D: We just want people to know what is going on inside the occupied territories and also inside Israel about the situation. Cause actually the media in and outside of Israel is really based on lies and denying what's happening. No-one really knows about the the situation and the conditions of the Palestinians. People are certain that the wall is going to be built on the green line, which is supposed to be the border of Palestine. Which is decided in 1967 by the UN, but actually, the way that the Wall is built, it's not on the Green Line. In some places it's 22, 24 kilometres far from the Green Line inside Palestine. It's not about security but landgrab, because the Wall annexes about 40% of Palestinian land, good agricultural land and their water reserves. It's really important that people know what is going on there.
---------------------------------------------
* How does this effect the daily lives of people living in the occupied territories?
R: The way the wall is affecting the Palestinians is, well, first we can talk about the Palestinians that live near the villages where the wall is being constructed cause on one level, for a lot of villages it cuts them of from their land, from where they usually make their living from. Then, some villages are completely isolated from other villages and then... they have problems of movement. If families are cut off from hospitals and schools. Then there is the situation where villages have tried to grow, to build more houses, but they can’t because they're completely surrounded by a fence and the wall. It depends, like, for the first phase of the wall - 145km has been built already- there are like 50 villages which are caught between the wall and the Green Line, I mean the green line which is supposed to be the original border between Israel and Palestine). So even though they [the villages in the area between the Green Line and the Wall -ed.] are left out of the wall, they are not Israeli citizens so they have problems of labour, having any rights whatsoever even getting inside Palestine because you have to have a special permit, even if you want to go to Israel you have to have a special permit. Usually you get screwed from both sides, so they basically, maybe, will have to move inside the wall so they can have a normal livelihood and build schools, hospitals etc.
Then you have the fact of all of the water resources and the agricultural land that is being taken away from them, so they have a problem of sustaining livelihoods in the bigger cities. Also the fact that you have migration from villages into the bigger cities. Let's say big markets or towns where you had a lot of commercial activity with the transfer of goods with Israelis who were friendly with them or even with Palestinians around the area are being shut down because they have no way in or out. And the fact that, the way it is progressing.....(?) ... to completely isolate Palestine from both sides by Israel so they won't have contact with any other country.
But a positive aspect is that it is actually creating a situation where Palestinians are actually organizing for themselves.. because the Palestinian Authority (P.N.A.) and political organisations like Hamas and Fatah showed little concern whatsoever for these villages, they decided to organisize their resistance by themselves and also using new methods where it enables them to have a higher level of democracy. It is not some political official, it is the village deciding together and inviting who they want, whether an Israeli or Palestinian, to work together against the wall. This partly enables them to have a more direct political process happening, where they feel more empowered. And the fact that they are getting some results, even though they might be minor and small, they are getting more results then they got with with the Palestinian Authority or Hamas or political organisations that showed little concern for the villages. In that aspect it is actually changing the way things are dealt with. Also the fact that they do non-violent resistance and actually achieving something with it is giving them more force to do these kind of actions than actually using guns.
* So we get the picture of villages that are cut off from the rest of the world. So in the future things will get worse, you think?
Yes, things are getting worse. But even sometimes the effects in some of the places take time. When the wall is built you don't really feel sometimes the impact immediately. You feel it, let's say, when you're waiting for the harvest of olive trees which is next year, and then you see that you cannot always go and harvest them, it is really important to have a certain time to harvest them before it rots down or it starts raining too much and it's hard to harvest.
So on that aspect they're not even sure how it's going to be sometimes, and in some places it slowly has created a situation where villages slowly get more and more frustated. Actually in that area it's created a new hostility in places that before were not even political. Sometimes the occupation in the foreign news always seems as if it's happening everywhere and everybody is aware of it. And to a certain agree everybody is aware of it, but to different degrees. In the cities they're much more aware of it, you have tanks... In the Palestinian cities there are curfews, closures... So for a lot of villages which are more or less left to themselves they couldn't get out of the city easily, but they did not feel the whole impact of the occupation.
Then there's also the difference between the village and city: village people say this about the city people, city people talk about that about the village people. But here it's actually creating ... the big impact of the occupation is here in the villages. So it's also creating a whole new association between the city and the village, where cities are also getting more involved what's happening in villages and are trying to create demonstrations in support of the villages which are uprising. I mean, like at Nablus and Ramallah where they're getting more active about it.
* Is this something that is initiated from the Palestinian side or is this a cooperation beween the left in Israel and the Palestinian action groups that want to use non-violent measures against this wall?
Well, it's a combination of a bit of all. I mean it starts from Palestinians - they're the ones who are the most concerned and they're the ones who invite Israelis, that's the shift in the policy - where we can do demonstrations together and reach a broader audience and a bigger spectrum and maintain a more civil demonstration style.
It always comes from the Palestinian villages: you never have a situation where internationals and Israelis will come to the village and say: "OK, we want to do a demonstration here because there's a wall". So it's the Palestinian village, because they'll have to suffer the consequences. If it's having their land confiscated, having more problems with the army or with the police, maybe in the future having permits to cross the wall or go into other areas - they're the ones who are going to suffer for it, and they're theones who are deciding it.
And it is also creating a stronger point for non-violent resistance, which has always existed in Palestine but in the last few years, especially from the beginning of the 2nd Intifada, was very minor because of all these political organisations who were saying the only way to confront the occupation is through violent means, militias, suicide-bombers etc. Now we've said, no, you can do it differently.
* Can you tell us for how long this is going on, these non-violent protests against the wall?
I think it's about for just over a year. It started very small, and then through different actions just grew and grew. And now it's a situation where almost every village decides to do its demonstration and to do it on their own agreement and sometimes a neighbouring village will come in support. Each village tries to be non-violent and usually it's the new kind of way of dealing with it so... different results, usually.
* The support in Israel for these kind of actions, how is this, for instance, how is this portrayed in the national media?
D: Actually, it was not so long time ago in the Israeli national newspaper they said that about 65% of the Israeli population support non-violent, direct... ah, sorry, 75% of the Israeli people support actions against the wall but in legal ways and not violent. It means that people who are getting more aware of the situation, won't do anything on their side, but they support us as long we're not doing it in illegal ways.
* Are there are also many people that want to join?
