TEL AVIV - The Palestinian national movements is slowly getting used to the
idea of non-violent resistance, but is very far from using effectively this
strategy yet. This is the most important lesson so far from the ongoing unrest
that marks this year's Naqba day (a reference to the 1948 war; naqba in
Arabic means "catastrophe").
Israel spent much of last week preparing for the main Naqba commemoration on
Sunday; though analysts expected only temporary unrest - a prediction that so
far seems likely to hold - the overall mood was anxious and even a bit gloomy.
As Israeli
journalist Alex Frishman put it, "The goal: zero funerals." This is hardly a
lofty goal, and reality proved much less idealistic.
Toward the end of the morning rush hour on the first work day (Sunday) in the
Jewish state, an industrial Volvo truck driven by 22-year old Aslam Ibrahim
Isa, an Israeli Arab from the town of Kfar Kassem ploughed through cars and buses on a busy Tel
Aviv transport link.
He left one dead and 17 injured during his rampage that, according to most
reports, took place over a stretch of some two kilometers. He finally stopped
as he slammed into an oncoming bus that was waiting to make a left turn, and
both vehicles crashed into a school.
"When he hit the bus, the truck driver got off, grabbed a broken traffic light
and started hitting a female passer-by with it," an eyewitness told Asia Times
Online. "Then an officer on a scooter came and restrained him." The police have
designated the incident a "suspected terror attack".
According to locals who saw it happen, there was nothing suspected in it as the
driver aggressively pursued and hit over 15 cars and three buses during his
rampage. His argument that he lost control of the truck after his left tire
punctured seems highly implausible.
The attack bore similarity to two similar incidents in Jerusalem in 2008, when
Israeli Arabs used industrial trucks they were operating as tools of terror.
Similarly to Isa, the drivers in 2008 had no known ties to terror
organizations, sparking debate about the emergence of highly-decentralized
improvised terror structures. The latter would mimic trends and developments in
global jihad.
The terror attack attracted a lot of attention, not least because it happened
in a part of Tel Aviv populated by poorer people and immigrants, which had been
left largely unscathed by previous waves of terror. The bloodiest incidents of
the day, however, occurred on Israel's borders, and most surprisingly, on the
borders with Syria and Lebanon.
Hundreds of infiltrators from the two countries, both of which are in a state
of war with Israel, broke through the border fence and pelted soldiers with
stones. The Syrian infiltrators occupied a Druze town on the Israeli side of
the border, Majdal Shams, at which point the Israeli army opened fire and
killed four, wounding dozens.
In Lebanon, protesters and Palestinian refugees reportedly gathered near the
border, attempted to storm it, and attacked with stones both Lebanese and
Israeli soldiers. In the confusion that followed, shots were fired by both
armies, and 10 people were killed, with 112 injured. The lethal shots were
probably fired by Israeli soldiers, though conflicting reports exist, and
Israeli army sources quoted by the Israeli website Ynetnews claimed that the
Lebanese army fired directly at the crowd. [1]
The significance of these two incidents specifically is yet to become fully
clear - as influential Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on Monday, the
border infiltrations were "just the beginning". In terms of international law,
for now Israel seems to have a credible argument that, as both Barak and
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu put it, the country was defending its
"sovereignty", presumably against a suspected attack from hostile territory;
however, international pressure may intensify regardless, especially if
incidents continue.
In terms of practical implications, the incidents may signal a change of
tactics on the part of Syria in particular, which stands accused by Israeli
government sources of instigating them, [2] most likely to draw attention away
from its own riots. A prominent strongman in the Syrian regime, Rami Makhlouf
(aka "Mr Ten Percent") issued a veiled threat to that effect last week in a New
York Times interview. [3]
Flooding Israel with Palestinian refugees from neighboring countries has
enormous potential as a non-violent tactic, and has got Israeli decision-makers
understandably worried. If there were any over-reactions on the Israeli side,
they could be attributed to this fear. For now, at least, my previous
assessment, that the Palestinians are far from successful implementation of
non-violent strategies, seems to have stood a major test of practice. In an
article titled The
specter of the one-state solution (Asia Times Online, September 20,
2010), I argued that the nightmare vision that the Israeli left has been trying
to sell to the Israeli public, an Israel embroiled in a American civil
rights-type struggle against the Palestinians trying to establish a one-state,
is largely an illusion for precisely this reason.
