Skip to content or view screen version

Why 'Victory to the Intifada' ?

Justice Fields | 28.02.2004 16:31 | Anti-racism | London

The Intifada is the daily struggle of Palestinian people to live. Solidarity is crucial.

Let’s be clear: intifada means resistance. It is the mass media and Zionists who portray it solely as suicide bombing. Why has the resistance taken the form of suicide bombing?

The first Intifada started in 1987 and involved Palestinians boycotting Israeli goods, civil disobedience and work stoppages. Israel depended on the Palestinians as a cheap labour resource at this time – over 50% of Palestinians in the ‘Occupied Territories’ worked inside Israel in 1988. With the ‘Oslo Peace Process’ in 1993 Israel brought foreign workers from Asia and Eastern Europe, often ‘illegally’ but with full knowledge of the Israeli government, to substitute for Palestinian labour. These foreign workers were ideal for exploitation- they had to be housed but could be employed in very bad conditions (which they are and pay is often withheld) and can be easily deported on charges of being in Israel illegally. Palestinian labour inside Israel declined from 33% in 1992 to 6% in 1996. In the months preceding the eruption of the second Intifada 20% of the Palestinian workforce in the West Bank and Gaza Strip worked inside Israel or the settlements, but by 2000 Israel was no longer dependent on this labour force and was easily able to enforce border closures and curfews.

‘Oslo pushed the development of a parasitic Palestinian capitalist class that was reliant on its relationship with Israeli capital for its profits.’
‘Oslo aimed to keep Palestinian movement, goods, the economy and borders under Israeli control, while the Palestinian population was to be ruled by a Palestinian Authority… [whose] primary responsibility… was to ensure the “security” of Israel – i.e. to act as a police force for the occupying force.’

The Palestinian economy is completely dependent on Israel with 95% of all exports from the West Bank and Gaza Strip destined for Israel and 75% of all imports from Israel. Israel maintains complete control of the borders and thus trade. Israeli policy is actively seeking to make local production and internal trade impossible for the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Israel maintains ultimate control of water, electricity, phone lines, and the Internet.

In 2000 a Palestinian boycott of Israeli goods or strike actions would have hurt only the Palestinians, with virtually no effect on the Israeli economy. The second Intifada erupted spontaneously - the resistance of Palestinians against the increasing occupation and humiliation at the hands of Israel. On 28 September 2000 General Sharon made a ‘deliberately provocative, “right of ownership” walkabout at the Temple Mount – which is also the site of the mosques of al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock, Islam’s third most holy place’ under cover of 2000 soldiers with Apachi helicopters overhead. On the 29 September 2000, the Israeli army compounded the direct insult by their huge presence in the area when Palestinians went to worship at noon in al-Aqsa. Following prayers worshippers confronted the army. Israeli soldiers and police opened fire at the civilian demonstrators, including children, and killed six and wounded 220. This marked the start of the second Intifada.

In the first few days of the Intifada the IDF fired about 700,000 bullets and projectiles in the West Bank, and 300,000 in Gaza. ‘ “Someone in the Central Command later quipped that the operation should be named ‘a bullet for every child’.”’ In the first six days of the Intifada 61 Palestinians had been murdered by Israeli forces and 2,657 injured, many of them children, and many shot in the upper part of the body. During the same period four Israelis – three soldiers and one settler – were killed, while 35 Israelis were wounded, mostly lightly. Yet there were no bomb attacks on Israelis by Palestinians until 2 November when the Palestinian casualty toll had reached 145 dead compared with 14 Israelis. This was not a suicide attack – Hamas did not resort to suicide bombings until after Sharon was elected president in February 2001. Further, the Palestinians have repeatedly observed the ceasefire calls, suicide bombings have ceased for months at a time but the Israeli violent onslaught has not.

Israel led by Sharon has deliberately broken every ceasefire because Likud ultimately do not want peace - they want the excuse to make life so hellish for the Palestinians that they have to leave. Likud, Revisionist followers of Vladimir Jabotinsky, want to greatly expand Israel’s borders to include not only the West Bank and the Gaza Strip but also parts of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and the Sinai Peninsular (Egypt).

