As the details on the agreement to end the collective hunger strike of thousands of Palestinian prisoners continue to unravel, it is important to begin addressing what we have learned from this whole, momentous episode.

For one thing, these Palestinians demonstrated once again that they are willing to sacrifice everything—including their lives—to challenge the injustice of the Israeli occupation. This was a tremendous act of willpower, in which people starved themselves for more than two months, in order to draw attention to their plight. And what is this plight? It is being thrown in prison for months, or even years, without charge, trial or evidence. It is about lives suddenly broken and upended without the slightest recourse to justice as we know it.

We have also learned once again about the ease with which a Palestinian can be taken from his or her home and tossed into a prison cell for no apparent reason. And when Israel is demanded to proffer evidence, it cannot, hiding behind the excuse that the evidence is secret and risks exposing certain sources. Thus, an unaccountable intelligence agency can offer secret “evidence”—that cannot be challenged by the accused—in a military court in which the judge does not question the reliability of the information. (If you want to see how this works, watch the documentary “The Law in These Parts,”  or read the report, “Without Trial” by B’Tselem.) And this is the daily reality that a people have lived in for nearly 45 years of occupation.

This should also make us realize—if we have not already—that despite the Oslo Accords and the existence of a quasi-Palestinian government, the people have absolutely no security and no protection. Whether it is from the Jewish settlers who attack Palestinian farmers and burn their crops, or from the Israeli military and security forces that arrest arbitrarily, the Palestinian Authority is powerless to do anything about it. This in turn causes average Palestinians to question what the point is in a government that cannot even protect its citizens, undermining the entire foundation of a state.

We must also remember that Israel holds all the chips. These hunger strikers have managed to pressure Israel into a level of accommodation, but only while people are focused on the issue. As soon as that attention dissipates, Israel is free to take back what it has offered. In the relationship between the occupier and the occupied, Israel is the Lord who giveth and taketh away. What will the Palestinians do? Stage another collective hunger strike only to repeat the process of give and take? The costs are simply too high to stage such a strike every time the need arises to challenge the system.

This was one of the major inadequacies of the hunger strike that was launched on April 17, as opposed to the one that preceded it. The ten individual hunger strikers, beginning with Khader Adnan on December 17, were fighting against administrative detention. This was a worthy cause because administrative detention is one aspect—and probably the most egregious—of an inhumane system of military “justice” in the occupied territories. The larger collective hunger strike that was launched afterwards challenged the conditions and treatment of the prisoners by the Israel Prison Service. This is markedly different. It is not necessarily a bad or unworthy effort, but it overshadowed the more important cause of challenging the system as a whole. By protesting the conditions inside the cells, and not the nature of the imprisonment to begin with, Israel was able to belittle the collective hunger strike as little more than prisoners demanding plasma TVs in their cells (using hyperbolic Israeli terminology), for example. Furthermore, when those simpler demands could be met by Israel, it had the effect of taking momentum away from the prisoners who were contesting administrative detention and thus weakening the nobler goal.

On a positive note, however, this was in my humble opinion just one more example in the growing trend of grassroots initiatives taken by average Palestinians who are challenging the occupation on their own. No longer leaving the official centers of power responsible for securing Palestinian rights, individuals and groups at the grassroots levels are increasingly adopting this responsibility. From BDS to the popular struggle to Khader Adnan, people are not waiting around anymore for the old political factions to act. This is the most important change happening in Palestinian politics and the hunger strikes have highlighted this.

Moreover, they have also reaffirmed the perception that the Palestinian Authority does not want to rock the boat. Very little public effort was initiated by the PA during the entirety of the hunger strike movement. When the father of hunger striker Hana Shalabi asked Mahmoud Abbas in person to help get his daughter released, the president replied: there is little I can do.

Where was the international community?

Nor does the world seem to care. In the words of UN Special Rapporteur on Palestinian Human Rights, Richard Falk:

Can anyone doubt that if there were more than 1300 hunger strikers in any country in the world other than Palestine, the media in the West would be obsessed with the story?  It would be featured day after day, and reported on from all angles, including the severe medical risks associated with such a lengthy refusal to take food.

The lack of media coverage and public outcry abroad only serves to deepen the impression among Palestinians that no matter what they do, how desperate and dramatic the effort, the world will ignore their pleas for help. While preaching to the Palestinians for decades on their need to adopt a non-violent platform, no act of non-violence on behalf of the Palestinians elicits a response from their preachers. When one questions the reason for near-ubiquitous disillusionment by Palestinian society, this goes a long way in answering why.

