Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Nonviolence and the Gaza Freedom Movement
Less than a day has passed since the Israeli navy attacked an international Gaza Freedom Movement "Freedom Flotilla," intent on breaking Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip, in international waters. The explosion of media coverage surrounding this makes it likely the highest-profile act of (supposedly) nonviolent resistance to occur in years. But the dust has yet to settle. The boats and the activists who were aboard them are still under Israeli control, and so also, therefore, is the story of what really happened. As information comes in, here are some questions to keep in mind for thinking about this horrific event through the lens of nonviolence.
Were the activists really acting nonviolently? There has been considerable controversy thus far about who provoked whom to the violence that finally ended in deaths aboard the flotilla ships. It appears as if some people aboard took matters into their own hands and attacked the Israeli soldiers. But many of those leading the mission were seasoned activists committed to and trained in nonviolence. Their primary cargo was humanitarian aid, and their purpose was to make a political point, not engage Israeli forces in combat. If fighting broke out when armed Israeli forces arrived that is to be regretted, but that should not be mistaken for the Gaza Freedom Movement's intentions.
How are the mission's success and failure being measured? Some are going to look at this and say, "See, they tried a nonviolent approach, and it ended in violence. Therefore, the mission failed, and nonviolence doesn't work." It would be particularly troubling for those Palestinian activists who are thinking about trading violent for nonviolent methods to come to this conclusion. But nonviolent resistance always involves self-sacrifice on the part of those who struggle for justice. Though the tragedy in the loss of life is not to be downplayed, the flotilla has already proven successful in significant ways; people around the world, including influential leaders, have responded by condemning the Gaza blockade, and millions more have learned about the international movement to transform the conflict in the region.
Was the flotilla a mission of aid or activism? Reports often describe the flotilla's purpose as humanitarian aid. In turn, Israel offered to deliver the supplies to Gaza itself, precluding the need for the flotilla to finish its delivery. It is true that the ships carried humanitarian supplies. But the mission also had an explicitly political purpose, to resist what the activists understand as the injustice of the Gaza blockade.
Whose suffering is the media considering grievable? We already know that the Western media is more likely to concern itself with the deaths of Westerners than that of others. This is a tendency that we need to counteract. We should strive to treat all victims as if they are one of us and worthy of our deepest concern. We should also be attentive of the tendency to portray criticism of Palestinians and their advocates as plausible, and criticism of Israel as simply anti-Semitic.
What laws were violated, and why? Laws were violated on both sides. Israel attacked a ship in international waters, in violation of international law. And the flotilla intended to break the limits imposed by Israel's blockade. On the one hand, not all laws are equal; the blockade itself has been called illegal by a United Nations report last year. On the other, not all violations are equal; Israel violated international law out of convenience, with little or no expectation of consequences (since it hasn't suffered them for past incidents), while the activists on the flotilla intended to flaunt the blockade as an act of conscience, exposing themselves to the consequences.
Who are the activists representing? There is already a tendency in the reportage to point out the support of violent actors, like Gaza's Hamas regime, for the flotilla. Some will contend that the activists are therefore supporters of what has been labeled "terrorism." Attempts are also being made to link the activists to extremists in Turkey, which the Turkish government reportedly has investigated and strenuously denies. Whatever the case may be, it's important that we not let the activists' actions be falsely conflated with those of others. Making such conflations are very much in the interests of those who would want to justify Israel's disproportionate violence; nonviolent resistance is often more threatening to the powerful than violent resistance because it so visibly undermines their claim to moral superiority.
How is the official story being manipulated? By conducting its own investigation before allowing any foreign journalists or authorities to participate, Israel is being careful to ensure that its version of events is the only version. The Israeli government has already been hurriedly trying to explain its own violence with allegations that the activists were armed and intent on delivering materials meant to be weaponized. If Israel were to plant weapons on the scene after the fact to distort the investigation, it would only be following the US's example in Iraq. Since this incident took place in international waters, involving people from around the world, a truly international investigation should take place immediately.