Israel has always worked to expand its borders, repeatedly threatening its Arab neighbours. Israel started every single war between itself and neighbouring countries throughout its history, except one (in October 1973 Egypt and Syria struck first – parts of both already occupied by Israel). Israel is a heavily armed and funded aggressor state, built through occupation, which has been systematically terrorising the indigenous Arab population for over 55 years in order to expand and further its racist ends of being a Jewish state with a Jewish majority.

Palestinians are living under curfew, unable to move around freely, unable to tend to their livestock, olive groves or other agriculture, unable to trade. Children are being denied schooling and nutrition; adults are being denied livelihoods. Innocent civilians are being murdered every day, homes being demolished, people disabled. Torture is common, perpetrated by the Israeli detention forces that hold Palestinians without reason or trial; psychological torture is inflicted incessantly as Palestinians try to live.

The Palestinian Intifada must continue. For Palestinians it is their daily struggle to live. The Palestinian people must not be crushed. Will you side with the oppressor or the oppressed? That is the simple question. Israel has a whole lot of support in very powerful places - the US government, the British government, a vast number of businesses, charities etc.

We in our position of relative privilege in the imperialist oppressor and exploiter state of Britain that allows many, not all, to survive fairly well due to the profits made from the resources of poorer countries, cannot make judgements about how the Palestinians should resist the daily onslaught. We can have opinions and we can make analyses but we must support their struggle as one of a heavily oppressed people against the military and economic might of imperialism. We have a duty to support their struggle because we live in the country that is responsible for Palestinian oppression. We can change the situation for Palestinians by our actions in this country. WE MUST ACT NOW.

Boycott Israel! Victory to the Intifada!

Information and quotes taken from:
The New Intifada, Resisting Israel’s Apartheid, edited by Roane Carey. Verso: 2001
The Gun and the Olive Branch, by David Hirst. Faber and Faber Ltd: 2003
Class, Economy and the Second Intifada, by Adam Hanieh in Monthly Review, October 2002, Vol. 54, no. 5.
READ, LEARN and GET ACTIVE!

Join the pickets of Marks and Spencer, Oxford Street (Marble Arch end), London. EVERY THURSDAY – 6-8pm.



Justice Fields
- e-mail: victoryintifada@hotmail.com

Comments

Hide the following 11 comments

"Victory to the intifada" = celebrating the suffering of the Palestinian people

28.02.2004 16:54

I side with the oppressed, which is why I oppose the intifada - which has made the Palestinian people poor and hungry while their leaders grow rich and fat, Arafat alone being worth more than $2bn. What has the intifada secured for the Palestinian people? It's simply entrenched the dominance of the bosses over them. To live, you have to do things the terrorists' way. Oppose them and you risk being lynched in the street by the bosses' hired thugs - Hamas, Fatah, whichever group the result is the same.

Let's stand back and take a realistic view of the situation. The 'intifada', aka Arafat's Oslo War, is increasingly unpopular with ordinary Palestinians as they realise how much damage it has done and is doing to them. Only Rantissi, Arafat et al are gaining from it, parading in front of the cameras like leaders instead of the vicious, parasitic gangsters they are.

Marco


Intifada

28.02.2004 18:32

Marco,
I agree that an elitist few are certainly gaining from the intifada while others are suffering. But good things have come of it - world attention has been drawn to the treatment of the Palestinian people, and Israel has been shown that it cannot maintain the current situation forever. The economic repercussions of the intifada have surely been felt by the Israelis.

And what is the alternative? The Palestinians are in an impossible situation - they cannot continue to live under occupation, but on the other hand many feel that their uprising has been hijacked. Those who began the intifada knew, rightly or wrongly, that it would have a huge effect on all Palestinians. But maybe in the long-run it will have a positive effect?

Josh


A deadly dead end trap?

28.02.2004 23:46

Not saying there was an alternative to developments as they unfold -- and certainly not a diabolical plot on anybody's part (however the likely outcome). But we need to consider whether the Intifada isn't doing to turn into a disaster for the Palestinians. Because how does it get "turned off" suddenly when that becomes necessary. You can't, and yet.....

