Eyes Without Country: Searching for a Palestinian Strategy of Liberation

4. Nonviolent Civilian Resistance: Theoretical Underpinnings

Four Nonviolent Civilian Resistance: Theoretical Underpinnings As was pointed out in an earlier chapter, analysis of both the intifada and the general feasibility of nonviolent civilian resistance derives from the strategic or "practical" school. This perspective defines a nonviolent struggle as a "war," albeit one that is waged without lethal weapons. Instead of aiming to change the heart of the opponent or to convert the enemy to one's point of view, nonviolent action rests on changing the balance of power between the resistance and the opponent. The aim is to prevent the latter from exercising its power, and to force it to reach an acceptable accommodation with the goals of the resistance. Such action is not without "principles ." Underlying even practical nonviolent struggle is a clear preference for avoiding bloodshed and for preserving human life. Implicit in this is the premise that the solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict should be based on mutual rights to sovereignty and independence for both peoples-a two-state solution. Another consideration guiding the selection of such action is that given the asymmetrical relationship between Palestinians and Israel, the resistance cannot employ "power" equal to that of their opponent . Therefore, instead of being engaged in a futile struggle to destroy Israel's power structures, Palestinians would be struggling to defeat Israel's political will. Wielding power in this way is entirely possible through nonviolent civilian resistance. Copyrighted Material 96 Eyes Without Country Nonviolent Civilian Resistance At first glance nonviolent civilian resistance may appear a contradiction in terms. The assumption, at least in the literature on the subject, is that the two are synonymous: Civilian resistance presumes nonviolent struggle, while nonviolent resistance assumes a strong civilian (versus military) base. Among the many definitions of civilian resistance is that of William Gamson, who refers to it as a movement that utilizes "direct action to protest, counter and oppose the actions or policies of others."l In a similar vein, Paul Wehr describes civilian resistance as "that weapon which denies control of a state's social, political and economic institutions to the oppresSOr ."2 Elsewhere, Wehr provides an example based on the Norwegian case. He explains that under Germany's occupation during World War II, Norway was a "classic case of nonviolent resistance."3 He describes the political, social, voluntary, and communication institutions and structures that were mobilized against the occupying regime. In his view, such resistance was possible and effective because of "the self-limiting and goal attaining characteristics of the methods used." Of these methods he cites three: "Minimal use of violence by the civilian population." "Focus on protecting their institutions, not liberating already occupied territory." "Providing control through creating unity by way of existing structures and networks."4 Protecting and reinforcing national institutions so that they cannot be used by an invader, is, therefore, crucial to this undertaking. Other definitions highlight the nonviolent component. Gene Sharp, whose extensive writings on the subject are well known, depicts the dynamics of nonviolent action through mass mobilization of a civilian population "against invasion forces and occupation regimes."5 Among the twentieth-century struggles he cites are strikes and protests preceding the Russian Revolution (1905), Gandhi and the nonviolent struggle in South Africa (beginning 1906), India (1930-1931), selected struggles against the Nazis (in Norway, the Netherlands, and Denmark), resistance in Guatemala (1944), struggles in Czechoslovakia against Soviet occupation (1968), and the preludes to the American civil rights movement in Montgomery, Alabama (1955-1956). These examples indicate that in certain settings, including foreign occupation, nonviolent action is both possible and effective ; and in the view of the observers who document such resistance, it is a powerful and viable alternative to violence. Copyrighted Material Nonviolent Civilian Resistance: Theoretical Underpinnings 97 Social or civilian-based defense (CBD) embodies similar principles. Sharp refers to civilian defense as "the use of prepared nonviolent resistance to defeat domestic usurpations and foreign invasions."6 Clarifying die distinctions between civilian defense and the civilian resistance discussed previously , Sharp underscores the role of civilian defense strategies as an alternative to warfare in "national defense." He writes, "Civilian-based defense is an application, in a refined and developed form, of the general technique of nonviolent struggle, to the problems of national defense."? Other writers have long been preoccupied with nonmilitary alternatives to defense. Addressing the needs of smaller European countries, these writers have been concerned with developing viable defense strategies that would minimize the...