For now, first of all, we can at least mourn the deaths of those killed on the ships, alongside those whose lives have been destroyed or ruined in the wider conflict, both Palestinian and Israeli. The refusal to tolerate and glorify violence, whether conducted by the powers that be or the disempowered, is the first step toward bringing about nonviolent change.
- Posted in

14 Comments so far
Show All"Were the activists really acting nonviolently?"
And so we see the first piece by a hand-wringing liberal suffering under the superstitious pathology of "nonviolence".
Actually, assuming those on board did try to overpower (with stick and slingshots and other non-lethal means) the commados, they were the ONLY ones performing an action that was legal. The Isreali action was piracy, for which self-defense by the crew and passengers is always justified.
But, having writen that, the rest of the article makes some good points.
According to pictures released by the IDF, the passengers defended themselves and their families with kitchen knives, tools, and tool handles - all items normally carried on a sailing vessel.
Remember that all preliminary footage shows the IDF firing on the ship BEFORE it was boarded. Footage also shows men with the so-called weapons standing in front of women and children.
The Israeli spin is atrocious. Talk about blaming the victims.
By Israeli logic, if a woman being raped bruises her attacker while defending herself, he is entirely within his rights to kill her.
I am ashamed of the lame US response -
WE ARE ALL TURKS !!!!!!
The US Government is occupied Israeli territory.
Hoa binh
If the heat gets turned up too high, I wonder whether the Israeli government will kill some of its own citizens in a staged "terrorist" attack in order to muddy the waters.
This writer is full of shit. UNSC Resolution 1860 gives both legal and moral force to the flotilla, which is to say ONLY the Zionists broke laws. That Resolution calls for the blockade to be broken; that it is the responsibility of the UN community to cause its end.
"It is true that the ships carried humanitarian supplies. But the mission also had an explicitly political purpose, to resist what the activists understand as the injustice of the Gaza blockade."
this statement is inane. all consequential actions are political. calling these actions "political" attempts to delegitimize, actions, which are in effect an attempt at social, economic and political justice.
"Laws were violated on both sides. Israel attacked a ship in international waters, in violation of international law. And the flotilla intended to break the limits imposed by Israel's blockade"
since when did the blockade become international maritime law?
"For now, first of all, we can at least mourn the deaths of those killed on the ships, alongside those whose lives have been destroyed or ruined in the wider conflict, both Palestinian and Israeli. The refusal to tolerate and glorify violence, whether conducted by the powers that be or the dis empowered, is the first step toward bringing about nonviolent change."
saintly thought. the violence by the power that be is tolerated, justified, rewarded and glorified. the violence of the dis empowered is harshly condemned and penalized.
By this authors rather poor reasoning, If North Korea declared the waters in the Caribbean as its own and it would sink any vessel entering the same...the law is broken on BOTH sides if any ship enters the Caribbean without the Permission of North Korea.
There is no legitimate law that allows Israel to board ships in international waters, nor is there one that allows them to blockade the Gaza strip.
Another example of this was the "no fly zones" in Iraq. There was no recognized law that allowed the USA to declare such zones.
nonviolence will never trump violence...
it is the violent that encourage you to think it can...
RE: "Laws were violated on both sides. Israel attacked a ship in international waters, in violation of international law. And the flotilla INTENDED to break the limits imposed by Israel's blockade"
Not so. Israel clearly broke several laws. However, as the flotilla was in international waters they had not YET broken any laws - legitimate or not. Intent is not the same action. Don't we call that "prior restraint"? Or is Israel just following Bush's doctrine of "preventative war"? My guess is that Israel had this operation planned in detail as well as the disinformation campaign before the flotilla ever set sail.
I read this article with distaste in my mouth.
I agree with most of your comments here ..
the author is obviously not aware that he is doing the Israeli government a great service by following its PR-framing of the story:
" ...There has been considerable controversy thus far about who provoked whom to the violence that finally ended in deaths aboard the flotilla ships..2
This is a generated controversy, not a real one and the game is, to make the herd of journalists follow the script, which they usually do ...
