Resistance education: The responsibility of intellectuals
Tim AndersonTim Anderson
Source: Al Mayadeen English
24 Oct 2024 18:14
12 Min Read
Reason and evidence remain important in human debate, but it should be clear that the truth alone cannot “set us free.”
x
Israeli atrocities in Gaza over 2023-2024 have galvanized world public opinion against the Zionist regime. Sufficient room was available even in the heavily censored US social media to show the repeated massacres and Zionist reprisals against the civilian population, including children. The reputation of the Israeli colony is stained forever, it can never recover from this disgrace.
Nevertheless, the Anglo-American propaganda machine remains powerful and some important elements of the Palestinian struggle require clarification, at least to honest and curious people. This is a cause which calls on the moral responsibility of intellectuals, to explain more fully the character of Western censorship and, in particular, the importance of resistance and its key role in the path to liberation and self-determination.
The colonial powers almost all abstained on the 1960 Declaration on Decolonisation, the lead principle of which (the right of a people to self-determination) entered the twin covenants of the International Bill of Rights. After that the hegemonic powers tried to deny (but could not block) UN declarations and conventions on the right to resist colonialism, occupation, and apartheid. The result is that today most anti-colonial resistance groups are banned as “terrorist”, but only in the hegemonic regimes. International law clearly supports the right to resist (further, Palestine and Lebanon as recognised nations enjoy the UN chartered right to national self-defence) while the Anglo-Americans and their collaborators live in denial. This hegemonic denial of the right to resist (including the legitimacy of Palestinian insurrection) creates a culture which confuses and must itself be resisted. Proponents of resistance education should inform, encourage and build confidence in support of legitimate popular resistance.
In this paper I will outline the need to (1) support and promote the free flow of honest information over the Palestinian struggle, (2) explain the principles and forces of resistance and (3) support the main counter hegemonic forces which back the Palestinian liberation struggle.
1. Support and promote the free flow of honest information
First, we must recognise the key elements of this struggle, based on the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people, opposed by the Zionists and their sponsors, above all Anglo-American imperialism with its exceptionalist, arrogant and hegemonic pretensions.
Contrary to Zionist mythology, there is no Jewish right to self-determination in the lands of other peoples, as self-determination cannot be colonial and chauvinistic.
Back in the 1960s, all nations were forced to either support or at least accept the right of a people to self-determination, first put up in the Declaration on Decolonization, and the way it relates to the people of Palestine, and their consequent right to resist denial of that right. Many different cultures came together to recognise this great consensus, which was itself an initiative of the Global South and went on to form the basis of the UN’s twin covenants on human rights.
Of course, the collective right to self-determination necessarily implies a right to resist denial of that right. Western perspectives on human rights typically focus only on individual rights.
In face of relentless distortion and censorship of pro-Palestinian voices, responsible intellectuals should correct distortions and promote the free flow of honest information over the Palestinian struggle. That includes opposing attacks on pro-Palestinian voices, those who are de-platformed, banned, dismissed, and otherwise repressed for speaking up.
Similarly, the relentless war propaganda (especially over the Palestinian Resistance) must be exposed and deconstructed. What are the key aims of this propaganda and censorship?
Firstly to eulogise the colonists, for example through spreading fake slogans like the Israelis being ‘the only democracy’ in their region
Secondly to allow mild but not overly harsh criticism of the colonists and their sponsors,
Thirdly, by banning, so far as possible, any resistance voices or platforms which allow resistance voices.
As a consequence, the Anglo-American countries and their subordinates ban Palestinian and allied Resistance groups, usually as “terrorists”, while endlessly funding, arming, and humanising the Israeli colonists. They run a huge network of mass media (including NGOs and compliant academics) which repeat and amplify these messages. Meanwhile opposing voices are censored, de-platformed, removed from their positions and otherwise abused.
The first and central role of responsible public intellectuals must be to counter this virtual tsunami of misinformation, unmasking the vicious myths created against the Palestinian and regional Resistance.
2. Explain and support resistance principles, forces and voices
Self-determination is not a posthumous medal for helpless victims, it is a great right that must be fought for and taken from the imperial and colonial forces which try to deny and block self-determination. This is not well recognised in colonial cultures, which embed paternal myths.
Yet it is well recognised by anti-colonial leaders, like the great 19th century Cuban patriot Jose Marti who said in 1880, “You take your rights, you do not beg for them. You do not buy them with tears but with blood.”
While the Palestinian cause is popular in Western countries, this support begins as sympathy for the victims and is often simply an abstract call for an end to the violence. To take a further step and support the Palestinian and regional Resistance implies confronting Western regimes which have tried to ban and criminalise all Resistance groups.
Because of a natural instinct to avoid conflict and due to the avalanche of neocolonial propaganda, the resistance is poorly understood and poorly represented in colonial cultures. That calls for systematic popular education, stressing:
The need to recognise anti-colonial liberation movements, in particular the Palestinian struggle, as a key contemporary expression of the right of self-determination;
The inherent right to resist, by all appropriate means, denial of that basic right;
That the right to resist invasion, occupation, and apartheid by armed struggle is recognised in international law, in the Geneva Conventions, and in UN declarations over the right to resist occupation and apartheid “by all available means”;
The right of the Palestinian people to national Self-Defence (Article 51, UN Charter);
While passive resistance, like the steadfastness of remaining on one’s land, is important, it cannot survive without active support;
There is no moral equivalence in the character of armed resistance and armed occupation; one is legitimate and the other is not; suggestions that one should be “even handed” over Palestine-“Israel” are colonial deceptions.
