|
|
- People of the Intifada
-
-
- Union of Health Work
Committees, Palestine
-
- For most people in the
West, the terms "Palestinian" and "Intifada" are
synonymous, though few understand the real meaning of
"Intifada." Altering a passage from an Israeli tour guide (on
Massada) will give some insight into the concept of
"Intifada." (The text in parentheses is the original text.)
-
- Intifada (Massada) is one
of the most important symbols of heroism in the history of the
Palestinian (Jewish) people, witnessing to a magnificent chapter in the
struggle of a nation for freedom: the resistance of a few against the
many, of the weak against the strong, of the choice made by the
defenders of Palestine (Massada) when they could have lost hope, to
realize their political and religious independence, preferring death to
slavery. It serves as a source of inspiration and a symbol of courage
not only for the people of Palestine (Israel) but for all the peoples of
the world as well.
-
-
- Intifada 1987
-
- The first Intifada (1987 -
1993), was a spontaneous explosion of popular resistance to the Israeli
occupation, a resistance which had begun some fifty years before. The
Palestinian people made a conscious and determined choice to consolidate
their efforts in the struggle toward independence, regardless of the
cost. The coordination of resistance activities through a body called
The United Leadership of the Intifada, illustrated the depth and breadth
of Palestinian aspirations for freedom. The force with which the
Intifada began and continued for eight years stunned not only Israel,
but indeed, all countries of the world.
-
- One of the consequences of
this first Intifada was the international conference in Madrid. No
matter how frequently the negotiators met in Washington and elsewhere
during this time, Israel refused to comply with the basic requirements
for peace. United Nations resolutions 242 and 338 were suddenly not
acceptable for Israel, not to mention Resolution 194, which calls for
the right of refugees to return. The Madrid Conference served to divert
the growing public awareness of Israel as an occupying power with a
violent, oppressive, expansionist, colonialist, and racist character.
-
- Two years later, the world
was taken by surprise at the announcement of the Oslo Accord, signed in
September 1993. While the world was sold a "peace myth," the
reality was something quite different. The primary aim of Oslo was to
kill the Intifada and to ensure that Israel gained as many political
benefits as possible, all the while transforming its identity into that
of a peace-making country. Israel did not withdraw from the occupied
territories, as it had been agreed upon at Oslo. Hebron was divided.
More land was confiscated. Jerusalemites were forced to relinquish their
residency rights. Settlements increased at breakneck speed, which make
the concept of Israeli withdrawal almost impossible (from an Israeli
point of view, at least). Houses were demolished and trees were
uprooted. Finally, Palestinian lands were torn into areas A, B, and C
(not to mention the complete closure of Jerusalem), creating
easily-controllable and easily-suppressible bantustans.
-
- During and after Oslo, the
Palestinian people lived a nightmare of schizophrenia: pro-Oslo,
contra-Oslo; Palestinians inside the territories, Palestinians outside;
Gaza, West Bank; 1967 Palestinians, 1948 Palestinians; the Palestinian
Authority marching to the tune of Oslo, the parliamentary opposition
exercising its legitimate and democratic right within Palestinian
society to reveal that Oslo was a dead end.
-
- In the midst of all the
confusion, most Palestinians were waiting patiently for Oslo to restore
their national freedom, lost 33 years ago. They were waiting for Oslo to
bring peace and prosperity. They were waiting to see how they could
finally move freely within and outside the country. They were waiting
for their prisoners to be freed. They were waiting for their own state
where they could finally find peace and security. They were waiting for
family reunions which would unite families who had not been together in
50 years.
-
- The reality, however,
quickly jarred their patient waiting. Instead of prosperity, the
economic situation deteriorated to a level worse than in 1987. Instead
of experiencing unity, Palestinian lands were torn apart. In Hebron, for
example, 400 Jewish settlers were given free reign to control and
terrorize the lives of 120,000 Palestinian people (with the aid of the
Israeli army). The Palestinian people were subjected to a charade of
evil and deceit. In addition, the Palestinian leadership, impotent in
the face of Israeli aggression, agreed to seemingly unlimited
concessions to Israeli demands - until there was no more to give.
Instead of setting the stage for Palestinians to move toward freedom and
independence, Oslo was dragging them toward fragmentation and surrender.
