Palestinians don't want another blood-letting

Here, Haaretz introduces its five articles asking if this is the third intifada followed by the first two from Anshell Pfeffer and Amira Hass.

Palestinians throw stones toward Israeli police during clashes in Shuafat, East Jerusalem, October 5, 2015. Photo by Reuters

Has the Third Intifada Begun? 5 Must-read Analyses

Haaretz columnists examine all the angles of the current violence in Jerusalem and the West Bank and put it into context.

Haaretz introduction
October 06, 2015

The recent upsurge in violence in Jerusalem and the West Bank – including the horrific killings of Eitam and Naama Henkin last Thursday and Nehemia Lavi and Aharon Bennett on Saturday – has prompted questions regarding whether Israel is on the brink of a third intifada.

In a series of penetrating analyses over the last week, Haaretz columnists have put the turmoil in its political and military contexts and hazarded guesses about the future. Here are five must-read columns explaining the current unrest and what it means.

The violent events of the past few weeks conform with what the security establishment has long been calling ‘individual terror’ or ‘popular terror’ attacks, writes Anshel Pfeffer. They don’t yet exhibit the generalized intent that characterized the previous two intifadas, but that could change quickly. It could take “just one more death, on either side, for all hell to break loose.”

Amira Hass also believes that the Palestinians are not contemplating a new intifada. The Palestinian security forces are trying hard to improve their reputation and at times have allowed Palestinian youth to approach Israeli soldiers to let off steam – not to escalate the situation.  Fatah, she adds, is too weak to conduct an intifada and there are clear signs that the Palestinian population is not yet ready for another blood-letting.

Chaim Levinson examines the phenomenon of what he calls Israel’s “New Right” – the masses who “want blood in the streets and ‘Death to the Arabs’ in Zion Square.” They sense that Jews are being humiliated on the Temple Mount and have pushed aside the settler pioneers of the right in favour of “an immediate and violent solution.”
“It seems clear that the violence in Jerusalem will continue … [and] we Israelis, like the Palestinians, will have to adapt to it,” writes Nir Hasson, a veteran observer of events in the capital.  The closure of the Old City to Palestinian nonresidents after the stabbings on Saturday, he says, was “disturbing and painful proof to anyone who thinks that Jerusalem is a normal city that it is only an illusion.”

Amos Harel looks at the how Israel’s leadership has handled the unrest, arguing that the steps announced by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – increased forces, more administrative detention and home demolitions – were “old goods that Netanyahu is once again hawking to the public.” The prime minister is hoping that they “will be enough to gradually calm the mood,” he adds, but he faces pressure for more drastic action from his coalition allies and the settlers.

Israeli soldiers stand guard in front of Palestinian stone throwers during clashes in the West Bank town of Bethlehem, October 5, 2015. Photo by AFP

Third Intifada? When the lulls between terror attacks are barely noticeable, we may have to recognize a new reality.

By Anshel Pfeffer
October 05, 2015

“The third intifada” was the headline emblazoned on the front page of Yedioth Ahronoth, the tabloid of middle Israel, on Sunday morning. Newspapers, of course, have to sell papers and a headline doesn’t necessarily define or create reality. But it matters if Israelis, and Palestinians, call the latest round of killings in Jerusalem and the West Bank an intifada.

The extent of current violence doesn’t come close to that which took place in 1987 and 2000, when the previous two intifadas broke out. But regardless of whether that happens over coming days, intifadas aren’t just about mayhem engulfing the occupied territories — they’re also about a shift in the ground rules governing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“Intifada” has come to mean a Palestinian uprising; literally, it means a shaking-off — kind of what a wet dog does.

The first intifada drove home the realization that, after the first two decades of occupation, the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank weren’t going to accept gradual annexation. The second intifada was an attempt by the Palestinians to change the political reality through violence.

