Resisting the Nakba
The viciousness of
Israel is testament to its knowing that Palestinians will always
remain steadfast and defeat its past and present attempts to
erase them, writes Joseph Massad*
15 - 21 May 2008
Issue No. 897
Al-Ahram Weekly
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2008/897/op8.htm
One of the most difficult
things to grasp in the modern history of Palestine and the
Palestinians is the meaning of the Nakba. Is the Nakba to be seen as
a discrete event that took place and ended in 1948, or is it
something else? What are the political stakes in reifying the Nakba
as a past event, in commemorating it annually, in bowing before its
awesome symbolism? What are the effects of making the Nakba a finite
historical episode that one bemoans but must ultimately accept as a
fact of history?
I will suggest to you that there is much at stake in all of this,
in rendering the Nakba an event of the past, a fact on the ground
that one cannot but accept, admit, and finally transcend; indeed
that in order to move forward, one must leave the Nakba behind. Some
have even suggested that if Israel acknowledges and apologises for
the Nakba, the Palestinians would forgive and forget, and the
effects of the Nakba would be relegated to historical
commemorations, not unlike the one we are having this year.
In my view, the Nakba is none of these things, and the attempt to
make this year the 60th anniversary of the Nakba's life and death is
a grave error. The Nakba is in fact much older than 60 years and it
is still with us, pulsating with life and coursing through history
by piling up more calamities upon the Palestinian people. I hold
that the Nakba is a historical epoch that is 127 years old and is
ongoing. The year 1881 is the date when Jewish colonisation of
Palestine started and, as everyone knows, it has never ended. Much
as the world would like to present Palestinians as living in a
post-Nakba period, I insist that we live thoroughly in Nakba times.
What we are doing this year is not an act of commemorating but an
act of witnessing the ongoing Nakba that continues to destroy
Palestine and the Palestinians. I submit, therefore, that this year
is not the 60th anniversary of the Nakba at all, but rather one more
year of enduring its brutality; that the history of the Nakba has
never been a history of the past but decidedly a history of the
present.
THE MEANING OF NAKBA: While the Nakba has been translated into
English as "catastrophe", "disaster", or "calamity", these
translations do not fully grasp the active ramifications of its
Arabic meanings. The Nakba as an act committed by Zionism and its
adherents against Palestine and the Palestinians has rendered the
Palestinians " mankubin ". English does not help much in
translating mankubin, unless we can stretch the language a
bit and call Palestinians a catastrophe-d or disaster-ed people.
Unlike the Greek catastrophe, which means overturning, or the
Latin disaster, which means a calamitous event occurring when
the stars are not in the right alignment, the Nakba is an act of
deliberate destruction, of visiting calamities upon a people, of a
well-planned ruining of a country and its inhabitants. The word was
coined by the eminent Arab intellectual Constantine Zureik in his
August 1948 short book on The Meaning of the Nakba that was
ongoing as he wrote it, just like it is as I write these lines.
Since the beginning, the Palestinian people have resisted the
racist and colonial logic of the Nakba, through fighting off the
colonists in the 1880s and 1890s, in the 1910s, 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s,
60s, and on to the present. If Palestinian resistance failed to
prevent the massive expulsion of half the Palestinian people and of
the outright theft of their entire country, it has succeeded in
overthrowing Zionist official memory. Indeed, memory has always been
a key component of Palestinian resistance. When Palestinians insist
on naming their country, their cities, and their villages with their
original names, they are not only resisting the vulgar names that
Zionism has bestowed on the land, they are also insisting on a
geographic memory that Israel has all but succeeded to erase
physically. Zionist cruelty has been such that Israel insisted for
50 years after its creation in denying that the Palestinians even
exist as a people, or as a name; that the very name "Palestinians"
should not even be uttered. For Zionists, the very name
"Palestinian" functions as some magical incantation that could
obliterate them at the existential level. They are not necessarily
wrong in their impression, for the name Palestinian is itself the
strongest form of resistance against their official memory. The name
"Palestinian" has also been generative of continuities in
Palestinian culture and life, in Palestinian identity and
nationality, things that Israel had hoped it obliterated completely
and whose survival will always threaten its mnemonic operation of
inventing a fictional memory of non-Palestine, of non- Palestinians.
Palestinian counter-memory is in direct confrontation with the
Nakba's achievement of obliterating Palestine as a geographic
designation and an affront to the Nakba's ongoing efforts to
obliterate the Palestinians as a national group with a pre-Nakba
history. The survival of the Palestinians after the Nakba started,
and despite its assiduous efforts to efface them, has made the Nakba
a less than successful Zionist victory. It is in this context that
Israel's insistence on calling Palestinian citizens in Israel
"Israeli Arabs" is designed to silence their Palestinian-ness.
