veiled4allah: another post on Palestinian non-violence movement

Just to remind people that a diversity of viewpoints has always existed and continues to do so, I like to post about calls for a Palestinian non-violence movement every now and then. The latest is from Ghassan Rubeiz:

But Palestinians would do well now to abandon armed struggle, and invest in civil resistance to the Israeli occupation through non-violent tactics as an unswerving strategy. Gandhi and Mandela figured out the power of ideas in civil resistance; they utilized the moral power of justice for the oppressed to erode the dominance of the oppressor. Civil disobedience and hunger strikes, are more effective than exploding a bomb in a restaurant. The peace groups in Israel are a serious potential ally. The world is ready to support the Palestinians if they change the formula of their struggle.

Through diplomacy, political marches, village social mobilization, economic boycotts, street theater, music festivals, and other peaceful tactics of influence, Palestinians can convince Israelis to leave the occupied territories. Civil resistance over time reduces the exaggerated fears that the oppressor has toward the oppressed.

Palestinians can only "disarm" Jews with ideas of co-existence. In addition, Jews can only gain lasting security through return of occupied territories and facilitating the establishment of a friendly Palestinian state as a neighbor and a future partner.

When I raise the issue of non-violent resistance with Palestinian and other Arab intellectuals I know, I receive mixed reactions. There seems to be a growing realization that Palestinian civic resistance is worth trying. But I do not observe signs of excitement among Palestinians, the concept of civil resistance may now be slightly gaining ground in the Palestinian community, inside Israel proper.

Poor leadership, however, and ambiguity of agenda of social change among Palestinians slow the birth of a new social movement for peace, justice and reform. There is a fragile nonviolence movement among Palestinians, but so far it has been unable to assert itself since its leadership comes from the NGOs rather from the grassroots.

So Palestinians now need constructive Arab support to divert the current intifada from a path of hopelessness into a path of peaceful resistance to occupation. If we ask Palestinians to change the nature of their struggle, it would be also be fair to ask the Israelis to seek peace through generous land exchange and creative offers for future cooperation in human and economic development.

Cold logic dictates that one day Palestinians and Jews will rediscover the humanity in each other's faces and start negotiating peace built on justice and sharing of land, borders, ideas and good will.

We do not know how social change takes place and what historical development will precipitate a new way of rational and human problem-solving in Palestine and Israel.

What is badly missing is good leadership on both sides of the conflict and visionary international support. The Palestinians would do well to review their strategy immediately.

There are two basic themes in these calls. One argues that non-violence is the most moral or ethical course of action from a religious perspective. I first addressed that in Islamic non-violence. The other theme is that non-violence is the most practical course; i.e., that violent struggle has failed to gain anything for the Palestinians and in fact is only making their situation worse. Rubeiz seems to be taking that view. The issue is discussed in Leading Palestinians call for non-violence. You can also check out a list of my other posts on non-violence.