This is complicated because there are a lot of left-wing groups in Israel which are against the occupation but won't join those kind of actions. They support us, like, in passive ways (and sometimes it's not so passive) but it's out of Palestine - in Israel, in Tel Aviv, the big cities - Peace Now demos, they're just holding signs and singing and talking about it. But most of the people won't take part in this kind of action in Palestine, against the wall. Yes, you know it's scary and dangerous.
* What sort of actions are there now in Israel against the occupation?
R: Oh, actions inside the territories? But, it always attracts small groups of people because it's usually 24 hours' notice in advance, and it's complicated to get in (the occupied terroties) and it's always hard to telephone around everybody and ask... But then you have big organisations that create a demonstration and plan it one month in advance or so with a certain village and do some peaceful demonstration, graffiti against the wall. Then you have organisations that spread lists about what products to boycott which are built in Jewish settlements inside Palestine. There's the Comittee Against House Demolitions, which is an organisation which is in Jerusalem which helps fight the demolition of houses because it's hard for Palestinians to get permits to build their houses for absurd laws, so everytime they try to built let's say another room, because they cannot have another house because of the legal administration won't let them have one, you know for the plans? So they build a room onto their house and then the army comes in and destroys the house. And also trying to work with people inside the villages inside the wall which are certain to have houses demolished or schools. You have demonstrations inside major cities like Tel Aviv, who do like peaceful noise demos. And doing petitions, trying to bring the message across and doing small alternative demonstrations and even bigger demonstrations and making their own noise demonstrations inside Israel. And also doing info evenings inside of Israel and showing movies. And then there are also organizations that work on a bigger level in sustaining solidarity with the Palestinians.
* So a lot of things going on. We also saw on your video that there are a lot of people from outside Israel and Palestine joining in. Does this help and in what way?
Well, it works on a few aspects. First of all it shows that we're not isolated, that there are also other people who are also concerned about what's happening. On a moral level this is very important. On a practical level internationals can go to places where Israelis cannot go. There are areas in Palestine which is it forbidden for Israelis to go to and internationals can, basically the bigger cities in Palestine, which is considered Area A for Israelis, but internationals can go. Then, in some villages it's still hard for them or difficult for them to work with Israelis, so the internationals can prepare the ground for working with other groups. They can even have their base network inside Palestine, which is hard for Israelis to maintain. And also, like, spreading out the message, coming over, documenting, trying to help, going back to their countries and trying to create support overseas and create pressure from outside which is also very positive.
D: It's really important for Israelis to be there, first of all for the Palestinians. It's really important that Israelis support them because the Israelis are the ones who put them in this situation, they are the ones who conquered them. It's really important for the Palestinians to see that also Israelis support them, and really care for them and really want to help them. I mean, it changed the whole image for them, because now it shows them that not all the Israelis are the enemy and, yeah, we can still work together and try to learn to do postive things together. So it's really important that there are Israelis there. When Israelis are there it changes the situation with the soldiers a bit: now they cannot do what they want do and shoot the Palestinians, because when Israelis are involved it also means that the media gets involved more easily. Now they cannot just shoot live ammunition; they have to be a little bit more calm.
[* ed. note: this is a transcript of a radio interview made earlier this year with some members of the Anarchists Against the Wall initiative. The interview was broadcast by Free Radio Tonka in the Netherlands. Link to audio version at http://www.ainfos.ca/04/sep/ainfos00540.html]
Friday, October 1, 2004
Thursday, September 30, 2004
Israel-Palestine: Radio interview with Anarchists Against the Wall 30/09/04
A radio interview made earlier this year with some members of the Anarchists Against the Wall initiative is available online at http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2004/05/291928.mp3 . The interview was broadcast by Free Radio Tonka in the Netherlands.
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Palestine-Israel, Update - on the daily struggle against the Apartheid wall: Budrus demo 28th September 04 (it) 29/09/04
About 20 comrades were arrested in a demo in Budrus initiated by the radical anti occupation people - including the Anarchists Against The Wall initiativePalestine-Israel, "We arrived at the village at around 12:30 and started marching at around 13:00. we were about 150 palestinians and 50 israelis and internationals. we stood on the hill, and didn't attempt to walk towards the soliders, for a bit more than an hour. We chanted and sang and the whole time people from the village stopped the Shabab from throwing a single stone. The village then decided the protest was over. We started walking back, I managed to see one shower of stones and then we started running from the sound grenades and tear gas. A bunch of us crowded between 2 buildings, and suddenly we were surrounded by Magav (border police) who were threatning the people in the house, and not letting anyone of us leave. The made us sit down and then told all the israelis to get up and that we were arrested.
We walked to where the protest was and were made to stand against a wall that was a sort of ramp where internationals were standing with magav. Suddenly the magav started hitting everyone and I saw a guy on the floor being kicked by at least 4 Magav, and a at least 3 internationals who were beaten over the head with sticks while soldiers were shouting in hebrew "lie down on the ground!". We couldn't do anything, it was horrible. The guy who was kicked was a palestinian they arrested with us.
They then took us to a shady hill near the village where we sat for about 3 hours. We were two internationals (one of whom is a reporter), 2 palestinians who were accused of throwing stones (the one who was beaten up, and another one who was grabbed from his house and apparently wasn't even in the protest- they obviously both never did such thing) and 16 israelis (including 3 minors under 18).only the second palestinian was handcuffed.
We were taken in a very crowded truck where we decided on jail solidarity with the internationals and palestinians.
We got to police station in Beit Aryeh where they let us sit on the grass outside for hours, which was very nice. The internationals were relaesed quite quickly, around 19:00, me and another guy were told not to enter Budrus for the next 14 days but werent given anything to sign and got our IDs back, and another woman needed to be at work the next day so she signed it at around 22:00.
The others waited on the grass till we knew what was happening with the palestinians. At the end the one who was beaten was released on the same condition as the israelis, and the other was taken to Ofer but was paid bail for in the same night. Everyone were realeased around 23:00.
we went home feeling tired but in high spirits and very much in solidarity with eachother.
We walked to where the protest was and were made to stand against a wall that was a sort of ramp where internationals were standing with magav. Suddenly the magav started hitting everyone and I saw a guy on the floor being kicked by at least 4 Magav, and a at least 3 internationals who were beaten over the head with sticks while soldiers were shouting in hebrew "lie down on the ground!". We couldn't do anything, it was horrible. The guy who was kicked was a palestinian they arrested with us.