Negotiations with the Israelis were starting to address the four points
that had been postponed seven years earlier, namely: Jerusalem, the
settlements, refugees, and the establishment of a state.
-
- Not only is Israel
unwilling to give back occupied East Jerusalem and to stop its
settlement activity, it is unable even to recognize its moral and
historic responsibility for the catastrophe of the Palestinians people.
Israel rejects any responsibility for the Palestinian refugee problem. A
Palestinian state may be "acceptable" to Israel, only if it is
bereft of all the typical ingredients of a viable state, foremost among
them, sovereignty. Suddenly, we see the transformation of the
establishment of a Palestinian state into an Israeli prerequisite for
the completion of its hegemony. Any peace agreement that might be signed
based on these conditions would amount to an agreement of surrender on
the part of the Palestinians. The Paris Economic Protocol (1996), on
which Israel insists any future relations be based, is one example of
the intended circumcision of the coming Palestinian State.
-
- Al-Aqsa Intifada
-
- The first Intifada,
characterized as it was by its popular support and non-violent nature,
served a critical purpose in the Palestinian struggle for liberation.
Similarly, Al-Aqsa Intifada, characterized somewhat differently, is also
a vital component in the struggle, sending a clear message that
surrender and subordination are unacceptable as a solution to the
Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
-
- The role of the media in
altering reality during both Intifadas has served to mask the primary
purpose of Intifada, namely, the struggle toward freedom from Israeli
occupation. The Zionist-controlled media does its best to conceal the
true nature of the Palestinian resistance. For example, German TV, the
BBC, and Euronews broadcast the news about the attack on a military
convoy escorting settlers in Gaza by stating, "Palestinian gunmen
shot at an Israeli bus, killing three, among them a woman." No one
bothered to mention the fact that it was a military convoy escorting
settlers in Gaza.
-
- The Israeli government has
concentrated its efforts, together with the US government, to
systematically eliminate any effective Palestinian presence in
Palestine. Since Israel failed to eliminate the Palestinians as major
players in the "peace process," the Palestinians were given a
minor (basically insignificant) role that would be easy to manipulate.
Israel's intentions and policies since 1948 were not changed by the
handshake of Rabin and Arafat. Noam Chomsky writes that in 1948, the
Israeli government Arabists had an internal discussion while ethnic
cleansing was under way. Their expectation was that the refugees would
be crushed and die, while the rest would turn into human dust and the
waste of society and join the impoverished classes in other Arab
countries.
-
- As documented by various
human rights' organizations, and most recently by the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights, Israel's response to the Palestinian
resistance is vastly disproportionate. What these organizations fail to
realize, however, is that Israel's use of excessive force and aggression
is an integral component of its general policy toward the Palestinian
people. According to Chomsky, Israel relies on support from the US and
on the "Powell Doctrine": use massive force in response to any
perceived threat. The perceived threat, of course, is not the pitiful
weapons used by the Palestinians, but the fear that resistance and
revolution will become a Palestinian "way of life."
-
- Shlomo Ben Ami has
repeatedly asked President Arafat to call on his people to stop
protesting against the Israeli occupation. The world's media is
repeating this nonsense without thinking twice about who should be
asking whom to stop the atrocious human rights violations, foremost
among them the right of a people to resist occupation. The United States
and Israel, together with their mutant child "Oslo," were able
to delude us into believing that there is peace in the occupied
territories. Even the media joined in the conspiracy. Was it ever
broadcast that 40% of Gaza was still occupied? Did anyone ever bother to
ask why in the world Israel should seek the most populated piece of land
on earth (8 x 32 km, with over one million people) to build its
settlements?
-
- In an article in the Irish
Times (17 November 2000), Lara Marlowe writes: "The Arabs in
general, and the Palestinians in particular, failed in their attempt to
focus European attention on the fundamental injustice of the Israeli
occupation and the need to return to the United Nations Security Council
resolutions 242 and 338 which demand that Israel leave the West Bank and
Gaza". What kind of deception is this? Which country in Europe does
not know 242 and 338? Oslo? Or Madrid, in which the infamous conference
took place? Paris, in which the Paris Economic Protocol was signed?
