Al-Jazeerah History
Archives
Mission & Name
Conflict Terminology
Editorials
Gaza Holocaust
Gulf War
Isdood
Islam
News
News Photos
Opinion
Editorials
US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
www.aljazeerah.info
|
|
Talk of a Third Palestinian Uprising
(Intifada) Against the Israeli Occupation Regime
By Ramzy Baroud
Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, November 27, 2014
When a journalist tries to do a historian’s job, the outcome
can be quite interesting. Using history as a side note in a brief news
report or political analysis oftentimes does more harm than good. Now
imagine if that journalist was not dependable to begin with, even more
than it being “interesting”, the outcome runs the risk of becoming a
mockery. Consider the selective historical views offered by New
York Times writer Thomas Freidman - exposed in the book “The
Imperial Messenger” by Belen Fernandez for his pseudo- intellectual
shenanigans, contradictions and constant marketing of the status quo.
In an
article entitled, The Third Intifada, published last February,
Friedman attempts to explain two of the most consequential events in the
collective history of the Palestinian people, if not the whole region:
“For a while now I’ve wondered why there’s been no Third Intifada. That
is, no third Palestinian uprising in the West Bank, the first of which
helped to spur the Oslo peace process and the second of which - with more
live ammunition from the Israeli side and suicide bombings from the
Palestinian side - led to the breakdown of Oslo.” Ta-da, there it
is: Palestinian history for dummies, by, you know .. Friedman. Never mind
that the consequences that led to the first uprising in 1987 included the
fact that Palestinians were rebelling against the very detached elitist
culture, operating from Tunisia, which purported to speak on behalf of the
Palestinian people. It was a small clique within the PLO-Fatah leadership
that were not even living in Palestine at the time who signed a ruinous,
secret agreement in Olso in 1993. And, at the expense of their people’s
rightful demands for freedom, this arrangement won them just a few perks.
The uprising didn’t help “spur the Oslo peace process”; the ‘process’ was
rather introduced, with the support and financing of the United States and
others, to crush the intifada, as it did. While there is some
truth to the fact that the second uprising led to the breakdown of Oslo,
Friedman’s logic indicates a level of inconsistency on the part of the
Palestinian people and their revolts - that they rebelled to bring peace,
and they rebelled again to destroy it. Of course, his seemingly harmless
interjection there of Israel’s use of live ammunition during the second
uprising (as if thousands of Palestinians were not killed and wounded by
live ammunition in the first), while Palestinians used suicide bombings -
for the uninformed reader, justifies Israel’s choice of weapons.
According to the
Israeli rights organization B'Tselem, 1,489 Palestinians were killed
during the first intifada (1987-1993) including 304 children. I85 Israelis
were reportedly killed including 91 soldiers. Over 4,000
Palestinians were killed during the second intifada, and over a 1,000
Israelis. However, according to B’Tselem, the high price of death and
injury hardly ceased when the second Intifada was arguably over by the end
of 2005. In “10
years to the second Intifada,” the Israeli organization reported that:
“Israeli security forces killed 6,371 Palestinians, of whom 1,317 were
minors. At least 2,996 of the fatalities did not participate in the
hostilities when killed. .. An additional 248 were Palestinian police
killed in Gaza during operation Cast Lead, and 240 were targets of
assassinations.” There are other possible breakdowns of these
numbers, which would be essential to understanding the nature of popular
Palestinian revolts. The victims come from diverse backgrounds: refugee
camps, villages, small towns and cities. Until Israel’s devastating war on
Gaza, 2008-09, the numbers were almost equally divided between Gaza and
the West Bank. Some of the victims were Palestinians with Israeli
citizenship. Israeli bullets and shells targeted a whole range of people,
starting with bystanders, to un-armed protesters, stone throwers, armed
fighters, community activists, political leaders, militant leaders, men,
women, children, and so on. In some tragic way, the Israeli
responses to Palestinian uprisings is the best validation of the popular
nature of the intifada, which goes against every claim made by Israeli
leaders that say intifadas are staged and manipulated for specific
political ends. For years, many journalists have busied
themselves asking or trying to answer questions regarding the anticipated
Third Intifada. Some
did so
in earnest, others misleadingly, as in the NBC News report:
Palestinian Violence Targets Israelis: Has Third Intifada Begun? Few
took a stab at objectivity with mixed results as in CNN's:
In Jerusalem, the 'auto intifada' is far from an uprising.
But most of them, using a supercilious approach to understanding the
Palestinian collective, failed to understand what an uprising is in the
first place. Even the somewhat sensible approach that explains an
intifada as popular outrage resulting from the lack of political horizon
can, although at times unwittingly, seem distorted. It is
interesting that hardly any had the astuteness to predict previous
uprisings. True, violence can be foreseen to some degree, but the
collective course of action of a whole nation that is separated by
impossible geographical, political, factional and other divides, is not so
easy to analyze in merely a few sentences, let alone predict.
There were numerous incidents in the past that never culminated into an
“intifada”, although they seem to unite various sectors of Palestinian
society, and where a degree of violence was also a prominent feature. They
failed because intifadas are not a call for violence agreed upon by a
number of people that would constitute a critical mass. Intifadas,
although often articulated with a clear set of demands, are not driven by
a clear political agenda either. Palestinians lead an uprising in
1936 against the British Mandate government in Palestine, when the latter
did its most to empower Zionists to establish a ‘Jewish state’, and deny
Palestinians any political aspiration for independence, thus negating the
very spirit of the UN mandate. The uprising turned into a revolt, the
outcome of which was the rise of political consciousness among all
segments of Palestinian society. A Palestinian identity, which existed for
generations, was crystallized in a meaningful and much greater cohesion
than ever before. If examined through a rigid political equation,
the 1936-39 Intifada failed, but its success was the unification of an
identity that was fragmented purposely or by circumstance. Later intifadas
achieved similar results. The 1987 Intifada reclaimed the Palestinian
struggle by a young, vibrant generation that was based in Palestine
itself, unifying more than the identity of the people, but their narrative
as well. The 2000 Intifada challenged the ahistorical anomaly of Oslo,
which seemed like a major divergence from the course of resistance
championed by every Palestinian generation since 1936. Although
Intifadas affect the course of politics, they are hardly meant as
political statements per se. They are unconcerned with the belittling
depictions of most journalists and politicians. They are a comprehensive,
remarkable and uncompromising process that, regardless of their impact on
political discourses, are meant to “shake off”, and defiantly challenge
all the factors that contribute to the oppression of a nation. This is not
about “violence targeting Israelis”, or its collaborators among
Palestinians. It is the awakening of a whole society, joined by a
painstaking attempt at redrawing all priorities as a step forward on the
path of liberation, in both the cerebral and actual sense. And
considering the numerous variables at play, only the Palestinian people
can tell us when they are ready for an intifada - because, essentially it
belongs to them, and them alone. - Ramzy Baroud is an
internationally-syndicated columnist, a media consultant, an author and
the founder of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is "My Father Was a
Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story" (Pluto Press, London).
***
Share this article with your facebook friends
|
|
|