|
-
Why did the uprising begin?
Immediate Cause.
The immediate cause was Prime Minister Sharon's visit to the Haram al-Sharif on September 28, 2000, accompanied by over 1,000 armed Israeli police officers. It was a provocative show of authority over the central symbol of Palestinian aspirations for freedom, purposefully visited on a Thursday, the day before Muslim community prayers. The following day, Israeli police surrounded Muslim worshippers after prayer and responded to unarmed Palestinian protests with lethal force, killing five Palestinians and wounding more than 200 others. As the Mitchell Report points out, what could have remained unarmed, isolated protests turned into popular resistance due to "the decision of the Israeli police . . . to use lethal means against the Palestinian demonstrators." (p. 7)
Underlying Cause.
The underlying cause of the uprising, however, is Palestinian frustration with the lack of progress in the peace process accompanied by a steady deterioration in the quality of Palestinian daily life. Under the Oslo Agreements, the Palestinians were to be given their freedom in May 1999. By September 2000, the Palestinian people were still living under Israeli occupation. In addition, since the signing of the 1993 Oslo Agreements until the outbreak of the uprising, Israel:
constructed and expanded its illegal colonies in the Occupied Palestinian Territories at an unprecedented rate (the number of Israeli settlers doubled from 200,000 to 400,000 and the number of housing units in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (excluding Occupied East Jerusalem) increased by 52%); constructed checkpoints all throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territories, thereby restricting Palestinian freedom of movement; continued to demolish Palestinian homes and confiscate Palestinian land; and failed to fulfill its Oslo Agreement obligations, such as effecting a third withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces and releasing Palestinian political prisoners.
-
So how do we get out of this situation?
Understand Root Causes.
The only way out of this situation is to understand why the situation exists: Israel's on-going occupation of Palestinian land and the continued denial of Palestinian freedom. The PLO has repeatedly called upon Israel to return to negotiations in order to end the occupation. Israel has refused.
Implement Mitchell Report.
The Mitchell Report provides the only roadmap out of the current situation, having been endorsed by the international community as well as by the Palestinians. The Report recommends (i) a cessation of violence by both sides, (ii) the implementation of all signed agreements and (iii) a series of confidence-building measures, including a complete freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including natural growth. The Israeli cabinet has never endorsed the Mitchell Report.
Correct the Balance of Power.
Alongside the complete implementation of the Mitchell Report, the help of neutral third parties is required in order to monitor each side's compliance with the signed agreements and with the obligations contained in the Mitchell Report. Palestinians, along with the nations participating in the G8 Summit, have repeatedly requested such monitors. However, in an effort to keep the balance of power in its favor, Israel has consistently refused to allow any neutral third party to monitor the situation.
-
Why can't Arafat just crack down on terrorism?
The Palestinian Authority (PA) has always opposed terrorism and has exerted a 100 percent effort, as required by the Mitchell Report, to prevent terrorist operations. To this end, on December 16, 2001, the PA reiterated its determination to impose a total cease-fire, outlawed paramilitary organizations, and closed offices of, and ended financial transfers to, Palestinian paramilitary organizations. The PA has also arrested hundreds of individuals suspected of violating the cease-fire, including many individuals whose arrest was requested by Israel and the U.S.
There are, however, practical obstacles to the PA's efforts:
PA controls limited area. Only 17.2% of the West Bank is in the PA's security jurisdiction, divided into 13 separate and non-contiguous areas; the remaining 82.8% falls under Israel's exclusive security jurisdiction. Second, due to Israeli-imposed closures, it has been impossible for PA security forces to move from one Palestinian-controlled area to the next. Furthermore, Israel has bombed the very police forces that have carried out these arrests. Israeli actions undermine PA security efforts. Israel undermines Palestinian security efforts by carrying out the very actions that lead to terrorist and other violent operations in the first place: bombing Palestinian towns, killing Palestinian protesters, assassinating Palestinian activists, destroying Palestinian infrastructure, reoccupying areas under the authority of the PA, demolishing Palestinian homes and confiscating Palestinian land in order to construct Israeli settlements - all in violation of international law. Israel could facilitate Palestinian security measures by abiding by interim agreement obligations (such as further deployment of occupation forces and observing stated rules of engagement) but refuses to do so. Nevertheless, the PA continues to make arrests and to take other security measures. Security measures are not the best or only means of fighting terrorism and violence.
While the PA is prepared to take all security measures within its power to fight terrorism and end violence, the most effective means of fighting terrorism in the Palestinian-Israeli context is to address the underlying cause of Palestinian desperation - the denial of Palestinian freedom.
-
Why didn't the Palestinian Authority take security measures before?
The PA has repeatedly taken measures to address Israeli security concerns. In fact, by 1998, as a result of Palestinian-Israeli security cooperation and popular trust in the peace process, the PA had reduced the number of attacks against Israel to the lowest number since Israel occupied the Palestinian territories in 1967. However, since Israel terminated Israeli-Palestinian security cooperation in October 2000, the PA has been severely limited in the exercise of its authority even within those limited areas under its jurisdiction. Furthermore, Israel has never permitted neutral third party monitors, including American monitors, to verify Palestinian efforts, thereby allowing Israel to be the sole judge of such efforts. On a number of occasions over the last year, the PA has made arrests but Israel, in an attempt to delay a return to negotiations, has consistently denied Palestinian efforts, increased demands, or sabotaged efforts through assassinations, collective punishment and the killing of civilians. Israel will not permit neutral third parties to verify Palestinian security efforts because Israel is fully aware that such a party would find that the Palestinians have made good faith efforts to de-escalate the current crisis.
-
President Arafat successfully cracked down on Palestinian extremists in 1996, why can't he do it now?
Following the assassination of a prominent Hamas figure in 1996, there were three suicide bombings carried out in West Jerusalem and in Tel-Aviv. As a result of these suicide bombings, the PA arrested 1,500 Palestinians suspected of involvement. The arrests were possible for two reasons. First, Israel and the PA were cooperating on security matters. Second, Palestinians believed that the peace process was progressing due to Israel carrying out its first withdrawal of its occupation forces. An overwhelming majority of Palestinians (78%) supported the peace process and opposed any actions that could derail the process.
Today, despite the Mitchell Report's recommendation, Israel refuses to cooperate with the PA on security matters and, in fact, has attacked the very PA police forces that carry out arrests, including attacking Palestinian prisons in attempts to assassinate already incarcerated suspects. Furthermore, there is little public support for PA security measures given Israel's complete unwillingness to negotiate an end to the occupation and its continued violation of Palestinian human rights.
-
Why isn't there a movement towards non-violent resistance?
There have been a number of non-violent demonstrations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, carried out by Palestinians and international supporters. All of these demonstrations have been met with violent responses by Israel, including the firing of tear gas, concussion grenades and live and rubber coated metal bullets. Writing in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, Israeli journalist Amira Haas states that the Israeli army and occupation forces "have made clear innumerable times that any gathering of people opposite its forces is considered a dangerous 'disturbance of the peace' that requires a response." On February 2, 2002, a group of 300 Israelis staged a non-violent protest against occupation forces in Ramallah. Even they were met with concussion grenades. If Israeli occupation forces use concussion grenades against Israeli civilians, imagine what they use against Palestinians. For more information on the growing non-violent resistance campaign, contact the International Solidarity Movement at http://www.palsolidarity.org.
[1] Amira Haas, On the Edge of the Non-Violent Demonstrations, HA'ARETZ, February 6, 2002, at 5.
|
