Twenty Years Since Al-Aqsa Intifada: Between Armed Resistance and Negotiations

Sep 06, 2020 09:02 am
Mohammed Abu Oun.jpg

Mohammed Abu Oun

The Palestinian Intifada that erupted in the late 2000 and was known as Al-Aqsa Intifada (or the Second Intifada) constituted a turning point in the relationship between the Palestinian people and the occupation. After 7 years of international efforts to achieve peace between the Palestinians and the occupation, disregarding the Palestinian people’s rights, the Intifada broke out against the unjust attempts by the mediators, and the Israeli assaults against the rights and properties of the Palestinians.

At a time when the Palestinians were not given their simplest rights such as the right to self-determination and independence, the Israeli occupation carried out unbearable assaults and violations against the rights and holy sites of the people. The settlement project expanded and seized thousands of donums from the occupied West Bank. In addition, the number of martyrs and wounded rose due to the continuous attacks of the occupation’s forces and settlers against the Palestinian towns and cities. Hundreds of Palestinians were arrested in an attempt to terrorize the entire Palestinian people.

Ariel Sharon’s racist visit to the arenas of Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa provoked the Palestinians in general and the Palestinian Muslims in particular. Together, they all headed to protect Al-Aqsa. The protests reached almost all Palestinian lands and most of the Arab and Muslim countries. The situation escalated as the Palestinians initiated confrontations at the Israeli checkpoints.

The Palestinian people continued to develop its methods during the Intifada and developed the tools they used. They organized protests, and threw stones and Molotov at the soldiers. Realizing the severity of the occupation’s atrocities, the Palestinians decided to turn to armed resistance to force the occupation to stand down and stop its crimes.  

Still, the occupation’s crimes increased and it started using collective punishment as a main policy to prevent the people from heading to armed resistance. All these attempts were met with failure as the Palestinians insisted on moving forward with the Intifada and the resistance to thwart the occupation’s plans of theft and violation of rights.

In the first years of the Intifada, the decisions were officially made by the PLO, which considered peace as the only solution to the conflict. However, when Hamas was elected in 2006 and received the highest number of votes in the Legislative Council elections, the situation changed. A division among the people took place, as one part supported military resistance and the other rejected it.

This disparity was the beginning of a new stage where the armed factions were officially and popularly supported. Therefore, the occupation implemented a new policy where all the people are punished, and funds are prevented from financing the movement. This was in collaboration with regional Arab countries whose aim was to end any military resistance in Palestine.

The international position on the official institution representing Palestine, i.e. Hamas, created instability within the Palestinian institution. Hamas insisted on resistance, while the PLO surrendered to the pressure exercised by the international community that wanted to impose certain policies and resolutions that prevented the Palestinian people from using their right to resist the occupation.

The resistance proved its ability to deter the occupation’s forces the past 20 years in Gaza. It also proved that the occupation only answers to force. Years of work to expand the Zionist project were thwarted, and the beginning was when the settlements withdrew from the Strip because of the resistance’ strikes and operations.

The conditions in the West Bank, however, were different. The negotiations between the PA and the occupation continued, and the resistance was peaceful to the maximum. In fact, the PA and the occupation initiated security coordination that protected the interests of the occupation in the West Bank. It continued the construction of settlements, arrest of citizens and murder of civilians with cold blood.

Today, after 20 years from the Intifada, we see how the occupation never respected any diplomatic nor political agreements to stop its crimes. However, it answered to the power of the resistance’ strikes in Gaza. It can neither kill the people of the Strip nor steal their land. In fact, the occupation is now careful not to commit any crimes that could force the resistance to respond with fire.

Supporting the Palestinian resistance is quite costly to the occupation, which will affect its interest in expansion inside and outside Palestine. The resistance has proven the power of force in facing the occupation.

 

Related