Nonetheless, the effort was good enough to pressure Israel into seeking a way out. The prospect of Palestinian civil unrest in response to the death of one or more prisoners did not sit well with Israel and it took the necessary measures to release the tension. This exposes the power of unarmed resistance—it leaves Israel with little excuse for its reprehensible behavior and policies vis-à-vis the Palestinians.

But lurking in the shadows of a Palestinian achievement was Israel’s public relations machine, spinning everything in its favor. As the international media pounced on the story only in its final hour, most news outlets, including The New York Times, were reporting that the Palestinian prisoners and political parties had agreed to give up on terrorism in exchange for Israel meeting the demands of the prisoners. Quoting only Israeli sources on the stipulation, Israel was able to spin the story into an achievement. I mean, who wouldn’t give in to the prisoners’ demands in exchange for bringing down an entire system of terror to its knees in the single swipe of a pen? What a joke.

Over 1,600 Palestinian prisoners had been on a collective hunger strike since April 17, and eight others were on individual hunger strikes for much longer. Two prisoners, Bilal Diab and Thaer Halahleh, had gone without food for 77 days, the longest hunger strikes in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It was not immediately clear whether the deal met the demand of the two for immediate release, or whether they had agreed to call off their strike with the rest. Other sources had claimed that no such deal had been reached, and that reports to that effect constitute efforts by the Palestinian Authority to hijack the hunger strike.

Early Tuesday morning more information was leaked that Thaer Halahleh had agreed after midnight to end his hunger strike in exchange for either being released or charged at the end of his administrative detention term, on June 5. He will spend the remainder of his detention order in a public hospital. This is very similar to the deal struck with Khader Adnan, the first to launch his hunger strike back on December 17, 2011, and who was released on April 17 after Israel failed to bring any evidence against him. Bilal Diab will be released in August.

Sources had reported the two prisoners as very close to death. Both official Israeli and Palestinian sources revealed that they were worried that the death of a prisoner could spark widespread unrest in the occupied territories and that they were working hastily on a deal.

It is still unclear what has been agreed to at this point. The hunger strike movement—which has been popularly labeled the Battle of Empty Stomachs—is two-pronged: contesting the policy of administrative detention and also the treatment of prisoners, including excessive solitary confinement, the denial of family visits and the right to seek an education in prison.

Administrative detention remains the major issue on the table and the reason for the hunger strike in the first place after Khader Adnan, a former prisoner, went 66 days without food until Israel released him on April 17.

Diab and Halahleh were also fighting administrative detention along with several other prisoners. The policy—which has its origins in the British Mandate period—allows Israel to detain Palestinians without charge or public evidence for periods of six months that can be renewed indefinitely.

A positive outcome of the hunger strikes has been renewed international focus on the issue of administrative detention and Palestinian prisoners in general. However, despite the dramatic effort made by the prisoners, there was very little international media attention given to the issue, considering its scale and potential impact. For many Palestinians, this may represent another example of wide scale acts of non-violent resistance and civil disobedience, which are not met with international recognition–a prospect that further fuels Palestinian disillusionment.

Support has remained strong among Palestinian society during the months-long hunger strike movement that began in December 2011, but the mainstream public has not really galvanized. However, if one of the prisoners were to die, it is quite possible that Palestinian society would react more vocally. The prisoner issue is the most widely felt and supported issue within Palestinian society because nearly every family has had one or several members imprisoned since the Israeli occupation began in 1967.

Palestinian demonstrators staged a sit-in at the entrance to the United Nations offices in Ramallah Wednesday morning to protest inaction by the international body on behalf of the approximately 2,000 Palestinian prisoners now on hunger strike.

The sit-in, which was organized by the group Palestinians for Dignity, prevented UN employees from entering the offices in order to raise international awareness and bring about some type of action. In the early morning a small group of 20-30 people made up of the family members of prisoners, supporters and other activists attended the demonstration calling for protection from the UN instead of more aid.

PA security forces were deployed in the area. There were reports of threats in the beginning of the protest from security but no actual clashes have taken place.

Protests in support of the prisoners have been happening every day now for weeks, despite the hunger strikes having received very little media attention and virtually no response from governments around the world, including the United Nations. On Tuesday, another sit-in was staged in front of the Palestinian Authority presidential offices to protest inaction by the government.