They then took us to a shady hill near the village where we sat for about 3 hours. We were two internationals (one of whom is a reporter), 2 palestinians who were accused of throwing stones (the one who was beaten up, and another one who was grabbed from his house and apparently wasn't even in the protest- they obviously both never did such thing) and 16 israelis (including 3 minors under 18).only the second palestinian was handcuffed.
We were taken in a very crowded truck where we decided on jail solidarity with the internationals and palestinians.
We got to police station in Beit Aryeh where they let us sit on the grass outside for hours, which was very nice. The internationals were relaesed quite quickly, around 19:00, me and another guy were told not to enter Budrus for the next 14 days but werent given anything to sign and got our IDs back, and another woman needed to be at work the next day so she signed it at around 22:00.
The others waited on the grass till we knew what was happening with the palestinians. At the end the one who was beaten was released on the same condition as the israelis, and the other was taken to Ofer but was paid bail for in the same night. Everyone were realeased around 23:00.
we went home feeling tired but in high spirits and very much in solidarity with eachother.
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
Israel-Palestine/Tel Aviv 50 attended an open information+organization meeting of The Anarchist Against The Wall initiative, 2 days of action 28/09/04
People were invited to the meeting in a leaflet distributed at the just released 5 refusnics reception happening last Thursday. Teens and older people came to the meeting and were given a short introduction to the initiative, as well as basic tips for new Israeli participants in the direct actions in the joint struggle against the Apartheid wall/fence. After coordination of next day actions (Tuesday) and future dates, video documentaries of lasts days actions in Awwa and Budrus were screened. Following reports from two of this week actions:
1) bulldozers stopped in beit awwa, september 27 2004, by kobi snitz
2) bulldozers stopped in Budrus, Sunday, september 26 - at the 44th action
1) A small but unified march manages what a large march was unable to do: stop the work on the wall. after an early departure from Tel Aviv we arrived at beit awwa and got ready to join people who were gathering for the demonstration. The march was delayed when we heard that the army was around and looking to arrest israelis and internationals. (See the pictures at: https://israel.indymedia.org/feature/display/778/index.php)
The army and police were in the area in large numbers, especially on the route to the bulldozers, and the feeling was that it would be dangerous to head right towards them.
At around 9:30 a group of 50-100 people started to march from the center of beit awwa towards a field where olive trees were cut and away from where the soldiers were.
Two police vans arrived and after them more army jeeps. we got to within site of the cut olive trees and from there we headed back to beit awwa.
after regrouping near the center of the village, the march grew to about 200 people. We walked in the direction of the cemetery, where some preliminary work on the wall was being done, but the army was everywhere. either following us inside the village or moving troops to where we were heading. in spite of initial reluctance to get close to the soldiers we eventually headed towards the bulldozers. I guess the feeling was that we are close to the soldiers in any case so we might as well try to stop the bulldozers.
The odds were against us, last thursday a group of 1000 of us was unable to get past 20 soldiers who used lots of tear gas and rubber bullets and today we were no more than 200 and faced with what looked like 100 soldiers and police.
the soldiers must have expected the shabab to throw stones and did their best to provoke them, they drove their jeeps through the marching crowd but the shabab did not fall for it.
we linked arms in the open field where we were gassed on thursday and started up the hill.
unprepared for a unified and disciplined march the soldiers ran frantically trying in vain to stop the marchers. photographers later told us that the soldiers were yelling at each other for letting us get this far.
WE made it up the hill to a distance of about 100 from the machines. our proximity caused work to halt and we stood our ground in front of growing numbers of police, border police and army. At this point in what was the symbolic highlight of the day, a young man from beit awwa planted an olive tree in the place where trees were recently uprooted.
In the course of the standoff with the army and police a group of women advanced a small distance further and the situation came close to erupting when the border police and private security guards pushed and threatened the women.
after holding our ground for about 35 minutes and with the arrival of the border police notorious crowd control units it was decided to head back to the village instead of risking injuries. The thought was that we should retain control of the situation by deciding when to leave and that this will put us in a strong position to continue the demonstrations. We did manage to get back to the village without injuries and virtually no stones being thrown.
later, over cups of super-sweet palestinian tea there seemed to have been general satisfaction with the performance of the marchers as a group.
Pictures are at:
2) Sunday 26.9.04 was the 44th demonstration in the struggle against the wall at Budrus. And the bulldozers were blocked again, for a while. Following a a week of curfew, violence and threats to the Budrus villagers by the army, gendarmes, and occupation authority, 40 Israeli and international activists came to express solidarity and join the daily demo.
At 10:30 the villagers and activists released the kids from the school to prevent their detentions in the school by the Israeli forces - as they did lately got into the "habit" of "conquering" the village when dispersing a demo and holds the kids in the schools.
At 11:00, the the demo departed from the village towards the building site of the fence. About 100 participants - women and men of the village accompanied by the Israeli and international activists started to march towards the bulldozers. A big group of reporters from all over the worlds that came to cover the demo restrained a bit the soldiers brutality.
The demonstrators succeeded to mount the bulldozers and stop their work for 15 minutes. In spite shock and tear-gas grenades, the demonstrators held their ground for a while. When a big reinforcement of gendarmes arrived, the villagers decided to disengage to evade harsh violence towards them. It seems that the absence of violet clash at the site disappointed the gendarmes who came spoiled for action. As the villagers went away peacefully, the decided to follow them to the village - as they are used lately, to "educate" the villagers and to deter them from future demos "at any cost needed" (as was said to the villagers by occupation authority the previous week). They entered the village, and "conquered" the school using tear gas and shock grenades and rubber coats bullets.... Just that this time they got empty school with no pupils to "educate".
Tuesday 28 September a big demonstration is expected at the village at noon.
For details, Einat
1) bulldozers stopped in beit awwa, september 27 2004, by kobi snitz
2) bulldozers stopped in Budrus, Sunday, september 26 - at the 44th action
1) A small but unified march manages what a large march was unable to do: stop the work on the wall. after an early departure from Tel Aviv we arrived at beit awwa and got ready to join people who were gathering for the demonstration. The march was delayed when we heard that the army was around and looking to arrest israelis and internationals. (See the pictures at: https://israel.indymedia.org/feature/display/778/index.php)
The army and police were in the area in large numbers, especially on the route to the bulldozers, and the feeling was that it would be dangerous to head right towards them.
