Ending the Recurring Tragedy in Israel-Palestine
The practice of Unarmed Civilian Peacekeeping provides a real alternative to the destructive dead-end of revenge and violence.
By Michael Nagler
The soul-destroying conflict in Gaza and southern Israel has made it clearer than ever that we 𑁋 not just Israelis and Palestinians, but all of us 𑁋 have to find an alternative to the age-old reliance on violence to protect and avenge. Martin Luther King Jr. said the same thing: “Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation.” He also pointed to the answer: “The foundation of such a method is love.” The edifice being slowly built on that foundation is nonviolence.
Nonviolence, for Gandhi, included not only a method for resolving conflict, as King references here, but a principle on which to erect a new world order, in which such bruising conflict would be much less likely to occur. Gandhi called this aspect of nonviolence Constructive Programme. As early as 1895 he realized that in the long run it was even more important than direct disobedience and resistance. It could, for example, relieve the terrific damage being done to the environment in this conflict; damage being done both directly and by distracting us from the urgent need to stop climate destruction. Now, however, what we are up against is not what could happen in the long run but how to interrupt a violent conflict before more blood and treasure is wasted.
Nonviolence has a way to do even that: the practice of Unarmed Civilian Peacekeeping, or UCP, has grown out of Gandhi’s experiments with a Shanti Sena, or “Peace Army,” of trained individuals who would intervene as neutral third parties even after armed conflict had broken out, even on a large scale. Unfortunately, Gandhi was assassinated before he could see his vision to reality, but the dream didn’t die with him. UCP is now being carried out by some 20 organizations around the world and has been discussed seriously at the UN. As well it might be: Versions of it have worked that would otherwise be seen as miracles in Haiti, Mindanao, South Sudan and elsewhere. Three years ago, domestic teams used it successfully in the U.S. after the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis.
Could they stop the carnage in Israel/Palestine? In theory, yes. But unfortunately, we were not ready. While the world has not altogether ignored Gandhi, he has not been taken seriously enough to build a robust system that could intervene safely and effectively in serious conflict. Those who believe in this application of nonviolence (myself among them) have not yet convinced enough people of its efficacy (not to mention its mere existence) to get us to the point where it could be used effectively at such an advanced stage and scale. Yet, it’s coming. Harvard scholar Erica Chenoweth and co-author Maria Stephan have shown that nonviolent insurrections are twice as effective as violent ones, in about one-third the time. They are also four times more likely to lead to a democratic regime once the conflict is over 𑁋 a fact that’s extremely relevant for the Middle East. None of this information, by the way, was available as recently as 15 years ago.
Despite popular misconceptions, furthermore, the Middle East is not a complete stranger to nonviolence in either its constructive or obstructive forms. I have worked with both Israeli and Palestinian nonviolent activists for decades and seen interest from many parties 𑁋 including Hamas! One of the first teaching and training centers for nonviolence was founded just north of Jerusalem by Mubarak Awad, who was subsequently deported by Israel and went on to create a similar center, Nonviolence International, in Washington, D.C. An experimental school between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, Neve Shalom/Wahat al-Salaam (“Oasis of Peace” in Hebrew and Arabic) has been teaching Arabic and Jewish children together since the 1970s, and I have met with other people and organizations — Jewish, Arab and mixed — doing similar work at the grassroots.
None of this is as yet sufficiently developed (in this region or anywhere) to show the skeptical world that nonviolence can work on an international scale; but there is no reason it could not do exactly that if enough people were given the needed training and support 𑁋 organizational and, yes, governmental. The international community has not yet tackled this, but we need to do so now. That is perhaps the most important lesson of the present conflict. UCP would take a fraction of the monies spent on “force against force,” and save ourselves and the planet from much more destruction than that approach has ever done or ever could.
—
First published on October 14, 2023 on our page on Waging Nonviolence.
