And what is happening in Palestine is very confusing to many of those
who have long sided with the Palestinian struggle for freedom. It is a
struggle that has been manipulated to suit the aims of different
groups, each spurred on by ideological, religious and other motives. In
some places the fight in Palestine is conducted on behalf of Islam, in
others it is to resist racism. For some, the Palestinian struggle is an
aspect of the class war, and I once read, somewhere, the battle between
Israel and the Palestinians described as a civil war.
Thus is the conflict between a nation denied its land and basic
freedoms and a state with immense wealth and power distorted, allowing
the latter to defy international law on a daily basis, thanks in part
to the backing of the world's only superpower, the United States.
Decontextualised, the struggle has become the vehicle for spurious
meanings that lead to the misunderstanding of what is in fact
transpiring. In some instances it has led to an over-romanticising of
the conflict, which goes part way to explaining the bewildered response
of many who long stood in solidarity with the Palestinian people.
But the Hamas takeover of Gaza in June 2006, and the factionalism and
bloodshed associated with it should not have come as a surprise. The
conflict in Palestine, like any other conflict, is rational, and can
serve as a classic example of a regional conflict with international
boundaries, allowing opportunity for analysis that does in fact matter
to Americans (the role of their country in the conflict, and the power
of the Israeli lobby in their midst), the Europeans (who wish to see a
truly independent Europe playing a less injurious role in a region
where they have a vested interest in stability), the United Nations
(whose credibility has been damaged too often by the belligerent
US-Israeli alliance), and others.
Many questions must be asked and debated. Should solidarity with the
people of Palestine wane because the Palestinians chose a religious
group to represent them in democratic elections, hurting the secular
sensibilities of many of their supporters? Can the Palestinians be held
collectively responsible for the few among them who choose to align
their interests with those of power and capital? Is what Mahmoud Abbas
did — working with the coloniser to isolate a large segment of his
people — unprecedented? Has any nation that fought for its freedom
actually managed to avoid the peril of infighting?
One can understand the sense of demoralisation that has struck many
supporters of the Palestinian cause as events unfolded in the Gaza
Strip and the West Bank. However, it is also important to warn that if
such demoralisation is caused by the Palestinians failing to live up to
the ideological and religious expectations of others, then it is
perhaps time for those others to engage in some serious introspection
as to why they wished to support the Palestinian struggle in the first
place.
I believe that there is no choice but to side with that which is just
and morally upright even at the risk of creating ideological
inconsistencies or, dare I say, upsetting religious dogma. The conflict
in Palestine doesn't have to be a straightforward clash between haves
and have-nots, blacks and whites, Muslims and Jews.
The responsibility of deciphering recent accretions to the seemingly
mystifying conflict is the responsibility of the intellectual who is
capable of research, analysis and articulation. The intellectual is not
a cheerleader, nor a poet, and should, no matter where his sympathies
lie, remain capable of dispassionately approaching the subject at hand.
Over 30 years ago, Noam Chomsky wrote in the New York Review of Books :
"Intellectuals are in a position to expose the lies of governments, to
analyze actions according to their causes and motives and often hidden
intentions. In the Western world, at least, they have the power that
comes from political liberty, from access to information and freedom of
expression."
No one can claim that the Palestinian question is easy to understand.
It may be a classic colonial case that should not have been allowed to
fester for so long but to grasp an event as recent as Palestinian
infighting requires an examination of various layers of analyses,
local, regional and international. One must ask questions about causes,
motives and hidden intentions. If done properly, this will show that as
disheartening, demoralising and confusing as they may seem from the
outside, recent developments in Palestine were predictable and are
consistent with the history of past national struggles. If we do not
wish to shirk our moral and intellectual responsibilities we must
resist the temptation to make of Palestine an exception.
Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an author and editor of
PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been published in many newspapers
and journals worldwide. His latest book is The Second Palestinian
Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle (Pluto Press, London).