WEST BANK: The Second Intifada is over and Palestinian politics are desperately polarized, but as Gaza grips the headlines it is important to remember that Qassam rocket fire is not the only contemporary expression of Palestinian resistance.
As the construction of Israel’s separation wall nears completion, I travel with a group of young activists from Ramallah to Ni’lin, a small Palestinian village about to be cut off from its land as the wall snakes further and further through its fields.
In these dry rocky hills dotted with olive trees, a popular movement is underway.
The people of Ni’lin have organized and are fighting to have the route of the wall moved back. Every two days they march unarmed towards the heavy machinery that builds the wall and are inevitably met with violence.
Before today’s demonstration was over, 17 people were injured, felled by rubber-coated bullets and military grade tear gas.
Despite the ever-present threat of physical harm, the movement’s participants know what is at stake and few are dissuaded.
Security Barrier or Apartheid Wall?
In 2002, the Israeli government announced its intention to build the 650-km long wall between Israel and the West Bank in order to prevent the uncontrolled entry of Palestinians into Israel.
In 2004, the International Court of Justice issued a non-binding ruling stating that much of the wall is illegal and recommended that it should be torn down.
Nearly the entire wall extends beyond the pre-1967 border demarcated by the Green Line further east into Palestinian land.
In the distant prospect of an eventual Palestinian state, it is unlikely that land eclipsed by the Israeli separation wall would ever be given back.
In 2005, a report issued by the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem noted, “Israel is once again relying on security arguments to unilaterally establish facts on the ground that will affect any future agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.
The Israeli government says the wall is meant to protect its citizens from suicide bombers, but in places like Ni’lin where the wall’s intended path will effectively annex Palestinian farmland for the expansion of the Modi’in Illit settlement, it is hard to ignore allegations that the project is a land grab carried out under the guise of security.
“One of the primary reasons for choosing the route of many sections of the barrier was to place certain areas intended for settlement expansion on the Israeli side of the barrier, says B’Tselem.
Ni’lin, a village of 4,700 people, lies 18 km west of Ramallah. Agriculture is at the heart of the community’s economy. If built along the planned route, the wall will confiscate some 2,500 dunams (250 hectares) of Ni’lin’s farmland.
Ni’lin is one of six villages located near the expanding Modi’in Illit settlement facing the loss of hundreds of hectares of land.
The other villages include Midya, Deir Qadis, Kharbata, Saffa and a place called Bil’in.
Bil’in’s Blueprint
Ten kilometers east of Ni’lin, the village of Bil’in has been engaged in a movement against the wall for the past three years. Residents have held weekly protests every Friday, while simultaneously challenging the legality of the wall’s path in court.
On Sept. 4, 2007, the Israeli Supreme Court ordered the Israeli Defense Ministry to redraw the path of the wall, declaring the planned route to be “highly prejudicial to the people of Bil’in.
Chief Justice Dorit Beinish wrote in the ruling, “We were not convinced that it is necessary for security-military reasons to retain the current route that passes on Bil’in’s lands.
While no doubt a victory for the anti-wall movement, the court’s decision will only alter the path of 1.7 km of the 650-km long barrier.
Bil’in residents have continued their weekly demonstrations, saying the Supreme Court’s decision did not go far enough.
For the other villages near Modi’in Illit, Bil’in’s struggle is a symbol of strength and a model to be replicated.Abdullah Abu Rahme, leader with the Popular Committee of Bil’in, is pleased to see his neighbors follow the example set by his village.
“We are in the fourth year of our struggle and we are happy to see our method of non-violent popular mobilization spread to other places. I believe that they can succeed if they do what we’ve done, he says.
Abu Rahme hopes the expansion of the movement can create a wider popular uprising in the West Bank but insists that it must remain peaceful in order to succeed.
“We want to make another intifada using non-violent action. They (the IDF) use violence against us but we must remain peaceful for our movement to succeed, he says.
Following Bil’in’s example, Ni’lin residents have held continuous demonstrations every two days since construction of the wall began in their fields in May.
Joined by Israeli and international activists, residents march towards the heavy machinery building the wall. There they challenge the Israeli soldiers guarding construction and are inevitably dispersed through physical intimidation and force.
The permanence of an eventual wall is evident to the residents of Ni’lin, they know that the final battle for their land is now underway. Win and the wall can be pushed back, lose and the land is likely lost forever.
Another Day, Another Demonstration
With demonstrations taking place three times a week in Ni’lin, the event is well rehearsed. However, today’s march has taken on a tense and solemn tone.
A protest organizer named Ibrahim Burnat clings to life in a nearby hospital having been shot three times in the leg with live ammunition at a similar demonstration three days ago in Bil’in.
Despite the threat of violence, approximately 200 people have gathered for today’s march.
Like many others here, the struggle is very personal for 25-year-old Hindi Mesleh.
“My father will personally lose 50 dunams (five hectares) of land if the construction of the wall continues as planned, he says.
In response, Hindi has become one of the key organizers in Ni’lin’s anti-wall movement.
“This is our land, this is our home, we refuse to give it to anyone, he says.
Hesitant to express too much optimism he adds, “We’re not sure how much change we can make because the wall gets closer everyday and the IDF responds with greater violence every time we protest.
Within seconds of the demonstration beginning, the first volley of tear gas lands.
The shabab spread out, load suitable stones into their slings and hurl them in the general direction of the IDF (interpreted by the movement as civil disobedience, not violence.)
Meanwhile, the brunt of the demonstration heads in the direction of the heavy machinery building the wall.
The IDF soldiers let loose with all of the crowd-control weapons at their disposal, including countless tear gas canisters, stun grenades and so-called “rubber bullets.
But that term is deceiving. A more accurate description would be steel bullets covered in a thin layer of rubber.
An international activist from Northern Ireland is shot with such a bullet. It sheds its rubber coating and enters his thigh like the real thing.
Seventeen-year-old Ni’lin resident, Ayoub Hamed Abdel-Mahdi, is shot twice with rubber-coated bullets from two meters away. He is carried to the relative safety of an olive tree where he lies writhing and moaning.
As others are hit with projectiles and many more succumb to the effects of tear gas, falling choking and blind to the ground, a Palestinian Medical Relief Society ambulance attempts to reach the injured.
As the driver leaves his ambulance, rubber-coated bullets slam into the door while others smash two side windows. Taking cover, he is eventually forced to climb back into the vehicle and flee, leaving the injured behind.
“They saw the markings on the vehicle and I showed them my vest. I shouted that I was first aid, but they just kept shooting, said Ahmed, the paramedic.
“They’re always shooting at ambulances here, he added.
Suddenly the air is shattered by the distinctive cracki
ng sound of live gunfire.
Fortunately, these are warning shots fired in the air over our heads. They are intended to frighten the crowd rather than wound or kill like those fired days ago in Bil’in.
Eventually the crowd is dispersed. Seventeen people have been injured, two of them seriously, but there is little doubt that a similar sized crowd will return here in two days time.
For the residents of Ni’lin engaged in the struggle the daily violence is a status quo they can accept, a wall cutting across their land is one they cannot.