THE REAL IMPORANT POINTS ARE:
1) THE SIEGE IS ILLEGAL (collective punishment, a violation of the Geneva conventions) AND OF COURSE IMMORAL AND CRUEL
2) TOTAL GOVERMENT FAILURE
As Jeff Halper pointed out, the big scandal is, that the FREE GAZA movement is doing the work our "democratic" GOVERNMENTS OUGHT TO BE DOING: namely put EFFECTIVE pressure on / sanction Israel for its criminal and inhumane actions
When the German foreign minister says that "it is clear that UNSC-resolutions and thus international law MUST BE adhered to" but nobody lifts a finger to ensure that the law is respected by Israel - why even report his platitudes, or Obama's call for an "independent investigation" which is even more laughable?
3) ISRAEL HAS NO RIGHT TO INTERCEPT SHIPS OFF THE COAST OF GAZA (LET ALONE IN INT'l WATERS)after Gaza was "given back" to the Palestinians (and the election of Hamas is no excuse either!)
4) MEDIA COMPLICITY (Newspeak at its finest ...)
The media here (in Germany) keeps referring to the "military action", but in fact Israel committed the following crimes:
HOMICIDE, PIRACY, KIDNAPPING, THEFT (CONFISCATION) (they released activists could only keep their passports, nothing else!)
Israel imposed a complete information blackout on the activists for almost 48 hrs (denying them access to lawyers, contact to families, friends, and most importantly to the media)while their SPIN dominated the news worldwide..
the same footage (IDF video) was played over and over again but nobody found it strange:
if you look closely you can see that the alleged violent activists are wearing masks, one is even wearing a gas mask (allegedly clubbing a soldier with an iron "rod") - this seems rather odd to me ...
One German MP pointed out what the media ought to ask:
"If the Israeli version was true, why did they confiscate all the video and other documentary material from the boats?"
Nobody plays with the media as Israel's PR-experts do ...
The media sheep here have now accepted the "frame" Israel provided:
Generate massive doubts about the good intentions of the activists (Israel's specialty in dealing with perceived moral "enemies": character assassination)
Turn the victims of your aggression and lawlessness into perpetrators: it was their own fault after all ...
As usual Israel was "forced" to act to defend itself..
as Golda Meir said
"I will never forgive the Arabs for forcing us to kill them"
One German TV reporter, so eager to portray Israel's violence as unintentional, even used the expression: they just wanted a "peaceful assault", claiming that the unit was equipped with harmless"paintball-rifles" while at the same time repeating the IDF-story that the activists took the pistol of one soldier and used it to shoot at another (footage of Netanyhau visiting the "victim" of the "lynch-mob" showing surprise to learn that live ammunition was used ...
How stupid can you get as a journalist?
Conclusion of the German media: Israel just "overreacted" to a "provocation" ...
WHO ARE THE PEOPLE KILLED? Nobody here seems to care ..
Watch the comments on Democracy Now - especially the ones by Richard Falk ...
Based on the comments, and the passion that drives them, I'm going to assume that most of you are arranging right now for tickets to Turkey to stock and staff the next boat, or perhaps even joining a modern-day Lincoln Brigade to shoot -- and take -- bullets to help these oppressed people.
Consider this a survey. These are the three choices:
1) Going to Turkey to get on a boat.
2) Going to Palestine with a gun.
3) Typing on Common Dreams.
Please announce which of these you are doing.
“Where the choice is between only violence and cowardice, I would advise violence. To take the name of non-violence when there is a sword in your heart is not only hypocritical and dishonest but cowardly ... Though violence is not lawful, when it is offered in self-defense or for the defense of the defenseless, it is an act of bravery far better than cowardly submission.”
-- Mahatma Gandhi
For a lot of purported "non-violent" activists, it is cowardice rather than morality that holds the key to their behaviour.
And as for the "violence", invoking Gandhi is a perverse way to victimize the victims anew, by holding them to an impossible standard that their oppressors never have to meet, especially one so cruel, self-righteous, and inured to outrage as the Israelis.