For some, such reasoning may seem one-sided; after all, the Israeli Army continues to target civilians unhindered, so why deny Palestinians the right to retaliate? Palestinians have the right of self-defense, and the unequivocal right of ridding themselves of the occupation. These rights are protected in international law and require little debate or intellectual tussling. But it is wrong for the occupied — who surely have the moral edge — to use the same illegitimate means as the occupier. International law makes a clear distinction, as should the Palestinian resistance, between occupying military forces and civilians. If Palestinians waver from this crucial line of reasoning, their struggle risks being tainted with moral corruption.
The Palestinian revolution was born in Jenin in the 1920s. It was and remains a freedom struggle, a cry for justice. The methods used by the ongoing uprising in the occupied territories contrast with the ghastly practices of the Israeli government and army. Since their early days of combating the occupation forces, Palestinians insisted on the universal applicability of human rights. These values must remain intact.
But every nation — and Palestinians are no exception — has a breaking point. It is only human that, following decades of suffering, violence and dispossession, the determination to gain freedom can give way to desperation and a raw desire for vengeance. To those living in the occupied territories, suicide bombings are part of the reality into which Palestinians are born. Yet if Palestinians allow Israeli tactics to influence their resistance strategy, then the authenticity of the entire struggle is compromised.
But what if Palestinian factions overcome their sense of despair and unilaterally halt attacks on Israeli civilians, permanently and unreservedly? Alas, even then, the perception held of Palestinians and their struggle is unlikely to change, at least not in the United States, where political propaganda, not fact, governs public opinion. The Palestinian struggle was abrasively condemned in much of the Western Hemisphere before the first suicide bombing against Israeli civilians ever happened, less than ten years ago. This flawed perspective continues, in defiance of logic. After all, the conquest of historic Palestine, with all the massacres it entailed, preceded any truly collective Palestinian struggle, violent or otherwise.
For pro-Israeli media and governments, the version of history that counts is the one that highlights Palestinian violence. Violence in the Middle East is largely defined by Palestinian attacks; "calm" and "lull" are words that describe intervals between Palestinian, not Israeli, violence. The occupied territories may be drowning in Israeli violence; but so long as no Israeli casualties are reported, much of the world media report quiet.
The suicide bombings of October 4th and December 25th are a case in point. Between these two incidents, 117 Palestinians, mostly civilians including 23 children, were reported killed and thousands of Palestinians were made homeless, as Israeli explosives or bulldozers destroyed nearly 500 homes, primarily in the already overcrowded and poverty-stricken Gaza Strip. But according to Palestinian-American media critic Ali Abunimah, the corporate media in the US (and to a lesser extent in Britain) regretted that the December bombing (which targeted Israeli soldiers, not civilians) squandered an opportunity for peace.
The Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune and CNN dealt a blow to journalistic integrity when they chose their headlines to mark the day of the Palestinian attack: "12-week lull in Mideast ends", "Mideast quiet shattered", "There has been a relative calm since the Haifa bombing [last October]" and so on. Pro-Israeli pundits in the US media and government, and influential lobby groups and think tanks find Israel's justifications for its senseless violence and occupation of Palestinian land compelling. But even with this in mind, injustice must not cause a response with equally morally degrading acts. Sharon and his henchmen, of all people, should not determine the nature and magnitude of Palestinian resistance.
To maintain its moral edge, the Palestinian revolution must not be tainted by the crimes of the occupier; it must not fall into the trap of fury, racial and religious exclusivity and vengefulness against civilians. True, the US media will give the Palestinians no credit. But should we remain confined by media partiality and desperate for the validating words of some government spokesman? Were these the values that inspired and sparked the current uprising and the uprisings of the past? Suicide bombings against civilians estrange us from the principles of the Palestinian struggle for freedom. These values must remain untainted so that the will of the people may some day prevail over tyranny and oppression.