Two prisoners, Thaer Halahleh and Bilal Diab, have passed the 70-day mark of their hunger strikes and could die at any time. Several others are close behind. Approximately 2,000 prisoners launched a collective hunger strike on April 17 in conjunction with the independent hunger strikes already taking place since Khader Adnan began his on December 18.

On Monday, Israel’s Supreme Court rejected appeals by Halahleh and Diab for release from their administrative detention, in which they are held without charge or trial. The court’s decision has made the deaths of the prisoners very likely and it is difficult to predict what the public response to such an outcome will be.

UPDATE:

Similar protests were reported to have taken place Wednesday at the UN offices in Jerusalem and Geneva. A small protest on the issue of hunger strikes was conducted at the gates to Tel Aviv University, as well.

Read also:
‘Empty stomachs’ hunger strike spreads across prisons 

Yesterday, I attended my first Palestinian demonstration across the Green Line, in front of Ramle Prison. Having been to many protests in the West Bank I was eager to assess the differences between the two events and how the Israeli authorities respond to each.

The day before, I had attended a demonstration in front of Ofer Prison near Ramallah. Both events were in support of the Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike in Israeli jails, and therefore, relatively parallel.

In the occupied West Bank, peaceable assembly by Palestinians is prohibited unless authorized by the Israeli military, which does not happen. Thus, any form of collective protest is dealt with harshly by the Israeli military, leaving Palestinians with no outlet for releasing public frustration or protesting for their basic rights.

On Wednesday, Palestinian demonstrators once again tried to reach Ofer prison in order to show their support for the approximately 2,000 Palestinian prisoners now on hunger strike in what has been billed the “Battle of Empty Stomachs.” Yet before the protest could even begin, the Israeli soldiers assembled on the road that leads to the prison began firing endless volleys of teargas canisters and excessive amounts of plastic-coated steel bullets.

I was nearly hit by these so-called “rubber” bullets on several occasions during the protest, even when I had moved from the front lines to a position in the back a few hundred meters from the soldiers. Some 20 Palestinians were reported injured. In the end, what could have been a peaceful demonstration and public expression of discontent devolved into riot control and stone throwing.

On Thursday in front of Ramle Prison, the scenario was much different. Peaceable assembly was permitted in the vicinity of the prison, to a small area designated by the Israeli police. There the protesters chanted slogans and displayed posters and flags for nearly an hour and a half.

When a bulk of the demonstrators tried to move beyond the metal grate fence erected for them, however, the police moved in quickly and aggressively, assaulting several of the protesters and arresting at least ten of them.

So, although people were allowed to protest, they were ultimately confined by police to a tiny space away from the public eye. As soon as the demonstrators moved outside their little box, the police pushed them back in using force—although without resorting to the type of extreme measures that are routinely used inside the occupied territories against the Palestinians with no rights. Those arrested were dealt with harshly, however, and reports from the jail said that the detainees were beaten by police far away from the watchful eye of the press cameras.

It is unmistakable that the protests are in many ways linked and reflective of how Palestinians are treated on the whole. Although those Palestinian citizens of Israel have more rights than their occupied counterparts, their voice is not appreciated and quickly silenced as soon as it attempts to speak not solely for its own sake but to influence those around them. Their rights protect them to some extent under the law but few would bat an eye if, and when, they are trampled on. Palestinians in the occupied territories are not even on the radar of Israelis and the military can deal with them as they see fit with virtual impunity. In the end, the grievances of all Palestinians are perceived as threatening and are crushed when they try to become more than just a show.

UPDATE:

It is worth noting that several of those arrested at the Ramle Prison demonstration were in fact Israeli Jews, who were not spared the treatment because of their background, but because of what they were demonstrating for. Many of them were the “anarchists” that face arrest often when they protest in the weekly village demonstrations of the West Bank. It will be interesting to hear the testimonies of those arrested to note what differences there may have been in the entire process of their arrest, detention, interrogation and release.

In the next few days, something momentous will occur. A group of Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike for over 60 days will either be released from incarceration in Israeli prison without charge or trial, or they will likely die.

And it will not end there, either. Many more have followed them down this perilous road of life, death and principle. In fact, thousands more.

