Does Nonviolent Resistance Work? Part 4b: The Curious Case of Palestinian Nonviolence

This is the seond of three posts comprising Part IV of a series of posts in which Dr. Ian Hansen shares his thoughts on nonviolence.

See also Part 1aPart 1bPart 1cPart 2aPart 2bPart2cPart3aPart3b, Part3c, and Part 4a.

January 10, 2009 protest against Israel invasion of Gaza at Lafayette Park, between White House and U.S. President-elect Barack Obama's temporary hotel residence. Photo by Carolmooredc.  In the public domain.
January 10, 2009 protest against Israel invasion of Gaza at Lafayette Park, between White House and U.S. President-elect Barack Obama’s temporary hotel residence.
Photo by Carolmooredc. In the public domain.

Consider the task I gave you in my last post: imagining the IDF using nonviolence to secure the rights and safety of Jews and Palestinians alike.   Would such an unorthodox deployment change the implicit definition of what it means to serve in the IDF?  Would it advance Israeli interests in the West Bank more than imprisoning refuseniks, bulldozing Palestinian homes, setting up economy-crushing checkpoints and roadblocks everywhere, uprooting olive trees, building gigantic colonial settlements, torturing detainees, shelling villages, etc.?

I would like to think that this is a rhetorical question expecting and deserving a unanimous yes, but the answer is probably “It depends.”

It depends specifically on which kind of “Israeli interests” are under discussion.  I think this nonviolent strategy would better protect the interests of most ordinary Israelis who are increasingly tasting the ashes with which the occupation has filled their mouths;  it might be less desirable for the bottom line of many Israeli corporations, like the ones that encouraged the 2006 bombardment of Gaza.  There is a disjoint between what is good for the people of nation (or would-be nation) and what is good for the war profiteers, terrorism profiteers, and apocalyptic ideologues who often rule over existing nations and those who dream of violent beginnings for new nations.

My perception is that it suits the morally disconnected rulers of almost any oppressor state (or insurgent violent movement) to inspire a combination of fear and rage in their target populations.  Oppressors love to instill fear because those who fear the oppressor’s violence more than the numb hell that results from neglecting the call of conscience are easier to control.  Oppressors love to inspire rage because rage makes people do stupid, ill-considered things, making the avatars of rage easier to defeat in the long run.

Ian Hansen, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the Department of Behavioral Sciences at York College, City University of New York. His research focuses in part on how witness for human rights and peace can transcend explicit political ideology. He is also on the Steering Committee for Psychologists for Social Responsibility.