Palestinian organizers certainly attempted to use non-violent strategy.
According to reports, a concerted initiative to start a non-violent Third
Intifada (Arab uprising) is currently underway, and its program looks
strikingly similar - with some crucial differences - to what happened on
Sunday. One of the organizers, Ahmad Najar, told Ynetnews last week that the
demonstrations were to be entirely non-violent:
According to the
organizers, the event will consist of four stages - the first is a "sit-down
strike" that will begin on Sunday, during which Palestinian refugees from
Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, the West Bank and Gaza will gather in locations
nearest to the border with Israel. These strikes will continue as long as
necessary - and may last up to several weeks and even months.
The second phase is dubbed "the advance", in which refugees will proceed
peacefully toward the border, as much as they are allowed. In the third phase,
referred to as "crossing", the refugees will cross the border and respond in
restraint to any attempt to crack down on the procession.
The fourth and final stage will begin when each refugee reaches their original
place of residence, or the nearest location to it, at which time a second
sit-down strike resume, until they are allowed to return to their plot of land.
[4]
Such a strategy may have had effect under different
circumstances; the obvious strength of using Palestinian refugees from Syria
and Lebanon is that a great number of such refugees live in camps in both
countries. Palestinians living in Syria have the additional advantage of being
able to claim that they are running away from the deadly unrest.
The obvious disadvantages, however, are that both countries are at war with
Israel, and the Israelis cannot be expected to assume, by international law,
that the intruders have peaceful intentions. After a few weeks of peaceful
sit-ins, this may have been a harder argument for Israel to sell, but when the
protesters jumped the gun and stormed the border on the first day, hoisting
Palestinian and Syrian flags in an Israeli Druze village and attacking the
soldiers with rocks, some red lines were very clearly crossed.
In terms of non-violent strategy, the protesters failed to convincingly capture
the moral high ground - a mistake that pro-Palestinian activists have made time
and again, including, as I argued previously, during the Mavi Marmara incident
last year. [5] Additionally, as future inquiries will possibly reveal, they
were successfully infiltrated by Syrian interests and utilized for a diversion
of world attention from the internal unrest in the country.
Violence broke out elsewhere as well. The West Bank had been placed under
closure, but Palestinian crowds attempted to take over Qalandiya checkpoint
between Ramallah and Jerusalem, and over 40 were wounded seriously in the
clashes, according to Palestinian news site Ma'an. [6] In Jerusalem, riots
broke out in several places. A 17-year-old Arab boy who had been injured in
previous clashes on Friday died of his wounds.
In Jordan and Egypt, violent protests were reported as well, with demonstrators
trying to storm Israeli embassies and calling for the peace treaties with the
Jewish state to be repealed. According to al-Jazeera, over 120 people were
injured in Cairo alone on Sunday. [7]
Most analysts have predicted - in all likelihood correctly - that the clashes
will subside quickly, but several important lessons can be drawn from Sunday's
events. "May 15 will be a dress rehearsal for September," an Israeli defense
official, Colonel Eran Makov, told the Israeli daily Ha'aretz last week. In
September, the Palestinians intend to declare independence, and unrest is
widely expected.
While the Third Intifada may not be non-violent - likely to the detriment of
the Palestinians - Sunday's clashes show that there is a real danger of a Third
Intifada. Other analysts have pointed out that in 2000, the late Palestinian
leader Yasser Arafat also used Naqba day as a preparation for the Second
Intifada that started later that year.
In terms of more immediate consequences, we can expect the clashes to add to
the intrigue at the White House later this week. Both Netanyahu and US
President Barak Obama are thought to have prepared major speeches for the
occasion of Netanyahu's visit, and there is a lot of speculation if there will
be major clashes in their visions. In a move that may prove related, the US
special envoy for the Middle East, Senator George Mitchell, resigned last week.
According to some speculation, the unrest may be intended by the Palestinians
to influence Obama to take a tougher stance against Israel. While nothing is
certain yet, we can expect a lot more information and speculation on the topic
in the next few days.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