At around 9:30 a group of 50-100 people started to march from the center of beit awwa towards a field where olive trees were cut and away from where the soldiers were.
Two police vans arrived and after them more army jeeps. we got to within site of the cut olive trees and from there we headed back to beit awwa.
after regrouping near the center of the village, the march grew to about 200 people. We walked in the direction of the cemetery, where some preliminary work on the wall was being done, but the army was everywhere. either following us inside the village or moving troops to where we were heading. in spite of initial reluctance to get close to the soldiers we eventually headed towards the bulldozers. I guess the feeling was that we are close to the soldiers in any case so we might as well try to stop the bulldozers.
The odds were against us, last thursday a group of 1000 of us was unable to get past 20 soldiers who used lots of tear gas and rubber bullets and today we were no more than 200 and faced with what looked like 100 soldiers and police.
the soldiers must have expected the shabab to throw stones and did their best to provoke them, they drove their jeeps through the marching crowd but the shabab did not fall for it.
we linked arms in the open field where we were gassed on thursday and started up the hill.
unprepared for a unified and disciplined march the soldiers ran frantically trying in vain to stop the marchers. photographers later told us that the soldiers were yelling at each other for letting us get this far.
WE made it up the hill to a distance of about 100 from the machines. our proximity caused work to halt and we stood our ground in front of growing numbers of police, border police and army. At this point in what was the symbolic highlight of the day, a young man from beit awwa planted an olive tree in the place where trees were recently uprooted.
In the course of the standoff with the army and police a group of women advanced a small distance further and the situation came close to erupting when the border police and private security guards pushed and threatened the women.
after holding our ground for about 35 minutes and with the arrival of the border police notorious crowd control units it was decided to head back to the village instead of risking injuries. The thought was that we should retain control of the situation by deciding when to leave and that this will put us in a strong position to continue the demonstrations. We did manage to get back to the village without injuries and virtually no stones being thrown.
later, over cups of super-sweet palestinian tea there seemed to have been general satisfaction with the performance of the marchers as a group.
Pictures are at:
2) Sunday 26.9.04 was the 44th demonstration in the struggle against the wall at Budrus. And the bulldozers were blocked again, for a while. Following a a week of curfew, violence and threats to the Budrus villagers by the army, gendarmes, and occupation authority, 40 Israeli and international activists came to express solidarity and join the daily demo.
At 10:30 the villagers and activists released the kids from the school to prevent their detentions in the school by the Israeli forces - as they did lately got into the "habit" of "conquering" the village when dispersing a demo and holds the kids in the schools.
At 11:00, the the demo departed from the village towards the building site of the fence. About 100 participants - women and men of the village accompanied by the Israeli and international activists started to march towards the bulldozers. A big group of reporters from all over the worlds that came to cover the demo restrained a bit the soldiers brutality.
The demonstrators succeeded to mount the bulldozers and stop their work for 15 minutes. In spite shock and tear-gas grenades, the demonstrators held their ground for a while. When a big reinforcement of gendarmes arrived, the villagers decided to disengage to evade harsh violence towards them. It seems that the absence of violet clash at the site disappointed the gendarmes who came spoiled for action. As the villagers went away peacefully, the decided to follow them to the village - as they are used lately, to "educate" the villagers and to deter them from future demos "at any cost needed" (as was said to the villagers by occupation authority the previous week). They entered the village, and "conquered" the school using tear gas and shock grenades and rubber coats bullets.... Just that this time they got empty school with no pupils to "educate".
Tuesday 28 September a big demonstration is expected at the village at noon.
For details, Einat
Palestine-Israel, The daily struggle against the Apartheid wall continues - 19 arrested in budrus demonstration today 28/9/2004
On 28 September 2004 in a demo in Budrus initiated by the radical anti occupation people - including the Anarchists Against The Wall initiative, 16 israelis and 2 internationals have been arrested and one palestinian who was also beaten. At 14:30 the arrestees were being kept in a grove near the work site. It was expected that they will be taken to the police station at givat ze'ev near Jerusalem, but latest news is that they were taken instead to Beit Ariye police station.
Monday, September 27, 2004
Palestine-Israel, Recent Palestinian Popular Resistance and its Israeli Support*- by Kobi Snitz 27/09/04
Palestinian resistance
Palestinian popular resistance is nothing new, yet in recent months it has reached a new level of development. The catalyst has been the confiscation of Palestinian land for the construction of the separation wall, the path of which stands to create enclaves containing tens of thousands of Palestinians. One of the leaders of the new type of resistance is Ayed Morar (Abu Ahmed) of Budrus, a small village close to the Green Line. Since November 2003 Budrus has been the model for what has come to be called the Third Intifada: Popular resistance to the wall by whole villages. According to Morar, there are several reasons why Budrus has been a model of organizing. Budrus is a small village with strong social and familial ties where the social and political leaders all know each other. So when it came time to organize a popular committee in Budrus, it happened quite naturally. Morar stresses that it was important that the popular committee include everyone: Religious leaders, members of Fatah, leaders of the mosque, school headmasters, leaders of the youth club and the civic council. Women's groups were particularly strong and vocal in demonstration in Budrus, unlike in some other villages.
In addition to the local committees, a council of 9 villages was formed to coordinate resistance among the villages. For various reasons, however, other villages where the wall was constructed did not put up an organized fight. According to Morar, the villages that did not resist were not as unified as Budrus and also did not know exactly how to go about actually resisting the wall.
> >>From the beginning of the demonstrations in Budrus on Nov 11*, 2003, the popular committee made a clear decision on three principles: To use only peaceful means in their struggle; to involve the entire village;and to seek international and Israeli support. The organizers were both morally committed to non-violence and also believed that it is the most effective way to struggle in this situation. Morar explained how it is easy for a handful of soldiers to disperse a crowd throwing stones from a distance but very difficult even for large groups of soldiers to control a disciplined crowd that approaches them. Morar's assessment is confirmed by Haaretz reporter Arnon Regular who describes "confused regular and reserve troops [facing Palestinian demonstrations], acting without a guiding hand in violation of regulations they do not know" [Haaretz April 14, 2004]. Commentator Amos Har'el commenting in the same issue on soldiers assigned to face demonstrations.
concludes that "it is not hard to guess which is the least favorite mission amongst soldiers in the central command region." In contrast, the army does not suffer from confusion or lack of guidance when it resorts to the use of violence, and according to Amos Har'el at least, Israeli soldiers prefer anything, including the use of violence, to confronting nonviolent demonstrations.