Both were very different. The year 1987 and subsequent years saw a popular uprising of stone- and firebomb-throwing, with the various armed organizations playing catch-up to the situation on the ground in the later stages. In the second intifada (2000-2005), it was the armed groups who were in charge nearly from the start with live fire and bombs on buses and in coffee shops.

The third intifada need not follow either pattern, but it would have to engender a fundamental change all the same.

None of the developments of the past few weeks is particularly unique. Even the most violent events – the stoning of a vehicle in East Jerusalem that caused the death of driver Alexander Levlovich during Rosh Hashanah; the death in Hebron two weeks ago of Hadeel al-Hashlamoun, whom the Israel Defence Forces claim was trying to stab a soldier; the drive-by shooting that murdered Naama and Eitam Henkin in the West Bank last Thursday; and Saturday night’s stabbing attack in the Old City of Jerusalem that killed two men — these all conform to what the security establishment has long been calling “individual terror” or “popular terror” attacks. Along with the general rise in violent confrontations, they could have all taken place at any point in recent years.

With the destruction of most of Hamas’ military hierarchies and other armed organizations in the West Bank at the end of the second intifada, and the formalization of security co-operation between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, each spike in violence has been characterized by these “individuals” who are usually acting on their own volition, without a terror cell backing them up. But when the spikes come fast and furious, and so close to each other that the lulls in-between are barely noticeable, perhaps it’s time to acknowledge that the shift has already happened and maybe the third intifada has already been going on for a year or so?

Another characteristic of the next (or current) intifada could certainly be the increasing prevalence of Jewish “price tag” operations, such as the arson attack that murdered three members of the Dawabsheh family in the West Bank village of Duma about two months ago.

The defining event of a possible third intifada should have been the end of the Palestinian Authority, a breakdown of the security coordination and the IDF being forced to go back into the West Bank cities. This would have happened in one of three ways: either Israel would have acted in a way that finally robbed the PA of all semblance of control over the limited area of the West Bank where it held sway; a popular uprising first swept away the Palestinian police before refocusing on the Israeli occupiers; or a frustrated President Mahmoud Abbas would, of his own accord, announce the end of the PA.

But as his “bombshell” speech at the United Nations General Assembly last week seemed to make clear, Abbas isn’t quite ready to relinquish power. And, despite the war of words with the Netanyahu government and accusations of “incitement” at the Al-Aqsa Mosque, he doesn’t want the current arrangement to come to an end. But the spate of attacks indicate that there’s no need for a conscious decision on either side, or for thousands of demonstrators to camp out in Ramallah’s Al-Manara Square, for the PA’s authority to erode to irrelevance.

We may have an answer very soon. Hopefully it will take just a few days of relative calm and we will once again be laying to rest the premature announcement of the third intifada. Or perhaps it will take just one more death, on either side, for all hell to break loose in a cycle of vicious retribution — and then we’ll have to admit it’s been going on for a long time already and we were simply in denial. But it’s still too early to say.

Israeli settlers protest against the escalation of violence by Arabs towards Jews at the Gush Etzion junction on October 2, 2015. The protest came as a response to the deadly terror attack last night, when an Israeli couple, Naama and Eitam Henkin, were shot dead while driving by the West Bank settlement of Itamar. Four of the couple’s six children were in the car at the time, but were unhurt. Photo by Gershon Elinson/Flash90

Palestinians Not Looking for New Intifada

Palestinian security forces allow young people to approach Israeli soldiers not in order to step up the violence, but rather as a way of allowing them to let off steam, hoping to avoid escalation.

By Amira Hass
October 06, 2015

The Palestinian security forces have been making enormous efforts to improve their reputation within Palestinian society. A number of news websites just reported that national security forces stopped Israeli soldiers from arresting a few minors who had thrown rocks at a military position in eastern El Bireh. All Palestinian media outlets publish the phone numbers of the Palestinian security liaison committee, in the event of assaults by or other problems with settlers — the incidence of which indeed increased over the long holiday weekend. And in certain cities, Palestinian security forces stopped forming a barrier between angry young Palestinians and Israel Defense Forces positions, and also stopped using the not-unreasonable excuse that they feared for their lives.

