RSS Feeds

The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil,    but because of the people who don't do anything about it

Occupation magazine - Commentary Home page  back Print  Send To friend Is it effective to throw flowers over the border? Jakob von Uexkull Founder World Future Council Right Livelihood Award Gaza, October 2014 No prior reports can prepare for a visit to Gaza. No expressions of support and sympathy seem sufficient after the horrors the people of Gaza have survived. As a European, I felt very inadequate that we have not been able to do more to end, or even lessen the destruction and the siege.The large- scale and targeted destruction of factories, health facilities and agricultural infrastructure makes me wonder if the purpose is to make life in Gaza literally impossible! Many Europeans are angry and frustrated that our governments are afraid to speak the truth and act to end the impunity for Israel’s barbaric actions, which break every law and every ethics of our global community. As Deborah Fink, co-funder of “Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods” has said, Israeli actions also go against Jewish ethics and violate Jewish laws. Allowing Israel to do what no other nation is allowed to do has devalued international law and spread cynicism and terrorism. If one country claims the right to invade, occupy, destroy, kidnap and kill, other countries can and will eventually claim the same right and the global order will collapse back into barbarism and anarchy. When I speak in different countries about global values, not surprisingly someone asks: How can you say that there are such values when we see what is being done in Gaza? The peoples of Europe see Israel as the greatest threat to world peace, according to an EU poll a few years ago. But, instead of listening, their governments told the EU not to ask that question anymore. Israel’s supporters say that it is threatened and has to act. But if you sow hatred and terror, you will harvest hatred and terror. If you lock up an entire people as here in Gaza – an unrepresented crime – they will try to break the prison walls with whatever means they have. As the New York Times columnist Roger Cohen wrote recently (July 25th): “An oppressed people will rise up. That is the nature of things.” We are told that questioning Israel’s identity goes too far. But Israelis who see through the propaganda know that it is Israel’s actions, which are threatening its legitimacy. Even the former Chief of Israel’s Secret Service, Yuval Diskin, said in a recent interview (DER SPIEGEL, 30/14) that Israel is “losing legitimacy”. In the 1990’s, when Serbia terrorized the people of Bosnia and Kosovo, no-fly zones were enforced and the USA and Europe forced Serbia to withdraw. Why is there no internationally enforced no-fly zone over Gaza? As a young journalist, I met Ghassan Khanafani, the prominent Palestinian resistance fighter and artist, in Beirut shortly before he was murdered by Israeli agents. He told me that he always looked for the most effective strategy of resisting and added with a smile: “If I thought it would be effective to stand at the Israeli border and throw flowers, I would.” As we know, many flowers have been thrown and many compromises offered over the years, culminating in the Oslo accords. But what has been the response? We are told that there is a peace process towards a two- state solution but we know that there is no such thing. There is a Palestinian Authority recognized by more and more countries. There are some remarkable individuals who have built world-class institutions. For example, the banking supervision regulations created by the PMA under very difficult circumstances are among the best in the world. Even the IMF has stated that the PA is ready to conduct the economic policies expected of a state. But the reality on the ground is very different. Earlier this year the World Future Council, which I founded, sent an expert delegation to Ramallah to advice on introducing a Palestinian currency (which would be in accordance with the Paris Protocol and international law). This New Palestinian Pound (NPP) would have several advantages for the Palestinian economy: reducing transaction costs, ensuring that seigniorage profits from money creation stay in Palestine, providing a lender of last resort to the banking sector, and contributing to greater economic flexibility. It would enable the PMA to become a central bank and spend directly into the economy. Such spending would not be inflationary if it enabled unused productive facilities and unemployed men and women to produce new goods and services. Contrary to conventional claims, such a currency does not need to be physically backed, e.g. by gold. Money is backed by the trust that it can be re-used and maintain its value. If Palestinian taxes and wages were set in NPP, its use would be immediate and widespread. Maybe such a currency can now be useful in Gaza to alleviate internal money shortages, in addiction to its political symbolism. But it became clear to us that it cannot support the Palestinian economy under current conditions because the PA does not have the minimum powers required to make it work. The many proposals for strengthening the Palestinian economy under the occupation ignore the key fact that the PA has no authority over imports, exports, or resources. Every concession it has been given can be blocked or taken back tomorrow by Israel. Agreements are implemented selectively to only favor Israel. Palestinian exports are delayed and sabotaged. The Palestinian economy remains a fully dependent subset of the Israeli economy. If there is a dispute, Israel refuses arbitration. The importation of many products is banned, forcing Palestinian entrepreneurs to use more expensive Israeli manufacturers. Other banned imports are offered for sale by illegal settlers at much higher prices. To quote a Palestinian