Since the outbreak of the intifada characteried by the use of knives and hit-and-runs, discussions began to take place, quietly and shyly at first, behind the scenes and by very few, regarding the form this intifada has taken, discussions became louder and more public and all media outlets are now talking about it.
Some considered what is going on to be suicide or free death and groups that were called “life over death”, and “no to free death”, were formed. These groups demanded that children not be used in this battle so they can enjoy their childhood, as if the occupation differentiates between children and adults, and as if field executions and other various Israeli attacks such as killings and burnings that have been ongoing have taken place on another planet where there are no children.
Some authors called upon the leadership, the factions and influential people to intervene to stop this phenomenon, and to stop the glorification and encouragement of children using knives, although the percentage of children participating in this wave is much less than publicised, as if those behind these ideas are hiding behind the umbrella of child protection, while in reality they are distracting people’s attention away from the real people who are leading the intifada to take this form.
It got to the point where one well-known analysts said that the use of the knives is a violation of international law, confusing their use with the use of weapons, even though armed resistance is approved by international law. This analyst added that what stands in the way of this uprising transforming into a peaceful popular intifada – as the leadership demands – is the use of knives and hit-and-runs, although he did not explain how and why the opposite could be achieved. So a peaceful popular intifada has not been achieved in spite of calls for it, which reflects the lack of conviction in resistance as a strategic method whether peaceful or military, or the inability or lack of seriousness of those who call for it in achieving their demands.
The inability to pave an effective path for struggle that is led by the leadership and national powers is the reason the intifada took, and may continue to take, this path, or perhaps take other forms such as widely using weapons as a result of the absence of effective policies and resistance, which has created a vacuum and nature dislikes vacuum. Thus we noticed the widespread use of knives and hit-and-runs, whereas if there had been a true popular resistance, or if Palestinians had F16s and RPJs, cornet, antiaircraft weapons, they wouldn’t have resorted to the use of cars, knives, scissors or vegetable carving tools.
People who had those ideas have forgotten that the intifada is an issue of concern for all Palestinians, with no need for leadership, as the leadership and national powers and institutions are divided, very weak, they lack options and they are eroding gradually. They are not fulfilling their leadership roles and thus how can they demand an end to the knife intifada, whether through claiming that it was a mistake all along or that it has fulfilled its message and thus has to stop now? So, we’ve noticed some leaders, who in order to cover up their impotence, are sanctifying the spontaneity of the intifada and say that it is better off without leadership and that had there been a faction behind it, it would’ve failed.
The bitter truth is that if the intifada continues without leadership or an organisation behind it, and without having set goals or making resources available, the options available for it would not only be for it to stop as some wish for it to do, but also if it stops it may be followed with an individually led intifada that uses weapons and that can be subjected to external interventions or it may bounce internally and not be geared against the occupation.
The explosion of popular anger took place when Palestinians became unable to bear the situation any longer and they came out in search for national rights that may lead to martyrdom but not as a form of suicide.
As the leadership and factions are slow in assuming their supposed role in directing the intifada, organising it, raising awareness of it and specifying its goals and shapes, the intifada went on spontaneously and assumed an individualistic nature. It continued to do so two months after its launch. Blame should not be placed on individuals who could no longer bear conditions they live under, and who courageously carried out their role, blame should be placed on the leaders, national powers and elites who were unable to keep up with the intifada and provide it with its needs.
What is happening in Palestine is that the current intifada wave is higher than previous ones that were witnessed over the past years, and they were called the following: detainees, Jerusalem, boycott, Al-Aqsa, settlement intifadas,… etc, and that it preceded leaders and powers, which is something that can happen and it actually did happen in the First Intifada, but in that case, the united national leadership was formed and it worked on identifying its rhythm. As for this wave, it remains an orphan with no leadership, organisation or goal; meaning without a mastermind to guide it, which is something that can only be explained by saying that the leadership has not assumed its responsibilities and that factions are helpless, while elites have not realised what is going on and the magnitude of change that is taking place within Palestinian youths, which led to what is taking place right now.
National powers are either unable to lead the intifada or they do not want it fearing it would get out of control, or get used by their internal opponents to threaten their interests which they acquired over the past 20 years of the Oslo authority, which helped create individuals and groups who have gained control over more wealth and influence than they have ever dreamt of before in very short time. Therefore all they care about is keeping things as they are with no change, or that they have been exhausted by the repression of the PA and the occupation together, and all they care about is using the intifada against their opponents while not using all their might to support it. They are afraid that the Israeli reaction towards what is happening in the West Bank would be to direct a strong blow against them in Gaza; they are also afraid that the intifada could be invested in a manner that can benefit their internal opponents.
Within this context, the intifada was launched and continued as one of knives and hit-and-runs, and it achieved a lot. It is driven by the atrocities, attacks and racism of the occupation, which have reached unprecedented levels and are expected to increase in light of Israel’s continued direction towards radicalisation and towards reviving the goal of establishing “Greater Israel” which are clear through Israel’s refusal to come to a peaceful settlement and the establishment of a Palestinian state and the increasing Israeli calls for annexing settlement blocs and area C which represent 60 per cent of the West Bank’s area, as well as calls for withdrawing identity cards from 80,000-200,000 Jerusalemites.
The one question that arises here is not why it is a knife intifada, but rather why did it continue as an individual intifada (lone wolf), what that means and how can it be interpreted?
The intifada has entered its third month. It started and continues to be spontaneous, so it cannot be treated as if it were organised or has leadership so we cannot say it allows the enemy to unite and use excessive force and all those weak excuses which would be interesting had the intifada been led by a leadership of powers and organised factions.
Had there been an effective popular resistance, boycott and a serious prosecution of the Israeli occupation for its individual and group crimes at the ICC, the intifada wouldn’t have taken this form as it is a result of necessity, because individuals have come to a point where they could no longer tolerate things so they moved in an individual manner as a natural response to the occupation and its violations, in the hopes that their actions would influence and motivate the people and the leadership.
Instead of acknowledging these harsh facts, we found some leaders and experts from big and small factions sanctifying the spontaneity of the intifada to the point where a prominent leader has announced that had there been a faction behind the intifada it would’ve failed and stopped by now. He continues by saying that there is a need to find a leadership for this intifada, and praises the fact that factions stayed away from it as if that is an advantage that means the factions won’t be held accountable for the intifada.
Popular participation in the intifada is still limited despite the wide support its getting. This is due to the division, absence of a vision and hesitation between an option that has disappeared but not completely gone and another option that has not been born yet and because the large audience is still divided into a number of groups: those who support but are not participating in it; those who oppose it and those who are still in between.
Opponents are divided into two groups: one that does not want the intifada even if it is 100 per cent peaceful because it can harm its interests and position in authority and society and because it can lead to the collapse of the authority, although the authority, as the president and its leaders reiterate, has become powerless. The second group is those who do not participate in the intifada and oppose it because they saw what the last two intifadas have led to, where gains were much fewer than the sacrifices made and the suffering experienced, not to mention they led to chaos and lawlessness; the First Intifada led to Oslo, while the Second Intifada led to the horrible division.
If this large section of Palestinians feels that lessons have been learnt and that there is a serious aim towards learning from previous experiences and that this intifada could be the first step towards the formation of new leaders and factions, then they will take part in the intifada in an unprecedented manner.
Translated from Sawa News, 1 December 2015.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.