Comments on: Dr. Mustafa Barghouti: Nonviolent resistance is more effective

By: the other joe

the other joe — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:45:56 +0000

@Rodrigo, laugh away. Justice will prevail in the end.

By: Jack

Jack — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 08:21:14 +0000

Rodrigo,
“though nearly every single country expects the actual borders of such a state to be determined in negotiations”
-
Thats not really correct. There is no dispute, UN, ICJ, NGO on the one side (some 130 states have already recognized Palestine on 1967 borders). Israel on the other with no support in international law or other states backing them on this. But that wasnt the question, the question was about the vocal support for a state on 1967 borders. The symbolic support and what it means for the peaceprocess. So the more provocative stance Israel is taking, the quicker a solution will come. Palestinians are going nowhere you know.
-
On Gaza there is no dispute neither, its occupied palestinian territory, no more no less.

By: Rodrigo

Rodrigo — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 03:29:06 +0000

Jack, I admit that here we disagree. Many countries are urging for a Palestinian state or the two state solution to be specific, though nearly every single country expects the actual borders of such a state to be determined in negotiations. This situation hasn’t changed in twenty years since Oslo was signed. Then, as now, the final map is expected to be based on facts on the ground. Israel has been creating such facts and Palestinian violence provides Israel with both reasons and cover to continue changing the situation on the ground. So, yeah, it is a zero sum game and the Palestinians are losing.
.

Gaza belongs to a geographic unit the UN has legalistically designated ‘Occupied Palestinian Territory’ along with the West Bank, but it itself is most certainly not occupied. In any case it isn’t relevant since no one has cares about Gaza ever since the Israelis pulled the settlers and soldiers out.

By: Jack

Jack — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 21:45:27 +0000

Rodrigo,
What you miss by your arguments is that you imply that the actions by Israel is to the benefit to Israel and to the disadvantage to palestinians. Thats not really correct. We have a whole world more than ever, urging not only a palestinian state, but a state on the 1967 borders, which of course happend before the actions of Israel (the 5 argument you used). So the more aggressive Israel commit itself to be regarding attacks on palestinians and the settlements the more likely world will put more pressure to solve the conflict. And that is in palestinians, not the israeli governments benefit.
-
Regarding Gaza, its under blockade and a occupation recognized by the whole world.

By: Rodrigo

Rodrigo — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 21:12:58 +0000

@TOJ, that is hilarious considering that Barghoutti himself got attacked by fellow Palestinians during the last protest. You can interpret events any way you want, but you should recognize reality where it is shining you in the face. Good luck with your victory.
.

@Max, I was in Israel (mostly in Jerusalem) during the length of the second intifada and am aware of its impact. I was referring to Israel’s strategic position and the drastic changes you mention in the political and social realms improve Israel’s ability to sustain the situation.
.

@Jack, All of these are the effects of Palestinian violence during the second intifada:
1)In Israel the destruction of the Israeli left wing and of faith in negotiations.

2)In the West Bank the entrenchment of Israel in in terms of settlements, the wall, checkpoints

3) In Jerusalem the cutting off of Arab areas from the West Bank.

4) In the West Bank the massive decline in the economy, the isolation of Arabs within smaller areas and the departure of the best educated Palestinians.

5) In Gaza the withdrawal of forces and civilians from a small heavily populated Arab area where no effective Jewish control over any significant portion of the land would have ever been possible.
.

The argument for Gaza being occupied territory is questionable and relies on links to Israel (blockade, water) that can be easily cut leaving even that argument empty. In any case, whether it is occupied or not is irrelevant given that it is simply no longer an area which anyone cares about.

By: Jack

Jack — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 08:41:25 +0000

Rodrigo,
That Israel impede the development for palestininan lives on the ground is nothing new. But we werent talking about that, but about the effect of violence.
-
Also there wa no Gaza withdrawal, Gaza is still occupied palestinian territory.

By: the other joe

the other joe — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 08:12:43 +0000

The statement that “at least Rodrigo has history on his side” is an assertion. In one sense we all chose what historical speculation to believe because we all make choices about how we interpret events. I happen to believe that violence is damaging in all circumstances and that non-violence is far more powerful as an agent of change.

By: max

max — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 08:06:32 +0000

@TOJ, Rodrigo, you’re both asserting speculations as facts… at least Rodrigo has history on his side, but – as TOJ implies – history is only a statistical assessment, like the old observation that the statistically the weather tomorrow will be like today’s.
.
Rodrigo, I find your assertion that “violence has comparatively had minimal effect on Israel” incredible. At best, it didn’t yet affect Israel’s strategic position, but it for sure affected it, socially and politically, enormously.

By: the other joe

the other joe — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 07:09:37 +0000

@Rodrigo – first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then you win. Palestinians are entirely capable of non-violence. The rest of your statement is guff.

By: Rodrigo

Rodrigo — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 01:00:42 +0000

Jack, probably because the Palestinians, both individually and as a group are worse off now than they were 30, 20 or 10 years ago. The economy sucks, every organization is corrupt, crime is high, educated people are leaving, the level of substantive international support is minimal and the Palestinians have failed in every goal they have set for themselves. The violence has comparatively had minimal effect on Israel or its ability to continue the current situation, if anything it just lets Israel make the painful choices to make the minimal concessions required to achieve long-term sustainability of the situation – See Oslo or the Gaza withdrawal or the construction of the separation barrier for how that works. Violence as a tactic is a failed one for the Palestinians.