Two Palestinians—Khader Adnan and Hana Shalabi—have already crossed the finish line, securing their release from prison—through deals cut with the Israeli government. Yet will Israel release any more, and in so doing, allow the military justice system, in place in the occupied territories for decades, to crumble?

Know their names. Bilal Diab. Thaer Halahleh. Hasan Safadi. Jafaar Izzedine. These men and thousands more men and women—prisoners with no rights—have usurped some of the power from their jailers and are challenging the system of imprisonment that has been used to subjugate Palestinians for nearly half a century.

Under the radar, Israeli leaders are scrambling for a way out. All types of measures have been used to break the will of hunger strikers, including excessive bouts of solitary confinement and psychological pressure aimed at weakening their resolve. The tactics have not worked. As thousands have joined the hunger strike movement it appears it has gone well beyond Israel’s ability to stop.

The future remains uncertain. Will the death of prisoners in Israel jails ignite the occupied territories or will they simply fizzle out? Although very little seems capable of mustering mainstream Palestinian society these days, the reaction to this eventuality is unpredictable. Prisoners are a decisive issue for Palestinians (read here). Moreover, as the peace process comes to an inglorious end, the status quo is increasingly fragile. The political and economic horizons for Palestinians are beginning to close once again. Times are changing.

LATE ADDITION:

One reader pointed out the connection to Bobby Sands and the IRA hunger strikes of the early 1980s. This connection was pointedly made during the 66-day hunger strike of Khader Adnan (coincidentally Sands would die of starvation on the 66th day of his own hunger strike). @RichardL also gave a link to a Guardian piece on the impact of the IRA hunger strikes, which ended in the deaths of 10 prisoners during Margaret Thatcher’s government and its impact.

The death of 10 men in the 1981 hunger strike was to prove a defining moment in the struggle between the Provisional IRA and the British government or, to be more precise, the prime minister, Margaret Thatcher.

The end of the strike after seven months was reported at the time as a victory for Thatcher’s fortitude. In fact, it proved to be the opposite. It boosted the ranks of the IRA, radicalised nationalist politics and can now be seen as the beginning of the process that led to Sinn Féin’s emergence as a vote-winning political party on either side of the disputed Irish border.

The article also discusses the English press’s coverage of the IRA hunger strikes. There is really little reason to discuss the Israeli press’s coverage of the hunger strike movement because it has been next to negligible. In the words of Haaretz columnist Akiva Eldar in an interview with me:

[Israelis] don’t give a shit. They think that they deserve it. And in the best case they should rot in a jail for the rest of their life. In the worst case they should be executed. And it is a waste of money to keep them there and to feed them.

This is the way they feel good with themselves. You see, most Israelis don’t really care about anything that is connected with Palestinians, or with ‘the other.’ They are so busy with their victimization, which they will never give up. So, prisoners are the victim of the occupation, victims of the violence, victims of the situation. But Israelis will never give up their right to be the victim. This is not only in regards to the prisoners, but to the occupation…

Yet the parallels to the IRA hunger strikes are remarkable. As the Guardian article notes:

But there was no genuine attempt to answer that question. Instead, the response was pitiless. “I will shed no tears when Sands dies,” wrote John Junor, then editor of the Sunday Express. “My only hope is that if and when he does every other IRA terrorist will go on the same sort of hunger strike in sympathy. And stay on it until they are all in wooden suits.”

As I reflect upon all this, I do it with the belief that the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is steadily moving its way down a new path. The resolution of this conflict at the official levels of state, where they have worked to no avail for at least the last 20 years, is coming to an end. The people are once again taking action into their own hands. The hunger strike movement will do nothing for the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority. But it will be a lightening rod in the hands of those who wish to continue to rally those inside Palestine and around the world to their cause.

Read also:
Palestinian Prisoners’ Day: Hundreds join hunger strike
Randa Adnan, wife of hunger striker, discusses her husband’s struggle
Palestinian Prisoners’ Day: The numbers
Khader Adnan agrees to stop hunger strike in exchange for April release

Khader Adnan speaks to his supporters on the night of his release from prison (photo: Omar Rahman)

A movement of Palestinian prisoners protesting their incarceration and treatment inside Israeli prisons is continuing to reach momentous proportions. Billed the “War of Empty Stomachs,” the number of prisoners on hunger strike is now in the thousands.

