because of lack of access to proper medicines,
because of poor health and economic situations in the
occupied territories, because of the slow death of
structural violence, far exceeds the number of those
killed in the last weeks. Were there deaths any less
horrific, were there lives any less worthy or sacred,
because they weren't captured on the evening news?
This is a question we must be willing to ask
ourselves, for the people of Palestine, and of Israel,
because if we truly believe, as we should, that Israelis
have the right to live in peace, to not fear car bombs
and 'terrorism', than we must recognise that this can
only happen, if Israelis and Palestinians are willing to
work for a true, a just, and an honest peace.
We, however, cannot be satisfied with being silent.
Otherwise, we are only helping the war to continue.
Kai Frithjof Brand-Jacobsen
Dir. ICL/Praxis for Peace & Coalition for Global
Solidarity
icl@c2i.net
©
TFF 2000

Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
|