|
A Tale of Two Demonstrations by Uri Avnery
One
took place at the Homesh settlement, not far from Jenin. Tens of
thousands of settlers and their sympathizers came to demonstrate against
the planned evacuation of this settlement. The demonstrators swore to
sabotage the decisions of the government and the Knesset. One of them
declared that they could be removed only in coffins draped with the
national flag. Hundreds
of soldiers and policemen were stationed along the route to protect the
demonstrators against all eventualities. The official Voice of Israel
radio told its listeners that the traffic police were acting on
instructions from the leaders of the Settlements Council. At
the same time, another demonstration took place at Bil'in, west of
Ramallah. The inhabitants of that and the neighboring villages, together
with Israeli peace activists, demonstrated against the "Separation
Fence" that is being put up on their land. This
demonstration was savagely attacked by soldiers and policemen, who
assaulted them, beat, injured and arrested them, using old and new
weapons. The security people, as the Hebrew expression goes, "had
murder in their eyes." In
this area, there is not even the pretense that the Separation Fence
serves security purposes. The real aim is evident to anyone visiting the
place: to rob Bil'in and the other villages of their land, in order to
enlarge the settlement of Kiryat Sefer. I
remember that place from some ten years ago. Then, well-kept olive
groves were being expropriated and destroyed by bulldozers. At that
time, too, the villagers asked us to protest and try to stop this. Now,
a large town of ultra-orthodox Jews has been built there and is growing
rapidly. The Separation Fence will pass close to the last houses of
Bil'in and cut the village off from the remainder of its lands. On this
land new neighborhoods of Kiryat Sefer will be built. Together with the
nearby settlements of Modi'in Ilit and Matitiyahu, this is one of the
"settlement blocs" that Israeli governments (whether Likud or
Labor) want to annex to The
plan of the villagers was to conduct a peaceful demonstration on the
path of the Fence and plant some symbolic olive saplings there. But
experience in this area has taught us that one must expect the security
forces to react violently. Therefore, only activists who know the
conditions and are experienced in dealing with them were asked to take
part. We were some 200 Israelis, men and women of all ages. The
instructions given in the buses, orally and in writing, were to keep the
demonstration strictly non-violent. We
expected the buses to be stopped on the way and were prepared for this
eventuality. We were, therefore, quite surprised when we reached the
village without incident. Only later did we realize that it was a trap. In
the village, we joined some thousand inhabitants of this and the
neighboring villages, men, women and children, and set off together
towards the path of the Fence. At the head walked the former Palestinian
minister Kadura Fares, the Palestinian presidential candidate Dr.
Mustafa al-Barghouty, the Arab members of the Knesset Barakeh, Zakhalkeh
and Dahamsheh, the village chiefs and I. We were holding olive branches
in our hands, to plant along the path of the Fence. The village
youngsters also carried a 50-meter long Palestinian flag. Ahead of us a
decorated van was driving slowly, and a Palestinian activist on it
announced in Hebrew through a powerful loudspeaker: "This is a
peaceful and non-violent demonstration!" About
a kilometer before the path of the Fence, a line of security people
stopped us. They wore no insignia, and so we did not know whether they
were soldiers or border policemen. Suddenly,
without any warning, a salvo of tear gas grenades was launched at us.
Within seconds, we were enveloped by a cloud of white gas, with the
thump of bursting grenades coming at us from all directions. The
demonstrators, coughing and choking, dispersed to the two sides. Many of
them outflanked the soldiers and continued to move forward over the
rocky terrain. They were stopped by a second line and also showered with
tear gas. We,
at the head of the demonstration, went on and reached a point about At
other places, the rampage was even worse. Muhammad Hatib, one of the
village chiefs, noticed a man who, with his face covered, started to
throw stones at the soldiers. He ran towards him, shouting: "We
decided not to throw stones! If you want to throw stones, do it in your
own village, not ours! What village do you come from, anyway?" The
man turned towards him and attacked him, at the same time calling out to
his associates, tearing the handkerchief from his face and donning a
police cap. Thus
the secret came out and was also documented by the cameras:
"Arabized" undercover soldiers had been sent into
action. These started throwing stones at the security people in order to
provide them with a pretext to attack us. The moment they were
uncovered, they turned on the demonstrators nearest to them, drew
revolvers and started to arrest them. Later on, when it became clear
that the events had been recorded by foreign television crews, the
police officially confirmed that throwing stones is the method used by
"Arabized" undercover soldiers so as to merge with the crowd. In
the course of the day, more details about the events emerged: This was a
unit that had never before been used for such an action: the Prison
Service unit "Massada," the normal job of which is to suppress
mutinies in the prisons. This is an especially savage unit, perhaps the
most violent in the country, which was supplied with new means of
"riot control." Among others: salt bullets that are designed
to cause particularly painful wounds. Muhammad Hatib, the man mentioned
above, 30 years old and father of two children, got four bullets in his
back: large, swollen, black-blue rings the full width of his back. These
salt bullets were brought to It
appears that the army prepared the whole action in advance as a trap.
The "Massada" unit tried out its tactics and weapons on this
peaceful march of civilians. The
shocking difference between the ways the two demonstrations were treated
provides food for thought. The
settlers are openly preparing and trying to paralyze the state, prevent
the implementation of the government and Knesset decisions, and, in
effect, to overthrow Israeli democracy. But Ariel Sharon and his people
call publicly to "embrace them," to "love them" and
"view their pain with understanding." This is the directive
given to the security forces. For peace activists, quite different
treatment is indicated. This
throws light on a much more important phenomenon that may determine the
future of The
fact is that every day, all the Israeli media devote their main news
reports to the settlers' propaganda. Every single news program on each
of the three TV channels gives exhaustive coverage to the affairs of the
settlers, speeches by settlers and interviews with settlers. Often,
these reports fill half the news program. Between
the settlers and the media a kind of symbiosis has come into being--they
work "with one head." Every day several events are prepared
for the media, which scoop them up greedily, to serve as unpaid
propaganda organs of the settlers and the extreme right. Once upon a
time, it was usual to give the other side the right of response, for the
sake of "balance." Not anymore. There is no other side. In
the news programs, not a word--literally not a word--of criticism of the
settlers is ever heard. The establishment "leftists" also
speak of the need to "embrace them" and "understand
them," and so, of course, do all the spokespersons of the
government and the big parties. To people who have an opposite opinion,
no opportunity is given to speak about the settlers on the main media of
the country. In
this way, Israeli democracy puts all its media exclusively at the
disposal of the enemies of democracy. Even in the Absurd?
It only seems so. In reality, it reflects the real situation: in spite
of all the loud talk about "disengagement," The
present controversy about a handful of small settlements in the Gaza
Strip is, in his eyes, a kind of family spat, and will pass quickly.
Actually, On
the other hand, the controversy with us, the peace activists, the real
opposition to the government, is a genuine struggle for the future of
Israel: whether it will be a state within the Green Line borders, a
liberal, democratic state that lives in peace with a viable Palestinian
state at its side; or an aggressive, nationalist state, that will hold
on to practically the whole of the West Bank and keep the Palestinians
in some isolated enclaves. If
one sees it that way, the directives given to the army are quite
logical: Embrace the settlers, because they are our brothers, and hit
the peace activists, because they are the enemy. discuss this column in the forum Uri Avnery is a peace activist. |