On April 17, the prisoner movement split into two when between 1,200 and 1,600 prisoners launched a coordinated, open-ended hunger strike against their treatment inside Israeli prisons, including the pervasive use of solitary confinement, denied family visits and right to education. Another 2,000 joined in a limited solidarity hunger strike.

The prisoners had joined a group of hunger strikes launched independently by prisoners protesting their administrative detention—a policy by which Israel incarcerates Palestinians for periods of up to six months without evidence or trial, which can be renewed by a military judge indefinitely.

Galvanized by the hunger strike of Khader Adnan, beginning on December 18 and carried on by Hana Shalabi in February, the hunger strike movement is continuing to grow rapidly. At least seven prisoners are reaching dire health conditions, including Bilal Diab and Thaer Halahleh, who are on the 61st day of their hunger strikes. Hasan Safadi is on his 56th day, and others, including Omar Abu Shalal and Jafar Izzedine, are quickly approaching these lengths of time.

Khader Adnan’s hunger strike—which lasted 66 days, the longest in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict—opened the door for other prisoners after Israel decided to release him. He was joined near the end of his hunger strike by Hana Shalabi, whose hunger strike lasted 44 days before she was deported to Gaza in a release deal.

As more prisoners continue to approach the end of the road, Israel faces an increasingly difficult position. It can either follow suit with the two aforementioned hunger strikers and release more prisoners, or Israel can let them die in prison and potentially set off large-scale protests in the occupied territories. The latter choice also carries with it increased scrutiny on the practice of administrative detention, which is permitted under international law only in the most extreme cases. There are currently over 300 Palestinian prisoners held in administrative detention by Israel; the longest has been detained for over five years. At times, the number of prisoners has numbered in the thousands.

More prisoners have already declared they will begin open-ended hunger strikes this coming week, and demonstrations have begun to spread outside the occupied territories. One is scheduled for Thursday May 3 in front of the prison hospital in Ramle, Israel.

The latest hunger strikes have lacked the media coverage received by Khader Adnan and Hana Shalabi, both in the country and internationally. However this is likely to change in the coming days as several of them reach the end of the road and Israel is once again forced to choose which path it will take.

Click here to read more on the issue of Palestinian prisoners in an article I published in The National on Friday:

The centrality of the prisoner issue in Palestinian life has virtually no parallel anywhere else in the world. It is almost enough to note that the Palestinian Authority – the semiautonomous body that has governed the Palestinian territories since 1993 – has a ministry of prisoners’ affairs and that there are numerous social clubs, organisations and even a museum devoted to this cause.

For years, prisons have substituted as universities for large swathes of the population and provided a base for grassroots political organising. The country’s most popular political figure, Marwan Barghouti, is currently serving five life sentences but is still a likely contender for president. After close to 45 years of living under military occupation, where resistance is prized and collaboration with Israel is the ultimate crime, the stigma of prison has been transformed from a basis of disrepute into a badge of honour and, indeed, a source of pride.

Put simply, for Palestinians, the prisoner issue is only a microcosm of life under occupation, where many simply substitute a larger cell for a smaller one. Until they are all freed, there will likely be no dramatic changes inside the prison walls.

There have already been a number of articles written in response to CBS’s 60 Minutes report about Christians in the Holy Land. The sexy story in all this appears to be Michael Oren’s interview with Bob Simon of 60 Minutes, and the attempt by Israel, its embassy in the United States and syndicate of lobbying groups to prevent the report in some capacity from airing.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The real story told in this piece has been to some degree overshadowed by the Michael Oren story, but also lacks appeal because it does not ultimately stray too far from the accepted argument about why Palestinian Christians are leaving the Holy Land—only enough to make the Israeli government sweat and overreact in characteristic fashion.

While the report makes some good points and does counter the argument that Palestinian Christians are fleeing solely as a response to Muslim fanaticism and persecution, I still feel that the overall message of this piece is that Palestinian Christendom is being squeezed out of Palestine because of a religious conflict between Jews and Muslims—which is altogether false.

The piece does not properly identify Christians as a seamless part of the Palestinian population, which faces persecution from Israel without prejudice to religion—rather Christians are portrayed as the “collateral damage” of this inter-religious conflict between Muslims and Jews.

Contrary to this portrayal, Palestinian Christians are an integral part of the Palestinian people and have been at the forefront of the movement for national liberation. From the earliest days until now, Palestinian Christians have comprised many of Palestinian nationalism’s intellectual pioneers, advocates and political leaders—not the hapless minority caught up in a struggle in which they have no part, as this piece portrays them as being.