"At first it was very hard for us to get near the soldiers. With their history and their armor and weapons we were intimidated," says Morar, adding that "once we got past the fear, the soldiers were unable to control us and we were able to push the soldiers back a few times and stop the bulldozers." One key to maintaining unified and disciplined demonstrations in Budrus was that the leadership placed itself in front of the crowd and was always present. The level of coordination and trust was such that the people of Budrus were able to do one of the most difficult things in a demonstration, which is to walk away from a standoff without being hurt.
When they wished it, they would march up to the soldiers and hold their ground for an amount of time they decided on in advance and then turn back. In that way they gained a measure of control of the situation, and preserved their energies for days on which their goals were more ambitious.
As mentioned above, certain kinds of confrontations are easier than others for the army. Therefore, the army would try to escalate the situation into a confrontation between small groups of soldiers and a crowd throwing stones from a distance of 50-100 meters.
It is probably not the case that explicit orders are given to prevent peaceful demonstrations. Rather the soldiers on the ground are effectively given permission to use tear gas, shock grenades and rubber coated metal bullets at their discretion and given orders that make escalation inevitable.
After hours in the sun, performing a frustrating job they are not equipped or prepared for, soldiers act in the predictable way to make their job easier- they escalate the confrontation. The realization that the soldiers' job is difficult (if not impossible) does not remove their guilt. Soldiers do have the options of refusing to serve as thousands have done before them. However, the larger part of the blame belongs to the commanders who send soldiers on missions with predictable outcome and who set standards for conduct that allow soldiers to attack peaceful Palestinian demonstrations without fear of being disciplined. This is the sense in which it is army policy to prevent peaceful Palestinian resistance. As further evidence one can compare army procedures when dealing with settlers. In a recent example (May 17, 2004) no less than 1000 troops and police were used in the demolition of the single permanent structure in the Mitzpeh Yizhar outpost. With such huge numbers of troops, the need to escalate violence (to rubber coated metal bullets) in order to carry out orders does not exist. It goes without saying that the army would retreat before using live fire on settlers.
In the case of Palestinian demonstrations, violence would usually break out after the demonstration disperses. Usually soldiers would shoot rubber coated metal bullets, shock grenades and tear gas at the dispersing crowd.
Soldiers would sometimes even enter the village and chase people into houses. For their part, the young people of Budrus would respond with stone throwing. Morar emphasizes that the demonstrations were disciplined enough to prevent stone throwing but that demonstrations organizers should not be expected to be responsible for how the young people respond to army provocation after the demonstration is over. In addition, the army would often raid villages at night arresting those they suspect of stone throwing or political organizing. Once arrested Palestinians can be held indefinitely without trial.
Morar himself was arrested in this way and held for 10 days. Eventually, after the intervention of a member of the Knesset, Morar was released by a military judge who criticized the arrest in a rare move.
The price of resistance has been very high for Budrus and neighboring villages: Six dead and hundreds wounded. If the army succeeds in violently crashing this popular resistance it would escalate the level of violence in two ways. First by condemning thousands of Palestinians to life inside of open air jails and second by making non-violent resistance impossible. Army commanders and Israeli policy makers must know this and would welcome the escalation of violence for the reasons mentioned above. The higher the level of violence the simpler the confrontation is for the army. On the other hand, Ayed Morar and the other leaders of the Budrus resistance are striving in the opposite direction. As Morar says " We do not demonstrate against Jews, Israelis or even against soldiers. We demonstrate against the wall and the occupation. We have to act in a way that gives people a hope of freedom." That hope is both the strongest force against the escalation of violence and the strongest force of the popular resistance.
Israeli support
---------------
Israeli resistance to the separation wall in the form of direct action and support for Palestinian demonstrations has been growing along with the construction of the wall. The group I am familiar with is best described as a spontaneous anarchist organization, which has operated under different names such as "Jews Against Ghettos" and "Anarchists Against the Wall."
Although the form of organization is anarchistic in the sense of no centralized power and direct participatory democracy, most participants probably do not consider themselves anarchists. While in practice being far from the anarchist ideal, the group does benefit from the main advantages of such an organization: highly motivated and creative participants and a resilience against political pressure or repression.
Since the end of 2003*, the group has been mostly active in supporting Palestinian demonstrations against the wall. The main aims are to reduce the threat of violence against Palestinian demonstrators and to increase media attention. It should be made clear that the roll of Israelis is that of support. The initiators and large majority of participants in the demonstrations are Palestinians, who are also the ones who suffer the brunt of the violence and repression.
Between January and May, demonstrations occurred practically daily and often in more than one village.
Israeli participation falls into two categories, weekdays and weekends. During the work week construction usually goes on and the border police and army are out in force to prevent the demonstration from getting near the bulldozers. In spite of the best efforts by organizers, almost every weekday demonstration ends with at least a few wounded Palestinians. As the Christian Science monitor reported, [May 6 2004], 262 people have been injured and 5 killed in Biddu alone.
Weekend demonstrations are relatively safe since on those days there usually is no work being done on the wall and therefore less army or border police will be present to protect the bulldozers. However Friday demonstrations are also attacked sometimes such as in Beitunia on April 16, 2004, when 17-year-old Hussein Mahmoud Hussein Awad was killed. Because of the constraints of work and school, and because of the increased risk, a relatively small number of Israelis participate in weekday demonstrations. The Friday demonstrations are quite successful in drawing Israeli participation. The most successful Friday demonstrations have been organized mostly by Taayush and have drawn hundreds of Israelis to Budrus.
One aspect of the demonstration which does not make it into the media coverage is the interaction with occupation forces. It is sometimes possible for Palestinians as well as internationals and Israelis to safely approach the soldiers and negotiate or debate with them. It is not expected that soldiers will be persuaded to immediately put down their guns and refuse to continue to serve in the army. The hope is that it will be harder for soldiers to open fire on people they have just talked to and that a residue of moral pressure will still settle in them. It should be added that while internationals and especially Israelis might have more access to soldiers, their interaction with occupation forces should be approached very carefully. In my experience, soldiers have been surprisingly open to discussion and frank about their dislike of what they say they must do. However, as Gadi Elgazi pointed out to me, some of that sentiment should be understood as an attempt by the soldiers to divide Israelis and Palestinians demonstrators. The danger is that any agreement or even familiarity between Israeli demonstrators and soldiers can cast doubt on the solidarity of Israeli demonstrators with Palestinians. Still, with the conscientious objector movement growing amongst Israeli soldiers it is important to keep repeating to soldiers that they can follow the thousands of others before them and refuse to serve in the occupied territories or refused to serve at all.