Exposing myths around these issues is important for several reasons:
It can blunt the ideological attacks from colonial cultures on liberation movements;
It can inform false moral equivalence arguments, by which the resistance is urged to disarm, alongside the forces of occupation and apartheid;
Wider international recognition of the right to resist colonialism, apartheid, and genocide can be an effective antidote to imperial propaganda;
Clear moral argument, with evidence, may not be decisive in the propaganda wars, but it can inform honest and curious people in colonial cultures while vindicating the political will, morale, and achievements of Resistance forces.
Reason and evidence remain important in human debate, but it should be clear that the truth alone cannot “set us free”, as the entire world has watched the Gaza genocide and the sponsors of these great crimes remain stubbornly unrepentant. Truth alone is not enough; resistance is necessary.
3. Support the counter-hegemonic powers which back the Palestinian struggle
Recognition of the role of resistance must be accompanied by respect and in principle support for ALL the Palestinian Resistance groups, as well as those of the regional Resistance which materially support the Palestinian Resistance.
This means, for example, support for all the Palestinian factions, regardless of political preference or persuasion. They should be allowed to work out the form of their liberation and self-determination.
It means support for the Islamic Republic of Iran, the principal supporter of all the Palestinian factions, as these factions freely acknowledge. It is precisely Iranian support for the independent peoples of the region that makes it the focus of such hostility from the Israelis and Washington. No other regional nation has such capacity and political will.
It means support for Syria, the key link in the Axis of Resistance, which both supplies and bridges Iran to the Palestinian and Lebanese Resistance; and support for the resistance groups of Iraq and Lebanon. The dirty war on Syria, which made use of huge proxy armies, was run by Washington to divide and weaken the regional Axis of Resistance and has ended up with a triple occupation of Syria, with the Israelis (in the south) and NATO’s two largest armies (Turkey and the USA) in the north and east.
It means support for the Ansar Allah-led coalition government in Yemen (the National Salvation Government) dubbed “Houthi Rebels” by the UNSC, which has betrayed the Yemeni people by making the UN itself responsible for legitimising the ongoing siege and dirty war on Yemen.
It means support for the rising role of China in West Asia, a nation which recognises the legitimacy of the Palestinian Resistance and has been developing good relations with Axis of Resistance nations and entities.
Along with most of the international community, notably the BRICS group, China has called for the admission of Palestine to the United Nations. Beijing has recognized Palestinian statehood and also the Palestinian right to resist occupation. In February 2024, China’s representative, Ma Xinmin told the International Court of Justice that the Palestinian “use of force to resist oppression is an inalienable right” and cannot be equated with terrorism. This is an important step, as it helps undermine the Anglo-American propaganda wars and fosters an inclusive basis for all Palestinian factions to participate in a potentially democratic outcome.
China has repeatedly backed the need to admit Palestine to the United Nations, as a means of correcting historical injustice. While the form of this admission is yet to be seen, it seems likely that China will review its earlier commitment to a “roadmap” towards the so-called “two state solution”. That road faces many difficulties in view of the genocidal actions of the Israeli regime and the repeated designation of “Israel” as an apartheid state, a crime against humanity which international law says must be dismantled. A single democratic state in historic Palestine, with equal rights for all, is a path similar to the South African process of the late 1980s and, with some provisos over land and refugees, seems a superior objective.
The series of UNSC resolutions since 1967, referring to a return to (the non-existent) 1967 borders and creation of the long promised but mythical “two states”, have become obsolete. When this is fully considered, China may well contemplate the Iranian leader’s proposal for a referendum on a single democratic state, involving all the people of historic Palestine. Consistent with this trend, Chinese leader Xi Jinping has called for a peace conference to end the ‘tremendous suffering’ in Gaza.
Beijing has already taken several important steps in the West Asian region, in recent years. It not only verbally opposes the Unilateral Coercive Measures (unilateral “sanctions”) imposed on independent countries like Iran, Syria, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, it has set up strategic relations and economic groups – especially through the BRICS and the SCO – to include those nations held under siege by Washington and the Europeans. In 2021, China signed a strategic partnership with Iran (a statement of “Comprehensive Cooperation”). In 2024 China, Russia, and Iran carried out joint naval drills near the Gulf of Oman. China is gradually playing an important counterweight role in the region, as in the world.
China played a key role in bringing together Iran and US allies Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the UAE. The Iran-Saudi deal was said to have led to a “wave of reconciliation” in the region, including the readmission of Syria to the Saudi dominated Arab League. Iran, the Saudis, the UAE, and Egypt were subsequently invited to join the BRICS group in January 2024. Iranian and Egyptian rapprochement began in mid-2023, several months before their BRICS accession. China’s role in reconciling tensions in West Asia is now widely recognised.
In early 2024, both China and Russia made a deal with the revolutionary government in Yemen to guarantee the safety of Red Sea shipping that was not destined for the Israeli regime. That may be a step toward overturning a series of bad UNSC resolutions which have subjected the Yemeni people to war and siege, following the UNSC’s failure to recognise the revolutionary government, an Ansar Allah led coalition called the National Salvation Government. Since 2015 the Ansar Allah led coalition has controlled more than 70% of the populated areas of Yemen.
China is cautiously filing gaps left by the trail of disastrous invasions and hybrid wars initiated by Washington. Of course, Beijing has its own interests, but in general, it advances mutual interest without coercive political demands, and is opening up new forms of coercion-free international cooperation far more amendable to the needs of independent Global South countries, including Palestine.
The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.