Taking a closer look at the meat and bones of Bob Simon’s report, we see that even though every Palestinian Christians interviewed in the piece point to Israeli occupation and not Islamic extremism as the root of the exodus, Simon still insists on drawing the conclusion that Islam is at play in the flight of Christians.

Truly there are historical tensions between religious communities in Palestine, as there are in countries throughout the world. Some of the worst of these tensions are actually between different Christian denominations inside Jerusalem. But the true culprit in this tragic phenomenon that is emptying the birthplace of Christianity from its indigenous adherents is a political battle being waged on all Palestinians alike, irrespective of religion.

Both Palestinian Muslims and Christians must go through the same arduous procedures to obtain permits to visit their holy sites in Jerusalem. Both suffer the endless growth of Jewish settlements, home evictions and demolitions, mass imprisonment, the circuitous route of the wall and the daily torment of living under occupation–not to mention the Nakba.

Yet Simon continues to frame the Christians as “squeezed between a growing Muslim majority and Israeli settlements.”

Even those elements of the occupation that put pressure on Christians to leave the country, such as the separation barrier, are portrayed as byproducts of that conflict and an outcome of Israel’s need to protect its citizens from Islamic terrorism.

Juxtaposed with Ambassador Oren’s statement that although the checkpoints are inconvenient for Palestinians, Israel needs to do what it must to survive (“it’s their inconvenience, it’s our survival”)—Simon posits the endangering of Palestinian Christian culture, the threat to which is the growing Muslim majority. “The veil is replacing the cross,” he narrates ironically as a Christian nun with a veil walks by in the following shot. In other words, while Israelis face a threat to their livelihood, Palestinian Christians face a threat to their culture brought on by the Muslim majority, as if it is Israelis that have the exponentially higher death toll as a result of this conflict and not Palestinians.

It is difficult to understand where Bob Simon gets his conclusion, given that every one he interviews except for Ari Shavit (and obviously Michael Oren), would counter this claim. Yet even Sharit’s second comment to Simon says, “Israel is not persecuting Christians as Christians. The Christians in the Holy Land suffer from Israeli policies that are a result of the overall tragic situation.”

Palestinians of all stripes face the Israeli occupation and colonial enterprise together. Some are leaving. Others remain steadfast.

Here is an AP piece on Land Day, carried, among others, by the Washington Post. Let’s start with the headline.

Israeli security on high alert, as Arabs and Palestinians protest against Jewish State.

Umm, excuse me? First of all, Land Day is not a protest against the Jewish State. It is a commemoration of the 1976 demonstration by Palestinian citizens of Israel against massive expropriations targeting Arab-owned land for Jewish settlement purposes. The protest left six Palestinians dead and hundreds injured. Today’s Land Day demonstrations, which occur throughout the whole of the country occur to protest the continuation of this policy by the Israeli government.

Secondly, the entire framing of the news forces the reader to associate Palestinian demonstrations with a security threat to Israeli citizens, which it clearly is not. I don’t remember any Israelis getting killed during Land Day demonstrations, but I do remember quite a few victims from among Palestinians and other Arabs. Now, it is possible that this headline was written by the Washington Post: The Associated Press usually gives a title that the publishing outlet is free to change at their leisure, I believe. I am not sure which is the case in this instance. But even if it was from the Post, I am not surprised they would choose such a title given the article’s content.

Moving on to the body of the text.

Israeli security forces in riot gear prepared Friday for Palestinian and Arab demonstrations, deploying at traditional flashpoints and along Israel’s frontiers and confining West Bank Palestinians to their territory.

This first sentence frames the entire article. “Israeli soldiers in riot gear.” The demonstrations are labeled indirectly as riots from the outset, justifying the use of riot control measures against them.

Palestinians threw rocks and Israeli troops responded with stun grenades. No casualties were reported. Elsewhere things were calm.
Palestinians were banned from entering from the West Bank except for medical emergencies, and police barred Palestinian men under 40 from visiting a volatile Jerusalem holy site. Military deployments along Israel’s borders were reinforced to repulse any attempts to breach Israel’s borders as demonstrators did twice last year, touching off deadly clashes with Israeli troops.

