When Israel was dropping its newly acquired American made bombs into Gaza it was not my house that was in the crosshairs. When the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) was allegedly using white phosphorous in densely populated areas of Gaza, my children were not at any risk. When Israel used the Dense Inert Metal Explosives in Gaza, I did not feel the pain from these deadly killers that expel charged tungsten dust, which causes minor abdominal injuries at first but later degenerate into multi-organ failures.

On Nov 4, 2008 I was not present in Gaza when Israel broke the truce by killing six Hamas gunmen. I was not in Sderot, when Hamas fired back rockets terrorizing Israelis and eventually killing innocent bystanders. I am not the one who suffered as Gaza deteriorated into a cauldron of human misery. This even before the current conflict caused the death of over 1,400 Palestinians, mostly civilians with women and children making up nearly 40 percent of the death toll. I am not among the 50,000 people that have been rendered homeless. Finally, I am not an official of the United Nations, whose Secretary General has expressed outrage and called for an inquiry to find out why Israel bombed UN facilities and schools, where civilians and children had taken shelter.

I may not have the personal experience of these horrors but I do understand their implications.

Palestinians are suffering not only from the brutality of the Israelis but also from the lack of moral fortitude of the Arab leaders and the collective indifference of the world community. Israeli's are suffering too, although the scale is much lower. And yet in this moment of grief, Palestinians and Israelis must seek change. It is time for Palestinians to enter into a new phase of non-violent resistance, most vividly exemplified in our times by Gandhi, King and Mandela, which also finds significant support in normative Islam. Israelis ought to pay attention to the words of America's new President Barack Obama, when he reminded the world that ultimately all leaders will be judged by what they build, not what they destroy.

In advocating non-violence, I am not being a pacifist. I realize that most world philosophies, religious and secular, ancient and modern, concede war as an occasional necessity while abhorring its horrors and excesses. Gandhi said that if people “are to preach the mission of peace, they must first prove their ability in war.” He held the belief that “a nation that is unfit to fight cannot from experience prove the virtue of not fighting.” Hamas has proven their extraordinary capacity to suffer, endure and strike back. The IDF has proven its ability to kill with impunity. In Gandhi's worldview, only they can fully appreciate the virtues of non-violence.

I have read and re-read all the Islamic texts that provide contextual justification to resist occupation by force. However, the very texts that gives Muslims the right to retaliate, also extol the virtue of protecting the innocent non-combatant and the valor of forgiveness. In some of the worst moments of despair, Prophet Muhammad chose the path of forgiveness and mercy over that of retribution. It is then of little amazement that God Almighty describes Prophet Muhammad in the Quran as a "mercy to humanity" (creations, to be exact).

In the face of brutality and the daily humiliation, seeking the path of non-violent resistance is hard for Palestinians. As it was hard for Gandhi, trying to stare down the mighty British empire, whose iron fisted rule in India was just as devastating as the Israeli occupation. Like Palestinians faced Jenin, Gandhi faced Jallianwala. A contemporary of Gandhi, Khan Ghaffar Khan, a Muslim from the Northwest frontier of current day Pakistan, organized the “Khudai Khidmatgar” who embraced nonviolence not only as a policy, but also as a way of life. Khan Ghaffar Khan was a pioneer of the non-violence movement whose contribution in removing the British occupation was no less important than that of Gandhi.

Using non-violence resistance is far more likely to win freedom for Palestine than any of number of rockets fired into Israel. Showing restraint will be a far superior display of strength than any number of high-tech weaponry Israel can fire into densely populated areas. One cannot rationalize the morality of sending rockets into Israeli towns or sending suicide bombers into Seder parties, except perhaps by contending that Palestinians are answering Israel's brutality in kind. Like the Old Testament, the Quran allows an eye for an eye but even this allowance cannot justify rocket launches or suicide bombings which kill or injure anyone, not necessarily those who bomb Palestinian homes into oblivion. I have heard the attempted justifications - if Palestinians had the sophisticated weaponry like Israel they too would have engaged in "targeted killing," an abhorrent euphemism for murder. This rationalization, like those used by Israel, is Machiavellian, allowing the end to justify the means.