Zionism's insistence that Palestinian refugees be settled and given
the nationality of their host countries is aimed also to erase their
name.
Israel's final admission a decade ago that there was a
Palestinian people would come at the price of reducing the
Palestinian people to one-third of their total number. In signing
Oslo, Israel compromised with a collaborationist Palestinian
leadership, wherein the price the Palestinian Authority would pay
for Israel's agreeing to name West Bank and Gaza Palestinians with
their proper names was the de-Palestinisation of the rest of the
Palestinian people. In return, the Palestinian collaborating
leadership, under the guise of the Geneva Accords, has agreed to
multiply Israel's Jewish population by a factor of three, wherein
Israel would be recognised as the state of all Jews worldwide and
not of the Jews who live inside it, let alone the Palestinian
citizens over whom it rules.
But this arrangement has failed. Hard as it tried to legitimise
itself, the Palestinian Authority could not but be seen for what it
is: the creation of the Israeli occupation, an authority which in
its structure and logic is not unlike all colonial puppet regimes in
Asia and Africa serving their masters, not excluding the
Judenröte (Jewish councils) that the Nazis set up in occupied
Poland's ghettos to run Jewish life, collect taxes, and run the post
offices, inter alia; or the Bantustans that apartheid South Africa
set up as alternative homelands. The Palestinian Authority's attempt
to acquire the power of naming the Palestinian and Jewish peoples
failed as much as Israel's attempts before it. Palestinians continue
to insist on their name and on their inclusion in a Palestinian
nation, while non-Israeli Jews insist on not joining Israeli
nationality, no matter how much they may support Israel. The
politics of naming is the politics of power and resistance. The
power to name creates fictional histories against material
realities. While Israel has succeeded in imposing physical and
geographic realties, its attempt to obliterate historical memory has
failed. Palestinians are always standing in the way of its
falsification of their history and its own.
THE NAKBA IS NOW: Ever since the Nakba came to describe the
tumultuous actions of 1948, an ongoing struggle has raged to define
it as a past and finished event rather than an unfinished present
action. This is not an epistemological struggle but a lively
political one. To identify the Nakba as a past and finished event is
to declare its success and insist on the irreversibility of its
achievements. It is to insist that there is no longer a struggle to
define it, nor a successful resistance that stands in its way. It is
to grant it historical and political legitimacy as a fact of life,
but also to endow all its subsequent effects as its natural outcome.
Thus the struggle of Palestinian citizens of Israel today, according
to the Zionist narrative, is not a normal anti-colonial struggle or
one that demands national or ethnic or civil rights, but rather an
"abnormal" struggle to reverse the Nakba.
That Israel has upwards of 20 laws on the books that
institutionalise Jewish religious and racial privilege in rights and
duties over non-Jewish citizens is presented as a normal
consecration of the Nakba, which Palestinians continue to refuse.
Indeed, some Israeli leaders, most recently Tzipi Livni, have
suggested that Palestinian citizens of Israel should leave to
countries that would grant them national rights instead of remaining
in Israel where they will always be denied equal rights as part of
their ongoing Nakba. Palestinians are often reminded that
"much greater" peoples than they have opted for self-displacement
from countries that denied them rights to a country that granted
them rights, namely European Jews themselves who came to visit the
Nakba upon the Palestinians. If Palestinians in Israel want to
remain in Israel, they must accept the normalcy of the Nakba and
must acquiesce in their new status as mankubin who cannot and
will never have equal rights with Jews. Their refusal of the effects
of the Nakba is what makes Palestinian citizens of Israel want to
reverse its effects by calling on Israel to repeal its racist laws
and become an Israeli, rather than a Jewish, state. Israel and now
President Bush insist that the effects of the Nakba must be accepted
by all Palestinians. That the Nakba transformed Palestine into "the
Jewish State," Palestinians are told, is not reversible and no
amount of civil rights activism or national struggle will undo this
major achievement. Palestinian citizens of Israel however seem
unconvinced and continue to resist this irreversibility. Their
plight, according to Israel, however, is not caused by the Nakba
but by their insistence on resisting it.
It is also said that the Palestinian refugees languishing in
camps for 60 years are like all other refugee populations, with
which the world of the 20th and 21st centuries is filled, borne out
of war. Their problem does not lie with the Zionist actions of
1947-1948 that expelled them from their homeland but rather, Israel
insists, with the post-1948 refusal of Palestinians and Arab
countries to accept the Nakba as irreversible and settle these poor
refugees in their host countries. The refugees, Zionism insists,
suffer not because of the Nakba but because they refuse to
accept the Nakba and to accept themselves as mankubin.