See --- we can rightfully object to the Israeli occupation. We can demand that the Israelis dismantle the settlements, evacuate all those settlers, and allow the Palestinians to form their state. To live in peace there IF THEY CAN. Now I know that many of you say we need to demand more because THAT would be insufficient to lead to paece for the Palestinians - that the Palestinians cannot have peace as long as Israel exists. And that MAY be so -- but the problem is, whose repsonsibility is THAT?

I'm afraid that assuming we DO manage to get the Israelis out of their role as occupiers and the Palestinians their state that they will NOT be able to "turn it off" quickly enough. That either the new state will be forced to wage a gruesome civil war attempting to stop (or at least minimize -- a clear "best effort" attempt) attacks across the border or -- being unable to face that, nothing being worse than a civil war, will ignore such attacks and the resulting ultimata to the point of allowing these to be a traditionally accepted "causus belli" and they get crushed by the Israelis.

It's an unfortunate reality that such social movements CANNOT be turned off like a tap but that reality is not the moral responsibility of the Israelis. Whom we can condemn for oppressing the Palestinians but not for what happens if the Palestinains cannot manage to live in peace if/when the Israelis cease occupying them. It is entirely possible that the reason we see so little progress is that everybody there believes that disengagement is going to shortly lead right back to where we are right now. That the real problem is not "how do we get the Israelis to stop occupying the Palestinians" but assuming we get that done, "how do we then get the Palestinians not to 'commit suicide' by insisting upon war between their new state and Israel". The first may be MUCH easier than the second.

Mike
mail e-mail: stepbystepfarm mtdata.com


They're not stupid

29.02.2004 10:29

I don't think the first actions of a new Palestinian state would be to declare war against Israel. There is this image of Palestinians as fanatical, willing to fight to the last man to free ALL of historic Palestine from the Israeli's. They would certainly like that, but most Palestinians I know recognise that as an impossible task. What drives them to acts that seem fanatical is not the occupation of their historic lands in Israel, but the occupation of their present lands in the West Bank and Gaza, which make their lives a living hell, and destroy all hope.

I tell you, if the occupation is over, most Palestinians will want to get on with their lives, farming, studying, working. They will not be gathering their armies of what? Tractors? Sheep? Hardly an army with which to invade Israel. The idea that they would is one perpetuated by the Israelis to justify the occupation, and yet Israel possesses the third most powerful army in the world, which makes the image of the very existence of Israel being under threat a joke.

Hermes


It's not our problem

29.02.2004 13:33

What happens in some future time when Israel is driven out of the occupied territories, is not the problem of solidarity activists in imperialist countries.

This kind of 'but they'll all kill each other' mentality was used as an excuse to not totally confront the apartheid state in south Africa, and more particularly, for many lefties and so-called progressives never to take a position of support for the oppressed in Ireland or to oppose the occupation by British troops. It fuels the position that wants the UN to rule in Iraq instead of the US/UK.

If you support the struggle of the oppressed, you have to accept the right of those fighting back to determine the course of their own struggle. Some people in this, very refreshingly serious debate (these pages are too often full of crap) do that wholeheartedly; others are clearly scared to trust those from 'less civilised' nations with their own fate. Ultimately this is racist, and extremely typical of the 'socialist colonialist' mentality that has pervaded the thinking and actions of Labour governments and politicians ever since the days of Ramsey Macdonald and the Fabians, who described Africans as ‘non-adult peoples’ who would benefit from the civilising influence of a continued British Empire.

N


Not what I meant

29.02.2004 14:49

No Hermes, I did NOT mean the new Palestinian state would "declare war" on Israel. I meant the problem of the new Palestinian state being possibly unable to PREVENT war with Israel. To use an example from your own recent history, did Argentina "declare war" on Great Britain. I meant only that because of events/social movements established within the Palestinian community too many might continue attacks against Israel with the Palestinian state unable or unwilling to take strong enough measures to prevent that being "war".