The first mentioned goal of Israeli participation in the demonstrations is the increase of safety. It is impossible to know exactly how much safety is provided by Israeli presence. However, according to a senior army officer who commands the region "there is no doubt that the introduction of Israelis into [demonstrations] changed the picture... the most significant thing to change when Israelis are around is the open fire regulations." [quoted in Haaretz weekend section April 16, 2004]
The second main goal of Israeli support of Palestinian demonstrations against the wall is to increase media attention to the popular struggle. There has, in fact, been much media attention but most of it centered on the shooting of an Israeli protester by the army in Mas'ha on Dec 26, 2003.
Much of the rest of the coverage was about the participation of Israelis and not about the demonstrations as such, let alone the cause of the demonstrations. Still even with such racist priorities in the press, the existence of principled Israeli opposition to the wall and its critique as a means for Palestinian dispossession are now well known in Israel-- something that was not true 6 months ago. The over attention to Israeli demonstrators is motivated in part by the Israeli press's familiarity with the Israeli propaganda device known as "shooting and crying". By this device, domestic criticism is used as evidence of the liberalism and ultimate benevolence of "the only democracy in the Middle East." Indeed, a receptive Haaretz readership always feels flattered by depoliticized depictions of the beautiful Israeli lefty.In this way, just as familiarity with soldiers, so can over-familiarity with the Israeli press can corrupt Israeli dissidents.
There are several obstacles to the organizing of Israeli support of Palestinian popular resistance. It is a reflection of deep racism that permeates Israeli society that even after the army shot several Israelis and very nearly killed one of them, many potential supporters have to overcome their fear of the Palestinians they would be supporting rather than fear of the army. For those who do come out and support the Palestinian struggle, the reception has been completely positive--almost overwhelmingly so. This type of refutation of Israeli racist assumptions (about the hostility of Palestinians to individual Israelis for example) is perceived as a novelty and thus is one reason for the amount of attention given to the demonstrations.
Another typical, obstacle to drawing more Israeli support for Palestinian popular resistance is the particular opinion received by those more sophisticated than us. It is the idea that political activism is generally futile. This idea is communicated with empathy in the form of "very good of you but do you think any of it makes a difference?" The almost universal prevalence of this idea generally reflects the anti-democratic tendencies in societies where people are governed by other people and is not unique to Israel. It is both personally convenient and convenient for governments when people believe that their roll is essentially as spectators. The fact that the belief in political impotence is a product of indoctrination and personal psychology is reflected in the fact that it is typical exactly for those who do have the most political power and as such are subject to the most indoctrination.
One more indication of the power of the myth of political impotence is that as soon as this myth is refuted, political action suddenly becomes very attractive. In this particular case, the relatively large amount of media attention, (in spite of it being mostly derogatory) did give the impression that these actions have an effect and consequently the interest in joining the actions increased dramatically.
As mentioned above, media attention has a corrupting effect. While it is essential, it is dangerous for political action to be directed by a quest for media attention. On the contrary, much of the work of resistance is the unglamorous tedious work of political organizing. In many ways organizing is harder, more important and more democratic than the work that can be done by small groups of people. The true of success of direct forms of resistance is success in organizing a growing number of people.
At this point Palestinian popular resistance is in need of more Israeli support. Given the effect that a relatively small group of activists has had, it seems possible to increase significantly the political and material cost of constructing the wall. This effort does not really require an intellectual contribution (if this term even makes sense) in the form of literary metaphors or marketing expertise. The Israeli support effort requires resources and an honest effort on the part of Israelis. It requires more people, more creativity, more money and more work.
================================
* Article written for a conference at the Van-leer intitute by Kobi Snitz
================================
* Ed. Note: The upsurge in the struggle on November 2003 followed an initial project started at the Spring at Mas'ha. It was a camp of Israeli anarchists and others joining in protest against the wall local villagers, and Internationals. When the construction of the fence forced them away they moved the camp to Dir Balut for a while. The first joint action which even lead to damage of the fence was in Zabuba.
See:
http://www.ainfos.ca/03/nov/ainfos00221.html
(en) Israel - Palestine, Tel Aviv - Zububa, Twenty meters of fence removed - in joint Israeli/Palestinian action
http://www.ainfos.ca/03/nov/ainfos00203.html
(en) Israeli anarchist group - One Struggle - initiated an internationalist action against the wall
Palestinian popular resistance is nothing new, yet in recent months it has reached a new level of development. The catalyst has been the confiscation of Palestinian land for the construction of the separation wall, the path of which stands to create enclaves containing tens of thousands of Palestinians. One of the leaders of the new type of resistance is Ayed Morar (Abu Ahmed) of Budrus, a small village close to the Green Line. Since November 2003 Budrus has been the model for what has come to be called the Third Intifada: Popular resistance to the wall by whole villages. According to Morar, there are several reasons why Budrus has been a model of organizing. Budrus is a small village with strong social and familial ties where the social and political leaders all know each other. So when it came time to organize a popular committee in Budrus, it happened quite naturally. Morar stresses that it was important that the popular committee include everyone: Religious leaders, members of Fatah, leaders of the mosque, school headmasters, leaders of the youth club and the civic council. Women's groups were particularly strong and vocal in demonstration in Budrus, unlike in some other villages.
In addition to the local committees, a council of 9 villages was formed to coordinate resistance among the villages. For various reasons, however, other villages where the wall was constructed did not put up an organized fight. According to Morar, the villages that did not resist were not as unified as Budrus and also did not know exactly how to go about actually resisting the wall.