As for those Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza and East
Jerusalem, their problems are certainly not a result of the Nakba
but, as Israel insists, of the Arab refusal to accept it. Their
problems are born of an international war in 1967 that resulted from
the Arab refusal of the Nakba as a permanent fact. If Palestinians
and their allies would just accept the Nakba as a past and finished
event, the calamities that they still claim befall them would cease
immediately.
To insist that the Nakba is a present continuous act of
destruction that remains unfinished is to resist acknowledging that
its work has been completed. Palestinian resistance is what accounts
for the unfinished work of the Nakba and for its ongoing brutality.
Israel and its international supporters insist that had the
Palestinians accepted defeat and recognised the Nakba, had they
accepted their expulsion, their third-class citizenship within
Israel, and the conquest of 1967, their calamities would have ended.
The reason for the hardship that Palestinians experience, Israel
tells us, is that Palestinians have never stopped fighting it.
Palestinians resisted the Nakba in the 1880s, when European
Jewish colonists kicked them off land they purchased from absentee
landlords and denied them labour on land they had tilled for
centuries. Palestinian resistance took the form of a major
three-year revolt in the 1930s against British support for Zionists
to bring about the Nakba. Palestinians also resisted after the
actions of 1947/1948 when most of their land was conquered and
confiscated by the racist laws of the Jewish state. Their ongoing
resistance to the Nakba in the West Bank and in Gaza, we are still
told by Israel and The New York Times, is in fact what
invites more Nakbas. If Palestinians would allow Israel to lay siege
to them in the largest open air prison in the world called Gaza
without resisting it, Israel would not be forced to bomb them and
kill their children and destroy their homes, it would only starve
them and keep them inside the apartheid wall. If Palestinians would
simply accept their status as mankubin, the Nakba, as an
unfinished process, would be finally completed. This logic of
conquest is not exceptional at all, nor is it limited to the
Israelis. Has not the resistance in Iraq more recently stood in the
way of the final completion of the mission of the American invasion,
which President Bush declared "Accomplished" five years ago? It is
Iraqi resistance to the destruction that the Americans visit on Iraq
that forces the process of American destruction to continue and the
American mission to remain unaccomplished.
ZIONIST RACISM: But what is it that the Palestinians continue to
resist in the Nakba that Israel continues to visit upon them? In
short, it's effects and it's victories. Moshe Dayan once eloquently
described the Nakba as follows:
"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You
don't even know the names of these Arab villages, and I don't blame
you, because these geography books no longer exist. Not only do the
books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahalal
arose in the place of Mahlul, Gvat in the place of Jibta, Sarid in
the place of Haneifa, and Kfar- Yehoshua in the place of Tel-Shaman.
There is not one single place built in this country that did not
have a former Arab population."
The success of the Palestinian resistance to the Nakba has forced
a similar process of renaming Zionist and Israeli victories that is
now adopted across much of the world, and even, albeit in a much
more limited fashion, in the United States. To echo Dayan:
Palestinian resistance and victimisation replaced Zionist conquests
and victories. Many of you don't even know the names of these
Zionist victories, and I don't blame you, because the Zionist
history books and propaganda that once legitimised them are no
longer considered legitimate. Not only have these books and this
propaganda lost legitimacy, but the Zionist and Israeli victories
are no longer recognised as such either. The Nakba arose in place of
"Israel's war of independence," Apartheid replaced "Jewish
sovereignty," the expulsion of the Palestinians replaced "Plan Dalet,"
or even the "return of the Jews to their ancestral homeland,"
Israel's institutionalised and legal racism replaced "Israeli
democracy," Palestinian citizens of Israel replaced "Israeli Arabs,"
the Palestinian people replaced the "non-Jewish communities in
Palestine" as the Balfour Declaration had described them, and
Palestinian maftul replaced "Israeli couscous" which
continues to try to replace Palestinian maftul. There is not
one single Zionist victory in this country that the Palestinians
have not resisted and challenged.
Palestinians have resisted and resist the Nakba with
steadfastness and a refusal to leave their lands; with strikes,
demonstrations, and civil disobedience; with art, music, and dance;
with poetry, theatre, and novels; with writing their own history and
asserting their own geography; with local and international appeals
to courts of law, and to the United Nations. Palestinians have also
resisted and resist the Nakba with stones and with guns. The denial
of the Palestinians' right to resist (guaranteed and deemed legal by
international law) is not however confined to their use of guns, but
equally to their use of art, books, music, demonstrations, even of
filing UN appeals, of teaching Palestinian history, of narrating the
Nakba, or of remembering and commemorating it.
