Seeing rocket
fire from Gaza as a counter-discourse. This method of resistance is less about fatalities than undermining privilege
structures in an anti-colonial context.
we die like trees, standin up
I wonder whether, when the settler-colonial army of Israel is pounding Gaza, Palestinians should grab guitars, pianos, and white ribbons, look up at their oppressors flying over their heads in apaches and F16s, and sing a lullaby of peace. Perhaps, then, we can impress Middle East "experts" and "non-violent resistance" -mind you, I am using the V word- butterflies. I wonder, moreover, what authority, defined by what experience, entitles these experts and butterflies to ask us, the Palestinians, to put down our arms. Nonsense.
The
question here is one of privilege, one which must be fought and
broken down to its innermost core. Like the Jacobins of the French
Revolution, whose "radical" demands fell short of demanding
freedom for black slaves in Haiti and elsewhere in the French
colonies, the Jacobins of today advocate a version of freedom which
involves asking –actually telling- Palestinians to sit by and not
only sing for peace just as they are being lynched, but to denounce
armed struggle as well. Lest I not do the French Jacobins justice,
they did demand equality, but only to free mulatto owners of black
slaves. Ironically, this latter demand of equality resembles, in more
than one way, calls by "progressive" elements in the
Israeli Jewish society and around the world to "elevate"
the second-class citizens of Israel, the Palestinian minority, to the
privileged position of their Jewish counterparts. This elevation or
integration, which I prefer to call assimilation, regards the state
as the ultimate protector of its citizens, the source of justice,
rather than as the genesis of racist colonial ideology and practice,
as is very clear in the colonial State of Israel. In other words,
this proposition presumes that the Palestinian community's problem is
with the laws of the state rather than the state per se. In fact,
the liberal distinction between "state" and "law"
is questionable itself.
Resistance
rockets fired from the Gaza Strip provide a necessary
counter-discourse. The Israeli Jewish public must understand that
there shall be no security so long as they do not turn their anger
and frustration at their very supremacist privilege and ideological
system which is embodied in the Israeli government, left-wing,
centrist, or right-wing. No one is asking them to leave, but they
must accept Palestinian resistance insofar as they accept the
arrogance which characterises the Zionist ideology. The radical
potential of Palestinian rockets, of sirens going off, lies in these
rockets' ability to disrupt a system of privilege which Israeli Jews
enjoy at the expense of colonised and displaced Palestinians.
Rockets, in other words, are a radical declaration of existence and
unmediated expression of self-determination. Jacobins, too, must
learn to understand this.
The
Jacobins of today, some of whom are Palestinian elites who probably
suffer from the Stockholm Syndrome, use –consciously or not- very
similar rhetoric to the Israeli official line, which is deployed to
incite the
population against the resistance. Hamas, they say, is responsible
for civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip. Hamas rockets, they opine,
are futile and only cause Israel to retaliate; Hamas flourishes at
the expense of the civilian population which it lets be pounded to
death while its leaders hide behind them. This is a non-argument
precisely because it misses the point. Israel cannot retaliate.
Retaliation by Israel is a Kantian impossibility. Israel was born in
May 1948 after a mass wave of ethnic cleansing which led to the
expulsion of more than half the native Palestinian population. This
is the aggression to which every Palestinian rocket, demonstration, and
burned tire, is a response. Until Palestine is liberated, and by
Palestine I mean historical Palestine, Palestinian resistance cannot
be expected to wane. To be clear, Palestinians fire rockets into what
belongs to them in the first place.
On a
slightly different, but related, note, observations about the
"futility" of rocket fire are short-sighted; Palestinian
resistance did not start yesterday and will not end tomorrow. The
path to liberation is, as "path" suggests, a process rather
than a point that exists in the singular. Rocket fire, like civil
disobedience, is part and parcel of this process which began well
before Israel came into existence. The 1921 Yaffa (Jaffa) Riots,
Great Revolt of 1936-1939, and first and second intifadas are all
examples of events in a larger process which Israel, supported by the
US and European Union, does its best to eliminate from Palestinian
political consciousness.
Defeatist
and apologetic discourses resurface each time Israel bombards the
Gaza Strip or conducts a military operation in the West Bank, usually
invoking civilian deaths as moral grounds for anti-resistance
condemnation. These discourses are confused at best and hypocritical
at worst. Like any colonial power, Israel needs no reason to attack
civilians. Indeed, whether or not Palestinian armed groups launch
rockets, the colonial state of Israel beats up, murders, arrests, and
discriminates against the Palestinians on a daily basis. For
instance, Tariq
Abu Khdair, a 15-year-old Palestinian boy who was severely beaten
by Israel's settler-colonial soldiers, was subsequently arrested, put
under house arrest, and made to pay a fine of $900 all without charge
or trial for, basically, doing nothing. Mohammad al-Durra, who was
murdered in his father's arms on 30 September 2000 in Gaza is yet
another example of ruthless aggression committed by a colonial power
which systematically dehumanises its subjects.
Palestinian
armed fighters must be placed in this wider context; they are
colonial subjects of Israel who, like Sans Souci of Haiti, the FLN of
Algeria, and IRA of Ireland, reject the subjugation of their people
under colonial rule. Blaming the oppressed, to which
Palestinian fighters belong, for fighting their oppressors is a moral
question which pacifists, defeatists, and apologists fail to address.
The murder of civilians will not end when the Palestinian resistance
refrains from fighting alongside its people, but when Israel
decolonises Palestine.
Finally,
the al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas has never been the only armed group
in Palestine. Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades of Fatah, Abu Ali Mustafa
Brigades of the Marxist-Leninist Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine (PFLP), and al-Quds Brigades of the Islamic Jihad, though
to varying degrees, remain active in the anti-colonial struggle in
Palestine. Homogenising Palestinian resistance as "Islamist"
is, therefore, counterfactual and only allows Israel to fuel
Islamophobic hatred already rampant among its Jewish citizens.
Back to
Haiti, a certain Jean-Baptiste Sans Souci, mentioned earlier, was a
black slave under French colonial rule. During the Haitian Revolution
of 1791, Sans Souci, having been abandoned by Toussaint Louverture, a
Creole revolutionary leader who gave in to the French, rebelled
against Louverture's submission, took up arms, and fiercely fought
the French. Having seen the moral zeal of Sans Souci and his troops,
Louverture, who aligned himself with the French following his defeat,
joined revolutionary ranks again. Though Sans Souci was assassinated
in 1803, Haiti gained its independence one year later in 1804. There
is much more to be written about the Haitian revolution than space
allows me to do here, but in this excruciatingly brief account I wish
to underline a couple of points. First, Haiti gained its independence
not by striking a peace deal with France as Louverture had done, but
through the moral force of arms which obliged the French to submit to
the will of the people it enslaved. Second, Sans Souci's arms
achieved more than a military victory against the far superior army
of France; the morality of the cause for which Sans Souci fought
knocked out inferiority complexes –exemplified in Louverture- and
undermined privilege structures.
The
Palestinian revolutionary model must be 1791 Haiti, not 1789 France.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento
La redazione del blog ha scelto di moderare i commenti dei lettori. I commenti inerenti gli articoli saranno pubblicati Grazie