Rome, whose Italian government held the presidency of the European
Union? Copenhagen, in which a conference took place where the seeds for
"normalization," dialogue, and reconciliation between
Palestinians and Israelis were planted even before the war between them
was ended? Stockholm, in which all secret negotiations took place and
finally culminated in the unwise remarks of Queen Silvia, as reported in
the Jerusalem Post, regarding the barbaric Palestinians deliberately
sending their children to die? Athens, whose Minister refused to meet
with Faisal Husseini in Jerusalem, hoping to play a good game with the
Israelis, after the latter had begun relations with the Turkish
government? Brussels, where even the ECHO department has no idea why
they are in Palestine and what they should be doing? And which fields
should they support? If not Beduins and water, then what? (Maybe the
purpose of Al-Aqsa Intifada is to rescue them and restore their
"raison d'etre!") Berlin? No! Germany was silent. The German
Secretary of State, "Mr. Green," preferred not to speak at
all, not even when Mr. Schroeder came to Palestine and took 50 wounded
Palestinians back with him for medical treatment as a gesture of
humanitarian assistance. Even when a German doctor was killed by two
Israeli missiles while he was attending his injured Palestinian
neighbors, the German government did not have much to say. Imagine for a
moment if a German doctor had been killed by Palestinians somewhere in
Israel?
-
- And Canada....In the 1999
annual report of Canada Fund in Palestine, all the problems of the West
Bank and Gaza are mentioned, except one, of course: the Israeli
occupation. Jean Chretien, Prime Minister of Canada, moreover, found it
necessary on 3 November 2000 to write a letter of apology to the
Canadian Jewish Community after he had recently held a meeting with
them. Mr. Chretien writes, "In our meeting, I heard frustration
expressed that the unprecedented risks taken and courageous compromises
offered by the Israeli government in pursuit of peace have not been
reciprocated. Our government understands this frustration. We regret
that Canada's vote on UN Security Council Resolution 1322 has added to
this distress and frustration."
-
- Why is it that (as Robert
Fisk put it) we are unable, after more than half a century, to
understand the injustice of the Middle East? Why does the media insist
on praising Israel's military "restraint" while Palestinian
resistance is denounced as "terrorism?" When two brothers in
Nablus are killed by an Israeli missile inside their home, or when a
disabled man in his wheelchair is shot, then Israel is described as
"restraining itself." The same is true when Israel shoots at
stone throwers from a distance of 200 meters. Of course, we are supposed
to be relieved when we hear that the army has been instructed not to
shoot at children under the age of twelve. Since when are 13- or 14- or
15-year-old children prey for sharpshooters?
-
- In confronting Al-Aqsa
Intifada (the legitimate Palestinian struggle against Israeli
occupation), Israel apparently has four possible options, while the
Palestinians have only one: If Israel chooses to return to
"pre-Oslo" occupation, the Palestinians have only one option,
and that is to resist occupation.
-
- If Israel escalates its
military force and aggression (bombing, siege, building of settlements
and bypass roads) in order to impose a political solution (i.e.,
surrender), then the Palestinians have only one option, and that is to
resist occupation. If the Israeli government decides to regionalize the
conflict by attacking Syria, Lebanon, or any other Arab country, then
the Palestinians have only one option, and that is to resist occupation.
-
- Even if Israel declares
its readiness to pull out its last soldier from the occupied
territories, but stalls in its implementation, then the Palestinians
have only one option, and that is to resist occupation.
-
- Knowing that Israel is
well aware of the only Palestinian option, it tries its best to crush
the resistance. History has confirmed, time and again, however, that no
military power, regardless how strong, can defeat the will and the
aspiration of a people determined to be free.
-
- The Intifada of 1987 broke
out to demand a solution for the Palestinian problem based on the
legitimate rights of the Palestinian people. Al-Aqsa Intifada broke out
as a rejection of the proposed solution that was about to be imposed on
the Palestinians by Israel and the United States.
-
- The Palestinians, the
"People of the Intifada," will continue their resistance to
the Israeli occupation, the resistance of a few against the many, of the
weak against the strong. The defenders of Palestine have chosen to
continue, when they could have lost hope, to realize their political and
religious independence, preferring death to slavery. The Intifada will
be a source of inspiration and a symbol of courage not only for the
people of Palestine but for all the peoples of the world as well.
|
|