That the Nakba that Zionist planners conceived since the late
19th century included the take-over of all Palestine, the expulsion
of all of its native Arab population, and rendering it Arabrein,
continues apace. While land acquisitions started in the 1880s and
the en masse theft of the country occurred in 1948, Israel has still
not been able to take over the entire land. The ongoing confiscation
of lands in East Jerusalem and the West Bank today is part of the
continuing Nakba. Zionism's plans to make Israel Arabrein
also continue apace. If Israel is unable before international law to
expel all Palestinians today, it has devised a clever alternative,
namely to place all those it cannot expel inside an apartheid wall
that it will call a Palestinian state and make plans to expel those
residing outside this apartheid wall, namely Palestinian citizens of
Israel, to inside those walls. The end result will indeed be an
Arabrein Israel outside the wall. These Nakba efforts are being
pursued actively at present with the collaboration of the
Palestinian Authority and Arab governments under US sponsorship.
The destruction of more than 500 Palestinian villages did not
take place in 1948 but was an ongoing process for years following
the Zionist conquest. Expelling the Palestinians off their lands
started in the 1880s with a much larger expulsion inside and outside
Palestine beginning in earnest in November 1947. It is crucial to
remember that Zionist forces expelled 400,000 Palestinians from
their lands before 14 May 1948. Many hundreds of thousands more
would be expelled in the months and years following, throughout the
1950s, and again since 1967. Expulsions have not stopped. The
presence of Palestinians is what provokes Israel to expel them. If
Palestinians would accept to displace themselves and leave
Palestine, Israel tells them, there would no longer be expulsions. I
should point out here that the Zionist insistence on
self-displacement is not only directed at Palestinians. Since its
inception until now, Zionism and Israel have always recommended and
continue to recommend that world Jewry displace itself and come to
Israel. Like the Palestinians, most Jews outside Israel continue to
resist Israel's call on them to displace themselves. While Israel is
no longer able to force Jews outside its borders to move to it (and
there were many times when it could), it has the ability and the
will to displace the Palestinians no matter how much they resist.
RESISTANCE IS NOW: Palestinian resistance today is active on many
fronts. One of the key campaigns that Palestinians in Israel have
mounted recently is to force Israel to repeal its many racist laws.
A number of proposals and documents have been issued by Palestinian
organisations in Israel to that effect. This campaign must be
internationalised. The United Nations and other world forums must be
enlisted in the task of forcing Israel to repeal its racist laws.
This is not the demagogic attempt to call Zionism racism as the UN
had done in 1975 in a sloganeering resolution, but rather to
demonstrate how Israel is institutionally racist and that it rules
through racist laws that must be repealed.
Palestinians and their allies have also mounted an international
campaign of divestment and boycott of Israel until it ceases to be
in violation of international law through its continued occupation
of the West Bank and Gaza and it stops its ongoing war crimes
against them. This is another key campaign that has already scored a
number of impressive victories.
This is not to say that Palestinians do not continue to suffer
everywhere. The suffering of Gazans has been the greatest in recent
years, as Israel punishes them for their refusal of the rule of the
Palöstinenserrat Israel and its Palestinian collaborators
imposed on the West Bank and tried to impose on Gaza in their
attempt to overthrow the democratically elected Palestinian
government. Israel's war crimes against Gazans continue apace but
Gazans have had no choice but to remain steadfast and to resist.
But in resisting the Nakba, the Palestinians have struck at the
heart of the Zionist project that insists that the Nakba be seen as
a past event. In resisting Israel, Palestinians have forced the
world to witness the Nakba as present action; one that, contrary to
Zionist wisdom, is indeed reversible. This is precisely what galls
Israel and the Zionist movement. Israel's inability to complete its
mission of thoroughly colonising Palestine, of expelling all
Palestinians, of "gathering" all Jews in the world in its colony,
keeps it uneasy and keeps its project always in the present
continuous.
While Israel has used this situation to project itself as a
victim of its own victims who refuse to grant it legitimacy to
victimise them, Israel understands not only in its unconscious but
also consciously that its project will remain reversible. The
cruelty it has shown and continues to show to the Palestinian people
is directly proportional to its belief in their ability to overthrow
its achievements and reverse its colonial project. The problem for
Israel is not in believing and knowing that there is not one single
place in its colonial settlement that did not have a former Arab
population, but in its realisation that there is no place today in
its imaginary "Jewish State" that does not still have an Arab
population who claims it.
That the Nakba remains unfinished is precisely because
Palestinians refuse to let it transform them into mankubin.
What we are witnessing at this year's commemorations, then, is not
only one more year of the Nakba but also one more year of resisting
it. Those who counsel the Palestinians to accept the Nakba know that
to accept the Nakba is to allow it to continue unfettered.
Palestinians know better. The only way to end the Nakba,
Palestinians insist, is to continue to resist it.
* The writer is associate professor of modern Arab politics
and intellectual history at Columbia University in New York. He is
author of The Persistence of the Palestinian Question.