Intifada for Dummies: Why a Popular Uprising Is Yet to Take Off?
Print This
By Ramzy Baroud
Submitted by Author
Saturday, Apr 2, 2016
Whether
history moves in a straight or cyclical line, it matters little. The
uncontested fact is that it is in constant motion. Thus, the current
situation in Palestine is particularly frustrating to a generation that
has grown up after the Oslo Peace Accord because they have been brought
up within a strange historical phenomenon: where the earth below their
feet keeps shrinking and when time stands still.
The
nature of the current uprising in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is a
testament to that claim. Previous uprisings were massive in their
mobilization, clear in their message and decisive in their delivery.
Their success or failure is not the point of this discussion, but the
fact is that they were willed by the people and, within days, they
imprinted themselves on the collective consciousness of Palestinians
everywhere.
The current uprising is different; so
different, in fact, that many are still hesitating to call it an
‘intifada’; as if intifadas are the outcome of some clear-cut science,
an exact formula of blood and popular participation that must be fully
satisfied before a eureka moment is announced by some political
commentator.
It is different, nonetheless, for there
is yet to be a clear sense of direction, a leadership, a political
platform, demands, expectations and short and long term strategies. At
least that is how the 1987-93 Intifada played out and, to a lesser
extent, the 2000-05 al-Aqsa Intifada as well. But is it not possible
that the outcomes of these previous intifadas is what is making the
current uprising different?
The first Intifada
metamorphosed into a worthless peace process which eventually led to the
signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993. A year later, the Palestinian
leadership of the PLO was reproduced into the emasculated form of the
Palestinian Authority (PA). Since then, the latter has served largely as
a conduit for the Israeli Occupation.
The second
Intifada had less success than the first. It quickly turned into an
armed rebellion, thus marginalizing the popular component of the revolt
which is required to cement the collective identity of Palestinians,
forcing them to overcome their division and unify behind a single flag
and a distinct chant.
This Intifada was crushed by a
brutal Israeli army; hundreds were assassinated and thousands were
killed in protests and clashes with Israeli soldiers. It was a watershed
moment in the relationship between the Israeli government and the
Palestinian leadership in Ramallah, and between the Palestinian factions
themselves.
The late PLO leader, Yasser Arafat, was
held hostage by the Israeli army in his Ramallah headquarters. The
soldiers taunted him in his office, while blocking his movement for
years. Finally, he was slowly poisoned and died in 2004.
Israel
then went through the painstaking effort of revamping the PA
leadership, flushing out the nonconformists – through murder and
imprisonment – and allowing the so-called moderates to operate but, even
then, under very strict conditions.
Mahmoud Abbas was
elected President of the PA in 2005. His greatest achievements include
the cracking down on civil society organizations, ensuring total loyalty
towards him: personally, and towards his branch within the Fatah
faction. Under Abbas, there has been no revolutionary model for change,
no ‘national project’; in fact, no clear definition of nationhood, to
begin with.
The Palestinian nation became whatever
Abbas wanted it to be. It consisted, largely, of West Bank Palestinians,
living mostly in Area A, loyal to Fatah and hungry for international
handouts. The more the Abbas nation agreed to play along, the more money
they were allowed to rake in.
In 2006, this
fragmentation became absolute. Many will recall that period of discord
when Hamas was allocated majority of the seats in the Palestinian
Legislative Council (PLC); but the conflict, which resulted in the
violent summer of 2007, had little to do with democracy. The paradigm –
of endless ‘peace talks’, generous donors’ money, growing illegal Jewish
settlements, etc. – suited both Abbas and the Israelis very well. No
one, Hamas especially, were to be allowed to impose a paradigm shift.
Israel
immediately besieged Gaza, launched successive wars, and committed
numerous war crimes with little criticism emanating from Gaza’s brethren
in Ramallah. Bolivia and Venezuela seemed more furious by Israel’s war
crimes in Gaza than Mahmoud Abbas’ West Bank clique.
Until
October of last year, when the current uprising slowly began building
momentum, the situation on the ground seemed at a standstill. In the
West Bank, Occupation was slowly normalized in accordance to the
formula: occupation and illegal settlements in exchange for money and
silence.
Gaza, on the other hand, stood as a model for
barbarity, regularly meted out by Israel as a reminder to those in the
West Bank that the price of revolt is besiegement, hunger, destruction
and death.
It is against this backdrop of misery,
humiliation, fear, oppression and corruption that Palestinians arose.
They were mostly young people born after Oslo, became politically
conscious after the Fatah-Hamas clash, raised in the conflicting worlds
of their own leadership co-existing with the Occupation, on one hand,
and clashing with other Palestinians on the other.
These
youth, however, never perceived Occupation to be normal; never came to
terms with the fact that the earth beneath their feet kept shrinking
while illegal, massive Jewish cities kept on being erected upon their
land; true, they learned to navigate their way across the checkpoints,
but never assented to the superiority of their occupier. They abhorred
disunity; rejected identity politics and factionalism; never understood
why Gaza was being disowned and slowly slaughtered.
This
is a generation that is the most educated, yet; most politically savvy
and, thanks to the huge leaps in digital media technology, is the most
connected and informed of the world around it. The ambitions of these
youth are huge, but their opportunities are so limited; their earth has
shrunk to the size of a single-file queue before an Israeli military
checkpoint, where they are corralled on their way to school, to work and
back home. And, like the Israelis who shot at anyone who dared to
protest, Abbas imprisons those who attempted to do so.
It is a generation that simply cannot breathe.
The
current Intifada is an expression of that dichotomy, of a generation
that is so eager to break free, to define itself, to liberate its land,
yet resisted by an Old Guard unremittingly holding on so tight to the
few perks and dollars they receive in the form of allotments every
month.
History must remain in constant motion, and the
last six months have been the attempt of an entire generation to move
the wheels of history forward, despite a hundred obstacles and a
thousand checkpoints.
This might be the most difficult
Intifada yet; for never before did Palestinians find themselves so
leaderless, yet so ready to break free. The outcome of this tension,
will not only define this whole generation, as it defined my generation
of the 1987 Intifada, but it will define the future of Palestine
altogether.
Dr. Ramzy Baroud has been writing about
the Middle East for over 20 years. He is an internationally-syndicated
columnist, a media consultant, an author of several books and the
founder of PalestineChronicle.com. His books include “Searching Jenin”, “The Second Palestinian Intifada” and his latest “My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story”.
Source URL
|
Print This
|