At a time when so much innocent blood has been spilled and so many children have needlessly died, it is hard to contemplate the idea of forgiveness. But Palestinians must chart a new course for their struggle. They must allow voices of hope to rise from the ambers of destruction. Seeking an eye for an eye will only make the world go blind. At the end, Palestinians like all others struggling to earn freedom, have to realize that it is not just the righteousness of their cause but also the nobleness of the means that will help unite their own people and the many millions who identify with their plight.

I am part of the mosaic of Americans - Muslims, Jews, Christians and people of other faiths - who continue to petition our government to become a fair judge and an impartial jury in this long festering conflict. Sadly the political leadership of my country has gone from being Israel's friend to its advocate, unconditionally supporting all its excesses. America just inaugurated a new President. He is promising to fight for the freedom and justice of all. We will take him at his word and challenge him to live up to this aspiration.

To help us build a peace movement, both Palestinians and Israelis will have to demonstrate that they too are willing and able to change. In their actions, they must reflect the noble ideals they want to see in others. Instead of asking what their adversaries are doing to them, they need to ask what changes are they willing to make in order to advance the cause of peace and justice. This self-introspection and personal responsibility is the essential message of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the three faiths that call the region the holy land.

I suppose its appropriate to clarify that the picture is of Ghaffar Khan. I'm glad Parvez is finding his voice and only wish he could have done so while at the helm of CAIR. I suspect however, that any talk of non-violent resistance would have sent Awad and his crew into a spasm...

>>> Palestinians are suffering not only from the brutality of the Israelis but also from the lack of moral fortitude of the Arab leaders and the collective indifference of the world community.

I don't think that the world community is indifferent. I think the global community is impotent in the face of western unilateralism and institution. The UN as a body disempowers majority of the world from acting cohesively, forcing them to be picked as favourites from whichever superpower would have them.

>>> In advocating non-violence, I am not being a pacifist. I realize that most world philosophies, religious and secular, ancient and modern, concede war as an occasional necessity while abhorring its horrors and excesses.

Pacifism is willingness to do die to not fight war. It is the reality of majority of the Palestinian struggle, who die without any intention to fight and whose most telling form of resistance is throwing stones, protesting, smuggling food and fishing on their territory etc. But unlike King and Gandhi, the Palestinians are facing an ideological coloniser. Unlike these men, there are no willing parties to negotiate with and no constitutionally recognised right to resist.

Unlike the clear moral failings of the racist establishment that King and Gandhi faced, Israel itself exists to destroy Palestine, not to profit from its existence or control its peoples vast human resource. Even King and Gandhi forged their approach in the heat of popular violent uprisings. Without the resistance, any pacifist intentions are merely suicide. Mandela himself pushed the armed struggle when all options for progress were exhausted. In fact his imsprisonment was directly related to his refusal to denounce the armed struggle.

Well, I think its suicide to conduct an armed struggle that you can't win militarily. The first Intifada was genius and it clearly led to the Madrid Accords in part. Also, Mandela's armed resistance does not seem to have borne fruit, but rather the white minority's own exhaustion with maintaining control, an exhaustion that is settling into the Israeli mindset as well when you disregard the Extremist settlers. Israel is not going away, so wishing for its removal is vain and only prolongs needless Palestinian underdevelopment, poverty, death and destruction. Find a non-violent way to force Israel to live together with Palestinians, whether in two states (a viable Palestinian statelet in two halves is as fantasy as West and East Pakistan were) or in one bi-national state. Ya'll in South Africa do it now, why not in Palestine?

Ghulam: At least the Palestinians can do no wrong.

The fact is that it is coward Zionists who are afraid of Palestinian natives and the other way around. For example, Ha'aretz reported that some coward Jew soldiers were found faking as HAMAS fighters to save themselve from the stone-throwers.

No, actually they do that as an infiltration tactic. But, as usual, you can believe whatever makes you feel cozy...

>>>>To help us build a peace movement, both Palestinians and Israelis will have to demonstrate that they too are willing and able to change

This is ridiculous, this conflict isn't about whether or not Palestinians want to live in peace-which they very much do, in fact the widely accepted notion that all Palestinians want to is fight would be dispelled with a visit to Ramallah- it's about who achieves ultimate dominance the Holy Land. If Israelis wanted a peaceful resolution of this conflict they would have had it a long time ago since they have always had the upper hand, but that is not the ultimate aim of the hardcore Zionists in Israel. What they want more than anything is a way to deport Palestinians and make sure that the Jewish state remain mostly Jewish. The two-state solution has been accepted by most Palestinians because its the best and most strategic option out there, indeed that is why we should resort to non-violent resistance and political lobbying, not because its the "right" thing to do but because given the harsh realities it is the best we can hope for. Palestinians should be smart and calculating when it comes to demanding a state, and self-righteous indignation will only make that elusive state all that more out of reach.

