Apartheid

298
The priority, under all circumstances, must be to stop the gross human rights
violations from occurring. Whether that will involve future violence or armed resistance
remains entirely up to Israel, or very nearly so. Only if the Israeli army and the Jewish settlers
stop killing Palestinians and other dissidents, will there even be a possibility of a negotiated
peace. The criminal use of excessive force is the crux of the matter. If a Palestinian throws a
stone, he gets killed. If a Palestinian shouts loudly at a demonstration, he or she gets killed. If
a Palestinian attends a demonstration, he or she gets killed. If a Palestinian crosses a street, he
or she gets killed. If a Palestinian obeys a curfew and stays home, he or she still gets killed.
And the beginning of the spirals of violence that emerge from this basic situation remains an
overwhelmingly Jewish responsibility, although, as we have seen, western Europeans,
including Britain and Germany, the USA and its Arab allies could also be made partly
accountable.
The Palestinians who have committed or abetted violent acts, are in my opinion
primarily to be seen as victims of an ongoing grand crime against humanity. Therefore they
should only be considered guilty in a third tier of responsibilities, after Israeli Zionist Jews,
and after their supporters in the USA and elsewhere, as well as their Nazi enemies. The
charges against Palestinians may indeed include responsibility for crimes against humanity,
but only with regard to the targeting of innocent civilians with lethal force. A crucial question
is, however, whether anyone but the suicide attackers themselves may be held accountable for
their crimes against humanity. Those who assist, influence, and direct them may perhaps only
be prosecuted for crimes, but I will leave that question open.
In any case, as I argued in Section II.1, the crimes against humanity and all other
crimes committed by Palestinians resisting apartheid should be seen as crimes of a lesser
magnitude than apartheid itself. The severity of the punishment for their crimes should in my
opinion not exceed that meted out to apartheid perpetrators. The Israeli state death squads are
at present in clear violation of international law as well as justice, and not only because of the
large numbers of ‘collateral killings’ (which actually also amount to targeting of civilians due
to their extremely high numbers, more than three times higher than the victims of Palestinian
killers since 2000, and possibly as many as 20 times higher overall) and injuries and other
damage caused. Two months after the last quote above, but before the commencement of
Palestinian suicide attacks in 2001, Said added:
In our case, the fighting is done by a small brave number of people
pitted against hopeless odds, i.e. stones against helicopter gunships,
Merkava tanks, missiles. Yet a quick look at other movements – say
the Indian nationalist movement, the South African liberation
movement, the American civil rights movement – tell us first of all
that only a mass movement employing tactics and strategy that
maximise the popular element ever made any difference on the
occupier and/or oppressor. Second, only a mass movement that has
been politicised and imbued with a vision of participating directly in a
future of its own making, only such a movement has historical chance
of liberating itself from oppression or military occupation. The future,
like the past, is built by human beings. They, and not some distant
mediator or saviour, provide the agency for change. 743
They provide the agency but in doing so they also hold accountability and
responsibilities. Nonetheless, the vast majority of Palestinians involved in violent activities
during the present Intifada as well as the previous one are in my opinion not guilty of any
crimes at all. To resist a crime against humanity such as apartheid is not only brave, but
righteous, as well. Not only the Geneva Conventions provide justification for self-defense.
743 Said: The Tragedy Deepens, 2000