entrepreneur, Israel keeps all the profits and transfers all the costs. This equally applies in politics. The PA has been given symbols, duties and responsibilities to make it appear sovereign, but not the corresponding powers and rights to create a functioning state. It remains dependent on foreign donors for its existence who use it to uphold the illusion of progress towards a two-state solution. They can then continue to ignore Israel’s non-fulfillment of its obligations and claim that the problem is here in Gaza. If only Gaza was as co-operative as the PA in Ramallah, they claim, it would be so much easier to progress to peace and a two-state solution. Our findings show that this is not so. Palestinian concessions have not been reciprocated and the Palestinian people are still lacking basic human and citizen rights twenty years after Oslo. Powers transferred to the PA are under constant threat and largely symbolic. While daily life in the West Bank is not as harsh as in Gaza, farmers are being harassed by settlers who beat them, cut heir olive trees, poison their crops and set dogs on them. The IDF makes raids and arrests, operating freely even in Area A, which is officially under full Palestinian security control. It is noticeable that the Swedish Government’s recognition of Palestine, states that Palestine has “a government with the possibility to show inner and outer control”. Thus, Sweden recognizes the PA’s capacities, but is aware that this is not the current actuality on the ground. The Palestinian Unity Government cannot be expected to continue with the policies the PA has pursued for the past 20 years, accepting duties and responsibilities without the corresponding rights, thus saving Israel most of the costs of the occupation. Continuation of this non-peace process by the Unity Government will risk that all its participants lose popular trust and credibility. Therefore, the new government needs to send a strong immediate signal that it will not continue business-as-usual but intends to increase the pressure on the international community to end the siege and occupation an ensure equal rights. Is there an alternative strategy, which could break the current deadlock, increase international support for the Palestinian people and expose the illegitimacy of the occupation? I believe there is. Such a strategy would have three interlinked pillars. 1. An immediate signing of the Rome Statutes, exposing Israeli crimes to investigation by the ICC. No longer should a settler or soldier be able to commit a crime in the morning and fly to Europe on vacation in the afternoon without fear of being arrested! 2. Setting a date by which the PA will end all co-operation with the Israeli authorities, unless the international community presents a timetable for ending the siege of Gaza and Israeli withdrawals to specific borders (1967 with some mutual adjustments), i.e. a realistic two-state solution. This plan would need to contain punitive measures unless Israel complies. A UN resolution without such measures is likely to be ignored by the Israeli government. 3. These steps would be combined with a mass mobilization for Palestinian non-violent non-cooperation and resistance, along Gandhian and S. African lines. This would not be “passive” resistance, but a very active strategy. The theorist of non- violent resistance, Gene Sharp won the Right Livelihood Award (Alternative Nobel Prize) in 2012 for developing the detailed steps of such a strategy. The strategy has been used to de-legitimize and overcome several authoritarian regimes and can be used to de-legitimize the occupation. It would require careful planning. Such a strategy could declare its aim to be a democratic one- state solution. The Israeli authorities would no doubt resist. But they would quickly see their allies disappear if they try to suppress a non-violent mass movement. Indeed, a likely outcome would be that the Israeli government would agree to a realistic two-state solution in order to preserve a separate Jewish majority state! Either solution would end the occupation. In this sense, it is a win-win strategy. In order to send a clear signal to the world, it is important that the strategy of non-cooperation with the occupation is seen to be non-violent. This will make it much harder (and soon impossible) for Israel to suppress it violently. To be clear: this proposal does not deny the right of the Palestinian people to resist. It proposes using the creation of the Unity Government to present the world with a time-limited opportunity to help end the occupation. If the international community cannot achieve an Israeli withdrawal and enable the creation of a stable Palestinian state with viable borders within (say) 12 months, the PA can declare that it will no longer feel bound by this strategy but will use all means to achieve its ends. Thus, the world will be presented with a unique opportunity to focus the minds of governments and the international public. The chances for such an integrated strategy to end the Israeli occupation and impunity have never been greater. The world is still horrified by the recent Israeli attack on Gaza. In Israel itself, there is growing popular revulsion against the current government. Even the Israeli President, Reuven Rivlin, has attacked anti-Arab racism and described Israeli society as “sick” - causing him to be told to “Go be president in Gaza”. The editor of the English edition of the Israeli daily “Haretz”, Roy Isacowitz, last month (31.10) wrote that calling Prime Minister Netanyahu a “fascist” would be “far too tame”, and described him as “unhinged”, i.e. mad. These unprecedented divisions among the elites of the occupying power offer an unprecedented opportunity for the new Palestinian government. Links to the latest articles in this section The US and nuclear programs in the Middle East How can Israel, Palestine return to a two-state solution? A matter of concrete debate