> >>From the beginning of the demonstrations in Budrus on Nov 11*, 2003, the popular committee made a clear decision on three principles: To use only peaceful means in their struggle; to involve the entire village;and to seek international and Israeli support. The organizers were both morally committed to non-violence and also believed that it is the most effective way to struggle in this situation. Morar explained how it is easy for a handful of soldiers to disperse a crowd throwing stones from a distance but very difficult even for large groups of soldiers to control a disciplined crowd that approaches them. Morar's assessment is confirmed by Haaretz reporter Arnon Regular who describes "confused regular and reserve troops [facing Palestinian demonstrations], acting without a guiding hand in violation of regulations they do not know" [Haaretz April 14, 2004]. Commentator Amos Har'el commenting in the same issue on soldiers assigned to face demonstrations.
concludes that "it is not hard to guess which is the least favorite mission amongst soldiers in the central command region." In contrast, the army does not suffer from confusion or lack of guidance when it resorts to the use of violence, and according to Amos Har'el at least, Israeli soldiers prefer anything, including the use of violence, to confronting nonviolent demonstrations.
"At first it was very hard for us to get near the soldiers. With their history and their armor and weapons we were intimidated," says Morar, adding that "once we got past the fear, the soldiers were unable to control us and we were able to push the soldiers back a few times and stop the bulldozers." One key to maintaining unified and disciplined demonstrations in Budrus was that the leadership placed itself in front of the crowd and was always present. The level of coordination and trust was such that the people of Budrus were able to do one of the most difficult things in a demonstration, which is to walk away from a standoff without being hurt.
When they wished it, they would march up to the soldiers and hold their ground for an amount of time they decided on in advance and then turn back. In that way they gained a measure of control of the situation, and preserved their energies for days on which their goals were more ambitious.
As mentioned above, certain kinds of confrontations are easier than others for the army. Therefore, the army would try to escalate the situation into a confrontation between small groups of soldiers and a crowd throwing stones from a distance of 50-100 meters.
It is probably not the case that explicit orders are given to prevent peaceful demonstrations. Rather the soldiers on the ground are effectively given permission to use tear gas, shock grenades and rubber coated metal bullets at their discretion and given orders that make escalation inevitable.
After hours in the sun, performing a frustrating job they are not equipped or prepared for, soldiers act in the predictable way to make their job easier- they escalate the confrontation. The realization that the soldiers' job is difficult (if not impossible) does not remove their guilt. Soldiers do have the options of refusing to serve as thousands have done before them. However, the larger part of the blame belongs to the commanders who send soldiers on missions with predictable outcome and who set standards for conduct that allow soldiers to attack peaceful Palestinian demonstrations without fear of being disciplined. This is the sense in which it is army policy to prevent peaceful Palestinian resistance. As further evidence one can compare army procedures when dealing with settlers. In a recent example (May 17, 2004) no less than 1000 troops and police were used in the demolition of the single permanent structure in the Mitzpeh Yizhar outpost. With such huge numbers of troops, the need to escalate violence (to rubber coated metal bullets) in order to carry out orders does not exist. It goes without saying that the army would retreat before using live fire on settlers.
In the case of Palestinian demonstrations, violence would usually break out after the demonstration disperses. Usually soldiers would shoot rubber coated metal bullets, shock grenades and tear gas at the dispersing crowd.
Soldiers would sometimes even enter the village and chase people into houses. For their part, the young people of Budrus would respond with stone throwing. Morar emphasizes that the demonstrations were disciplined enough to prevent stone throwing but that demonstrations organizers should not be expected to be responsible for how the young people respond to army provocation after the demonstration is over. In addition, the army would often raid villages at night arresting those they suspect of stone throwing or political organizing. Once arrested Palestinians can be held indefinitely without trial.
Morar himself was arrested in this way and held for 10 days. Eventually, after the intervention of a member of the Knesset, Morar was released by a military judge who criticized the arrest in a rare move.
The price of resistance has been very high for Budrus and neighboring villages: Six dead and hundreds wounded. If the army succeeds in violently crashing this popular resistance it would escalate the level of violence in two ways. First by condemning thousands of Palestinians to life inside of open air jails and second by making non-violent resistance impossible. Army commanders and Israeli policy makers must know this and would welcome the escalation of violence for the reasons mentioned above. The higher the level of violence the simpler the confrontation is for the army. On the other hand, Ayed Morar and the other leaders of the Budrus resistance are striving in the opposite direction. As Morar says " We do not demonstrate against Jews, Israelis or even against soldiers. We demonstrate against the wall and the occupation. We have to act in a way that gives people a hope of freedom." That hope is both the strongest force against the escalation of violence and the strongest force of the popular resistance.
Israeli support
---------------
Israeli resistance to the separation wall in the form of direct action and support for Palestinian demonstrations has been growing along with the construction of the wall. The group I am familiar with is best described as a spontaneous anarchist organization, which has operated under different names such as "Jews Against Ghettos" and "Anarchists Against the Wall."
Although the form of organization is anarchistic in the sense of no centralized power and direct participatory democracy, most participants probably do not consider themselves anarchists. While in practice being far from the anarchist ideal, the group does benefit from the main advantages of such an organization: highly motivated and creative participants and a resilience against political pressure or repression.
Since the end of 2003*, the group has been mostly active in supporting Palestinian demonstrations against the wall. The main aims are to reduce the threat of violence against Palestinian demonstrators and to increase media attention. It should be made clear that the roll of Israelis is that of support. The initiators and large majority of participants in the demonstrations are Palestinians, who are also the ones who suffer the brunt of the violence and repression.
Between January and May, demonstrations occurred practically daily and often in more than one village.
Israeli participation falls into two categories, weekdays and weekends. During the work week construction usually goes on and the border police and army are out in force to prevent the demonstration from getting near the bulldozers. In spite of the best efforts by organizers, almost every weekday demonstration ends with at least a few wounded Palestinians. As the Christian Science monitor reported, [May 6 2004], 262 people have been injured and 5 killed in Biddu alone.
Weekend demonstrations are relatively safe since on those days there usually is no work being done on the wall and therefore less army or border police will be present to protect the bulldozers. However Friday demonstrations are also attacked sometimes such as in Beitunia on April 16, 2004, when 17-year-old Hussein Mahmoud Hussein Awad was killed. Because of the constraints of work and school, and because of the increased risk, a relatively small number of Israelis participate in weekday demonstrations. The Friday demonstrations are quite successful in drawing Israeli participation. The most successful Friday demonstrations have been organized mostly by Taayush and have drawn hundreds of Israelis to Budrus.
