It is very easy for a Palestinian to be exposed to feelings of anger, depression and hatred when everything around him shows that the military force occupying his land is the noblest of the recent era. Such feelings justify the desire for revenge, a sarcastic attitude toward the enemy’s afflictions, and the belief that justice can only be gained by force. So we become used to seeking solutions in violent ways. Yet these ways have proven to lead to a cycle of violence in which we are the losers. So what options stand before us to lift the oppression under which our people are living? Violence, submission or a third option?

Aggressive ways of resisting the occupation increase the oppressive measures that are taken against our people. Violence does not help in solving the conflict. Instead, it escalates the situation and causes more aggressive reactions, suffering, depression, and fear. It raises the intensity of occupation and unjust reactions, while gradually oppression is becoming a common feature of our life.

When I speak of the negative effects of the violent option in resisting the occupation, this does not necessarily mean that the only alternative is to coexist and submit to occupation. However, the real confrontation with the occupation should be achieved by declaring our refusal to the problematic issue of our understanding that injustice is the responsibility of its perpetrator only. The people who submit to it do not share any responsibility.

It is growing clearer that nonviolent means can be used effectively to lift the suffering and oppression in which we are living. However, we still need to resist the injury that is being inflicted upon us. Our human heritage presents rich examples that would provide us with peaceful means of resistance, as opposed to the use of violence to fight violence.

Actually we share part of the responsibility for any unfair actions to which we are exposed, since our submission and weakness gives a sort of permission for the occupying force to commit such actions. Our plan should be directed to solve this problematic issue and to create a state of fairness and justice for all of us. However, this would not succeed until we start caring about our suffering and working to regain what has been taken from us.

Some will ask, does nonviolent resistance help in solving our internal conflicts? Does it lead to meaningful results in solving our conflict with the occupation? Could nonviolence help in facing a very violent occupier? Is nonviolence more useful in countries ruled by democratic governments, which respect human rights, but less useful in cases where people are submitted to military occupation? And how can nonviolence be practiced against people like Sharon, Mofaz and others?

These questions reveal the Palestinian people’s need for a careful study of the Indian population’s experience with the British occupation, where nonviolent resistance was conducted to a great extent under the leadership of Gandhi. This experience might be successfully used as a third option for the Palestinians.