>>>No, actually they do that as an infiltration tactic

How do you know that?

>>>No, actually they do that as an infiltration tactic

How do you know that?

- Posted by nadia86

Perhaps you don't give Omar enough credit...

Meh, its a tactic about as old as war itself: dress as your enemy and you can get basically move around freely and openly. The Germans had a whole unit of American-accented soldiers who dressed as US troops and caused some major chaos during the Battle of the Bulge in the Ardennes Forest, Dec 1944.

Most countries today have Special Forces who uhmm, specialize in doing this...

I mean seriously, do you think that Israeli soldiers would carry around Hamas fighter clothes in their packs just so they can escape rock-throwers??!!

>>> Well, I think its suicide to conduct an armed struggle that you can't win militarily.

>>> Also, Mandela's armed resistance does not seem to have borne fruit, but rather the white minority's own exhaustion with maintaining control, an exhaustion that is settling into the Israeli mindset as well when you disregard the Extremist settlers.

Firstly, it wasn't Nelson Mandelas armed resistance, it was the entire countries resistance in various forms against the state and comprised even the Cape based Qiblah movement, pan-africanists, communists, liberals and conservative religious people. Secondly, armed resistance is only one critical element of the struggle along with education, politicisation, funding etc. Wars that were fought all over Africa and within South Africas borders had a very significant influence on the politics of dissolving the regime. The increased military capacity of the regimes opponents provided a very very strong persuasion to seek "peaceful" resolution. i.e. If they're fighting back, maybe diplomacy is a possible route. In the case of the Palestinians, if the PLO wasn't started, Gaza would've been a holiday resort with interspersed Kibbutz's.

Remember that Hamas are the elected government of the Palestinians and are responsible for preserving them as a people. Nelson Mandela himself has said that the South Africans and the world will not be free until the Palestinians are free. Lets not undermine the oppressed people to manage and understand their own resistance. They are faced with daily inhumanity of a state architecture, for over 60 years.

The Israelis just killed over a thousand people using weapons that are recognised as illegal and inhumane, injuries in excess of 5000, to destroy every form of infratstructure that the Palestinians have built peacefully... even the UN depots and schools. Israelis are the ones who violated the peace agreement in the first place. So lets not sit around and accuse the Palestinians of not being peaceful enough. Sheesh ... as far as tolerance goes, they're currently the most tolerant people on the planet. Still happily stagin protests in their refugee camps for the hope of a ten second timeslot on the world media.

>>> I mean seriously, do you think that Israeli soldiers would carry around Hamas fighter clothes in their packs just so they can escape rock-throwers??!!

Uhm ... do you even have understanding of the conflict. I've watched documentary after documentary where I've seen with my own eyes, Israeli police dressed as protesters inciting arrests through violent protest, and if that doesn't work they arrest people anyway. Is there really a free press in the US?

Nadia86 >>> If Israelis wanted a peaceful resolution of this conflict they would have had it a long time ago since they have always had the upper hand, but that is not the ultimate aim of the hardcore Zionists in Israel.

Thank you Nadia for stating the obvious. It seems that people are denial that Israel itself is the source of all wars and battles in the area. People think that resistance is the same as war and that colonisers are the same as their dispossessed and humiliated victims.

OmarG - Cowards are always has some fancy words to cover their evilness - for example, hiding behind Muslim or Christian or Hindu IDs.

Is Iran a threat to world peace? Nyeth, it’s Israel, stupid

http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/is-iran-a-threat-to-world-peace-nyeth-its-israel-stupid/

Uhm ... do you even have understanding of the conflict. I've watched documentary after documentary where I've seen with my own eyes, Israeli police dressed as protesters inciting arrests through violent protest, and if that doesn't work they arrest people anyway. Is there really a free press in the US?
- Posted by Ghulam


Where do you get your news from? Watching documentary after documentary, all produced from the same viewpoint, doesn't make you educated on the subject.