One aspect of the demonstration which does not make it into the media coverage is the interaction with occupation forces. It is sometimes possible for Palestinians as well as internationals and Israelis to safely approach the soldiers and negotiate or debate with them. It is not expected that soldiers will be persuaded to immediately put down their guns and refuse to continue to serve in the army. The hope is that it will be harder for soldiers to open fire on people they have just talked to and that a residue of moral pressure will still settle in them. It should be added that while internationals and especially Israelis might have more access to soldiers, their interaction with occupation forces should be approached very carefully. In my experience, soldiers have been surprisingly open to discussion and frank about their dislike of what they say they must do. However, as Gadi Elgazi pointed out to me, some of that sentiment should be understood as an attempt by the soldiers to divide Israelis and Palestinians demonstrators. The danger is that any agreement or even familiarity between Israeli demonstrators and soldiers can cast doubt on the solidarity of Israeli demonstrators with Palestinians. Still, with the conscientious objector movement growing amongst Israeli soldiers it is important to keep repeating to soldiers that they can follow the thousands of others before them and refuse to serve in the occupied territories or refused to serve at all.
The first mentioned goal of Israeli participation in the demonstrations is the increase of safety. It is impossible to know exactly how much safety is provided by Israeli presence. However, according to a senior army officer who commands the region "there is no doubt that the introduction of Israelis into [demonstrations] changed the picture... the most significant thing to change when Israelis are around is the open fire regulations." [quoted in Haaretz weekend section April 16, 2004]
The second main goal of Israeli support of Palestinian demonstrations against the wall is to increase media attention to the popular struggle. There has, in fact, been much media attention but most of it centered on the shooting of an Israeli protester by the army in Mas'ha on Dec 26, 2003.
Much of the rest of the coverage was about the participation of Israelis and not about the demonstrations as such, let alone the cause of the demonstrations. Still even with such racist priorities in the press, the existence of principled Israeli opposition to the wall and its critique as a means for Palestinian dispossession are now well known in Israel-- something that was not true 6 months ago. The over attention to Israeli demonstrators is motivated in part by the Israeli press's familiarity with the Israeli propaganda device known as "shooting and crying". By this device, domestic criticism is used as evidence of the liberalism and ultimate benevolence of "the only democracy in the Middle East." Indeed, a receptive Haaretz readership always feels flattered by depoliticized depictions of the beautiful Israeli lefty.In this way, just as familiarity with soldiers, so can over-familiarity with the Israeli press can corrupt Israeli dissidents.
There are several obstacles to the organizing of Israeli support of Palestinian popular resistance. It is a reflection of deep racism that permeates Israeli society that even after the army shot several Israelis and very nearly killed one of them, many potential supporters have to overcome their fear of the Palestinians they would be supporting rather than fear of the army. For those who do come out and support the Palestinian struggle, the reception has been completely positive--almost overwhelmingly so. This type of refutation of Israeli racist assumptions (about the hostility of Palestinians to individual Israelis for example) is perceived as a novelty and thus is one reason for the amount of attention given to the demonstrations.
Another typical, obstacle to drawing more Israeli support for Palestinian popular resistance is the particular opinion received by those more sophisticated than us. It is the idea that political activism is generally futile. This idea is communicated with empathy in the form of "very good of you but do you think any of it makes a difference?" The almost universal prevalence of this idea generally reflects the anti-democratic tendencies in societies where people are governed by other people and is not unique to Israel. It is both personally convenient and convenient for governments when people believe that their roll is essentially as spectators. The fact that the belief in political impotence is a product of indoctrination and personal psychology is reflected in the fact that it is typical exactly for those who do have the most political power and as such are subject to the most indoctrination.
One more indication of the power of the myth of political impotence is that as soon as this myth is refuted, political action suddenly becomes very attractive. In this particular case, the relatively large amount of media attention, (in spite of it being mostly derogatory) did give the impression that these actions have an effect and consequently the interest in joining the actions increased dramatically.
As mentioned above, media attention has a corrupting effect. While it is essential, it is dangerous for political action to be directed by a quest for media attention. On the contrary, much of the work of resistance is the unglamorous tedious work of political organizing. In many ways organizing is harder, more important and more democratic than the work that can be done by small groups of people. The true of success of direct forms of resistance is success in organizing a growing number of people.
At this point Palestinian popular resistance is in need of more Israeli support. Given the effect that a relatively small group of activists has had, it seems possible to increase significantly the political and material cost of constructing the wall. This effort does not really require an intellectual contribution (if this term even makes sense) in the form of literary metaphors or marketing expertise. The Israeli support effort requires resources and an honest effort on the part of Israelis. It requires more people, more creativity, more money and more work.
================================
* Article written for a conference at the Van-leer intitute by Kobi Snitz
================================
* Ed. Note: The upsurge in the struggle on November 2003 followed an initial project started at the Spring at Mas'ha. It was a camp of Israeli anarchists and others joining in protest against the wall local villagers, and Internationals. When the construction of the fence forced them away they moved the camp to Dir Balut for a while. The first joint action which even lead to damage of the fence was in Zabuba.
See:
http://www.ainfos.ca/03/nov/ainfos00221.html
(en) Israel - Palestine, Tel Aviv - Zububa, Twenty meters of fence removed - in joint Israeli/Palestinian action
http://www.ainfos.ca/03/nov/ainfos00203.html
(en) Israeli anarchist group - One Struggle - initiated an internationalist action against the wall
Sunday, September 26, 2004
Palesine-Israel, The struggle continue - Join demonstration In Budrus this Sunday! 26.9.04
Last Thursday the village was under curfew in order to prevent any kind of protest. the DCO told the villagers that they will not allow demos in Budrus "no matter what, no matter the results".This Sunday at 9:00 we will join the villagers to demonstrate against the stealing of their lands inspite of IDF promises and court decisions. it is very importent to be there and show solidarity.
call Raz:
---------------------
see also:
Palestine-Israel, Report of Anarchists Against the Wall (AAtW) about the last five days of resistance
http://ainfos.ca/04/sep/ainfos00429.html
See pictures at:
https://israel.indymedia.org/media/all/display/190/index.php
and
https://israel.indymedia.org/media/all/display/199/index.php
call Raz:
---------------------
see also:
Palestine-Israel, Report of Anarchists Against the Wall (AAtW) about the last five days of resistance
http://ainfos.ca/04/sep/ainfos00429.html
See pictures at:
https://israel.indymedia.org/media/all/display/190/index.php
and
https://israel.indymedia.org/media/all/display/199/index.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