In Bethlehem, where just two weeks ago security cameras captured Palestinian security personnel mercilessly beating young men trying to approach the separation barrier and an adjacent IDF post, they permitted the recent demonstrations — one of which resulted in the shooting death of a minor. In El Bireh, since the UN address by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas last week, the security forces have allowed young Palestinians to vent their anger on the nearby checkpoint of Israel’s District Coordination Offices (part of the Civil Administration) — the VIP crossing point.

Demonstrators gather in the nearby square, approach the checkpoint, burn tyres and throw rocks. The army responds with bullets and tear gas, and the Palestinian officers look on as if to say, “See, we’re not co-operating with the occupation.”

Last Wednesday, the day of Abbas’ UN address, and Friday, the day of his return from the United States, masked gunmen who identified themselves as members of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, raised their rifles and fired fusillades into the air, in frightening proximity to curious bystanders. They must be members of the security forces, said an acquaintance looking on.

The Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, which was founded during the early days of the second intifada by members of Fatah and the Palestinian security forces, no longer really exists. Anyone who could decipher what they were saying over the sound of gunfire heard them praising Abbas and his speech. On Sunday, a Fatah spokesman called on all the Palestinian organizations to rally around Abbas.

PA police are trying to rescue their reputation after incidents when they have attacked protesters. Here in July 2012 they beat demonstrators in Ramallah  protesting against a meeting between President Abbas and Israeli Vice Premier Shaul Mofaz. Photo by  Mohamad Torckman/Reuters

More than any other Palestinian organization, the security forces are still loyal to Abbas and his policy of opposition to both military and popular uprisings. Like him, they still hope to avoid military escalation. They allow young people to approach Israeli army positions not in order to step up the violence, but rather, as a way of allowing them to let off steam, hoping the latest round of violence will peter out. Fatah’s shaky political condition precludes the convention of regular conferences, let alone the conducting of a new intifada — especially without repeating the mistakes of the second intifada.

The Palestinian public seeks something that will shake up the status quo, the routine of the oppression. The events of recent days have affected behaviour: Everything seems quieter; people are less likely to leave their homes without reason — not only in East Jerusalem, but also in the West Bank cities. City streets and West Bank roads are both less crowded, whether due to the new army checkpoints or out of fear of the settlers.

But there are signs that the population is not yet ready for a third intifada: a faculty strike at West Bank universities was held on Monday, as planned, over salary demands; it is expected to continue today and expand next week. By way of comparison, when the second intifada broke out, the teachers union opted to suspend a long-standing wage dispute.

The Palestinian security forces can let young protesters vent, or stop them. But they have no control over the main factor in determining the arc of the recent spate of violence — the IDF, Shin Bet security service and Israel Police. The protests in the West Bank — and not only Jerusalem — in the past few days flared because of the order to temporarily bar Palestinians from the Old City and the killing of Fadi Aloun, of Isawiyah: A video that went viral among Palestinians showed a police officer seemingly acceding to the demands of young ultra-Orthodox Jews and shooting Aloun as he fled from the group, after allegedly stabbing a Jew. That officer, or a different one, continues to shoot at Aloun as he lies on the ground, killing him. To the Palestinians, there is just one message: Their blood is free for the spilling.

In the first days of the second intifada, when the IDF used lethal measures to suppress mass demonstrations, killing many protesters, it only stirred up passions. Young Palestinians pushed their fathers and brothers in the security forces to use their weapons not only against their own people but also against the soldiers. Fatah began competing with Hamas over which organization was better at taking revenge. Fatah lost, of course.

Even though all the heads of the Palestinian security forces are today aware of the destructive results of the second intifada, if Israel persists in its policy of collective punishment and lethal escalation, Palestinian security forces will again face a very difficult moral, personal and professional dilemma. It is reason for them, together with Abbas, to pray for an end to the escalation.