No one on this website is suggesting the Israelis are blameless. However, many here do seem to think the U.S. thinks they are. Last year a story came out about Arabs in Israel being armed with video cameras. The Arabs with the cameras commented about how after a few videotaped incidents had been made public, Israeli soldiers started behaving much better, especially when a video camera was present.

Not a bullet was fired, not a rocket was launched. It was an EFFECTIVE response to things the Israeli army shouldn't have been doing. Where are the calls for Israeli Arabs to continue doing the same kinds of things?

I'm simply entertained by people who've never been at war in a single day of thier lives who think that adding a couple pounds of gear on top of the 60+ lbs pack just to hide oneself as a Hamas fighter even remotely sounds reasonable :-)

@Ghulam: I don't dispute the inhumanity of the hard-line Israeli government (which has been most of them). I do dispute that armed resistance that gets lots of Palestinians killed and infrastructure ruined can qualify as "preserving a people". Quite the opposite, me thinks. The resevoir of non-violent pressure tactics has not even begun to be exhausted. And as someone whose been in two wars, I say that every non-violent resistance tactic and strategy must be used before stepping off the cliff of no return to armed resistance.

Outright genocide like i n Bosnia or Darfur or Cambodia merits armed resistance; colonization and neglectful occupation do not and can actually make the situation counterproductive. I think the defeat of the Israeli peace movement was precisely because Israeli society would not listen to them while hamas agents were suicide bombing thier streets and religious schools. Its as if Hamas is continually provoking the situation to force disproportionate armed responses to attract international attention.

If Israelis wanted a peaceful resolution of this conflict they would have had it a long time ago since they have always had the upper hand

How?

>I suspect however, that any talk of non-violent resistance would have sent Awad and his crew into a spasm...<

That's funny coming from an unapologetic neocon lackey, and a member of the most violent armed gang of cold blooded killers on the planet. Hypocrisy at its finest.

>The first Intifada was genius and it clearly led to the Madrid Accords in part.<

Wrong. The First Intifada did not "lead" the 1991 Madrid Conference(not "Accords"). Bush Sr. strong armed all the client regimes into a meeting to show that the US wanted a solution to the conflict after the 1991 war against Iraq. Yitzhak Shamir took off after only a day at the Conference citing the Sabbath, which is odd considering he was an atheist on a flight back to "israel."

>Israel is not going away, so wishing for its removal is vain and only prolongs needless Palestinian underdevelopment, poverty, death and destruction<

On the contrary, unless "israel" continues invading, occupying, annexing, ethnic cleansing it cannot survive.

>Find a non-violent way to force Israel to live together with Palestinians,<

Find a NON-VIOLENT way to FORCE "israel"(a nuclear "state") to live together with Palestinians?! LOL! You'd have a bit more integrity if you had the clarity and courage to name the REAL cause of all the violence: "israel."

>I suspect however, that any talk of non-violent resistance would have sent Awad and his crew into a spasm...<
- Posted by Solomon2

That's funny coming from an unapologetic neocon lackey,
- Posted by DrM


......That's strange, I don't see "Solomon2" on the membership list.



Find a NON-VIOLENT way to FORCE...
- Posted by DrM

My wife finds NON-VIOLENT ways to FORCE me to do things all the time. It's possible to prevail upon the Israelis in the same way. Forcing the Palestinians to do the same will require help from the Arab world.

The author suggests that the Palestinians have failed to adhere to the correct Muslim values.

I think that a more accurate - and honest - conclusion is that Muslims have failed to value Palestinians.

It is a collective failure of the Muslim world to find intelligent solutions and apply appropriate pressure on Israeli colonialism.

It is neither logical nor just to recline in one's chair and lecture the colonized and dispossessed with well-rehearsed Ghandi quotes and sermons on morality. Indeed, Ghandi himself said that at the end of the day, "according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds."

Rather, what would be useful is if we Muslims did more than offer more than lip service to the Palestinian cause for the past several decades.

Those who write and advocate and lobby on their behalf are to be commended - but those are the rare few among us.

I do not necessarily disagree with the spirit of the article; I just disagree with the intended target of the advice.

Crossingthecrescent: Fair enough, but does this mean that you support armed resistance? And, in what measure do you think it is appropriate? In what circumstances is it / is it not a good strategy?