WILL THE PALESTINE SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT MISS THE BUS?
In 1961, The Congress on Racial Equality (CORE) sent a stream of Freedom Riders on buses to the heart of the segregated American South. Other groups, including the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), considered the move too risky and too confrontational.
Indeed, many riders were badly beaten and it is something of a miracle that no one was killed. And it is a sad statement that most of the leadership of the civil rights movement, including Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., chose not to participate as riders, despite the opportunity and a direct invitation from the student riders themselves to do so.
Will the Palestine solidarity movement miss a similar opportunity?
The holy grail of Palestine solidarity is a massive nonviolent movement – a sea of irresistible humanity much like the 1963 March on Washington that came on the heels of the Freedom Rider movement. However, such a movement is happening now, while many solidarity groups remain on the sidelines.
The first major stirrings were the "Return Marches" of May 15, 2011, where tens of thousands of unarmed Palestinians from Lebanon and Syria converged on the borders with Palestine and attempted to enter. In Syria they broke through the fence, and large numbers crossed, with one participant reaching Jaffa and another Jerusalem. Dozens of Palestinians were shot dead and many more wounded by Israeli forces despite the fact that no Israelis were harmed.
No one knows what might have happened if a significant number of solidarity volunteers from other nations had come to join the demonstrations. In other situations of Palestinian nonviolent resistance, the presence of solidarity volunteers has indisputably reduced the casualties, by the reluctance of Israeli forces to harm non-Palestinians and by the fact that international media tend to cover such events with greater interest when such volunteers are present. However, no attempt was made to engage the western solidarity organizations, mainly in Europe and North America.
In that instance, we cannot point to a failure of the solidarity movement. The mobilization was accomplished locally on very short notice and without inclusion of the solidarity groups. By and large, the Palestine solidarity community had no time to organize or even take a position.
On March 30, 2012, however, the Global March to Jerusalem (GMJ) will attempt a massive nonviolent march within Palestine, along all its borders and in as many countries as possible around the world. It has been in the works for a year, and most of the major western solidarity organizations have been approached to participate in both the organizing and execution of the project. Despite a recent influx of major endorsements, however, many still refuse or ignore the invitation.
Why?
We hear some of the same arguments: that the project is too risky and confrontational. However, it is also true that the project was not the brainchild of any of these solidarity groups, or even of their Palestinian allies. Instead, it came from groups that represent large numbers of Palestinians – including many from the Palestinian expatriate communities in the border countries, such as the refugee camps, the Islamic movements and the supporters of armed resistance groups.
Although the solidarity community has claimed for years that it wants nonviolent resistance to catch on in these communities and the Palestinian mainstream, they apparently were not prepared for it to come unsolicited from that community. As a result, a lot of the reaction has been mistrust and a concern that such groups might “hijack” the Palestinian nonviolent resistance movement.
Who, then, should drive the agenda? Palestinians, or solidarity groups? Some of the solidarity organizations argued that they needed their allies in the relatively small Palestinian nonviolent resistance movement, mainly in the West Bank, to give their approval. However, a majority of these Palestinian groups joined the movement in October, 2011, and in January, 2012, they issued a call for all solidarity organizations to join the effort. Still some of the major solidarity organizations drag their heels.
If the solidarity groups are concerned that the voice of the movement does not speak the language that they would like to hear, it is perhaps because the solidarity movement has spurned the welcome extended to them for their voices and their language to be included. If they are concerned about conferring legitimacy upon groups whose message is different from theirs, perhaps it is time to ask why the solidarity groups are speaking with a different voice from Palestinians and what it means to be in solidarity. Solidarity with whom?
Thankfully, the 3000-member Palestine Solidarity Campaign in the UK has joined the GMJ. Code Pink, Global Exchange, ICAHD-USA, two Sabeel chapters, Canadian Boat to Gaza, Canadian Peace Alliance, Independent Jewish Voices, two committees of the National Lawyers Guild and others have also joined. However, where are the other organizations that worked together in twenty countries to create the Gaza Freedom Flotillas? Where are the major U.S. Coalitions, the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions committees, the student organizations and other major networks?
One is reminded of a 1968 cartoon by J.B. Handelsman, where the Greek philosopher, Diogenes, searching the world for an honest man, finally finds one. Instead of rejoicing, however, he complains, “…but I was hoping to find a taller honest man.” In the cartoon, Diogenes reluctantly accepts the short honest man, but in the Palestine solidarity movement, many of the groups appear to be holding out for a taller one.
When a movement goes mainstream, there is both opportunity and loss. The core that has nurtured the movement for a long period can be swept aside by the transition, as its members become dismayed by the changes and refuse to accept them. Or they can adjust their expectations, recognize they can be of benefit to the new center of the movement, and strengthen it by their participation.
Beware what you wish for, says the proverb, for the consequences will not be what you imagine. If we wish for a massive nonviolent movement, we should be prepared to be a part of it when it happens, and not to abandon it because it is not in hands of our choice. An opportunity has arrived, an invitation has been extended, and we are welcome to be a part of shaping and implementing a potentially historic period in the Palestinian nonviolent resistance movement. Will the bus leave without us?
Dr. Paul Larudee is a co-founder of the movement to break the siege of Gaza by sea and a founding member of the Global March to Jerusalem.