See, "what happens" is almost always determined by INTERNAL politics. You are too fixated upon the Palestinians not having a chance in a war against Israel (and thus no motive for inducing/allowing one) to interpet events unfolding as they serve the interests of this or that faction of Palestinians for relative position within their own society. All politics is local.

And no N, I'm really sorry, but I do not believe you. Do not believe that you "won't care". In any case, how can you look at a conflict of the sort which has been taking place among humans for at least as far back as we have recorded history, a conflict between ethnic groups for control of disputed territory, in terms of "capitalism" and/or "colonialism" which after all are only a few hundred years old.

You ask too much of "socialism". All we can hope for is that it would eliminate the social injustice of inequitable distribution within each socialist society. A worthy enough objective. But to imagine that it will eliminate ALL human ills is akin to a "religious faith". It doesn't matter that among capitalist societies the reasons they fight wars with each other are capitalist reasons -- that's NOT a reason to imagine that socialist societies won't find (socialist) reasons to fight wars. Because I haven't grown up in, haven't been acculturated to a socialist scoiety I can't imagine what these might be so I can't descibe these reasons to you -- but unfortunately I'm afraid "socialists" will have no trouble coming up with them (fighting "wars" may well be something that our species does).

Mike
mail e-mail: stepbystepfarm mtdata.com


It already hapened

29.02.2004 15:49

Just to remind all of you that this Intifada did start when the Palestinians were under some kind of a self regime (the Palestinian Authority) and while a negotiation was going on. So it wasn't a state yet.So they got upset when Sharon (which was only a member of the cabinet) entered a their holy place (and his too, but that doesn't matter). So what?

The Palestinians never missed an oppertunity to miss an oppertunity. They will always want more than what they can possibly get and thus be left with nothing.

someone


caring

29.02.2004 18:17

You've lost me Mike and you are putting words into my mouth. This discussion is about Palestine and I also cited apartheid south Africa and the British occupation of Ireland. I can't see anything contentious about saying these are all concerned with colonialism and capitalism. I am not discussing some early pre-capitalist tribal or regional warfare and nor is anyone else here. Israel is clearly an occupying power in the region, and is backed by the US and Britain. I didn't say I won't care what would happen if those forces all left, but the fear of what might certainly won't stop me supporting the Palestinian attempts to oust them.

N


...

29.02.2004 22:46

The whites in SOuth Africa were terrified of the revenge that could be meted out against them when the blacks were liberated, but it never happened, and the whites were a very small minority.

The militant groups can only affect Palestinian internal politics because of the terrible situation imposed on them by the occupation. Extremists thrive in extreme conditions. Israel has to let go the iron grip, and face what is coming in the short term, in order to for the people to save themselves the long term consequences of squeezing such an extreme situation.

If the settlements were abandoned, and the occupation over, it would free up a lot of soldiers to sit on the borders. This would make the Israeli's MORE secure.

Ultimatly, though, there should be no border, and both peoples should live together in the same land. Traditionally, the Jews and the Muslims got on much better than the Jews and the Christians, and maybe we'll be surprised in the future at the level of hatred that existed.

Hermes


Decorating Manger Square

01.03.2004 06:21

"The militant groups can only affect Palestinian internal politics because of the terrible situation imposed on them by the occupation."

Actually, th non-militant palestinians know that their militant pals will happily kill them along with Israelis, if it furthers the cause...it's plain old terrorism. Against the Israelis AND the Palestinians.
"palestine " is ruled by gangs.
Hey, remeber the "Christmas Decorations" the Palestinians hung in Manger Square? They crucified their own, as a warning to anyone who seeks peace with Israel.

They Terrorize Israelis and Palestinians


Tell me

01.03.2004 09:18

When you live in a ghetto, gang law is the only law.

The Israelis have forced the Palestinians into a ghetto. Are we surprised at the violence? Can you imagine how much violence will be bred behind the ghetto walls that Israel is building? But the Palestinians are not naturally violent. For hundreds of years they lived in peace, until European colonists came and stole their land. Again, are you surprised they fight back?

You have no idea what you are going to unleash upon yourself if you keep following this evil route...

Hermes