So, Palestinians initiated, Israeli responded, but not lethally. Palestinians were also banned from Jerusalem (their territory according to international law) except for medical emergencies. It is great that they made sure to add that last part so the whole world can know how benevolent the Israeli army is by its willingness to treat those it injures at its finest medical facilities.

Then the military terminology: “Military deployments;” “reinforced;” “repulse;” “attempts to breach.” As if the Palestinian-Arab demonstrations are a military operation against the ‘Jewish State.’

It goes on to describe Israeli military deployments, all to thwart the singing and dancing Arabs from their deadly assault, coordinated from their (historical) military fort:

In southern Lebanon, more than 3,000 Lebanese and Palestinians gathered outside the Crusader-built Beaufort castle 15 kilometers (9 miles) from the Israeli border, waving Palestinian flags, singing Palestinian national songs and performing the traditional dabke dance. Security forces kept them from moving any closer to the border.

The rest of the article is almost comical. No context at all is given to Land Day. It is basically Palestinians gather peaceably, Israelis respond in security-fashion to prevent the possibility of it turning violent.

Only one quote is given,  from a 70-year-old Palestinian refugee from Lebanon who talks about liberating the land from Israel.

The second article I alluded to in the opening was a short piece quoting Israeli politician Danny Danon referring to the Land Day protests as “political terrorism.” There were a few more articles from AP Jerusalem on Land Day, but I didn’t read them all. A small excerpt from one reporting a death in Gaza is also revealing.

Security forces in riot gear deployed in high numbers along the frontiers of Israel and the Palestinian territories in anticipation of a repeat of last year’s violence, in which at least 38 people died near the borders with Lebanon and Syria.

Security forces are deployed in anticipation of a repeat of last year’s violence… which they perpetrated. Hmm. interesting.

So, all in all, a great display of coverage by the Associated Press! Bravo!

The annual demonstration, which takes place in different locations across the country, had a robust turnout at Qalandia but the lack of strong leadership and direction was noticeable.

After the quarrel between supporters of Fatah, PFLP and Al-Mubadara (the Palestinian Initiative Party of Mustafa Barghouti) finished, the large crowd could not find a coherent way forward. Israeli soldiers blocking the road to the checkpoint fired teargas, rubber bullets and skunk spray in large quantities. Dozens were injured and rushed away in ambulances throughout the day. Youth from the adjacent refugee camp, from which Qalandia gets its name, began throwing stones and those wishing to march peacefully were caught in the middle.

The Qalandia demonstration was symptomatic of much larger issues with Palestinian attempts to mobilize against the occupation. The society is divided sharply along factional lines and there is virtually no leadership as party leaders no longer dirty their hands on the ground—with the exception of Mustafa Barghouti, who was injured during the protest and taken away in an ambulance.

Officials in the Palestinian Authority are not interested in leading their people in mass demonstrations. Thus popular frustration finds no coherent channel of expression and easily devolves when confronted by the Israeli military, which acts aggressively to break up any form of Palestinian protest.

This year’s commemoration had the potential to be a brilliant display of collective action as it linked up with the Global March on Jerusalem. Instead—at least from the vantage point of Qalandia, I heard things were better in other places—it was uninspiring. The Palestinian Authority security forces linked hands to prevent the Palestinian demonstrators from reaching an Israeli checkpoint in Bethlehem, according to Ma’an News, which also has pictures.

Land Day first began in 1976 after six Palestinian citizens of Israel were killed in a large demonstration protesting an Israeli government announcement to expropriate thousands of dunams of land for “security and settlement purposes.” Palestinians throughout the entire country, including the West Bank and Gaza, commemorate the event annually.

I came across this great documentary called “In Search of Palestine” from a friend that was aired on the BBC in 1998. It is about the return of Edward Said to Palestine for the first time since his exile in 1948. For anyone interested in revisiting the pre-Second Intifada Oslo period, it is a spectacular look at the situation on the ground with the preeminent Palestinian scholar of his time.

It also includes interviews with a number of interesting personalities including Israel Shahak, Azmi Bishara, Mahmoud Darwish, Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, Daniel Barenboim, and others.

For those who don’t know Edward Said, who passed away in 2003, he was a Professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University and author of several renowned and influential books, including Orientalism. He was also publicly active and one of the most trenchant critics of the Oslo Process and Yasser Arafat. His writings in the mid-1990s were prophetic in terms of what came out of the Oslo Process and the circumstances we are in today.

Click here to view the embedded video.