Last spring I had the honor of guest-editing an issue of Off Our Backs Magazine that was devoted to exploring women’s visions for peace. One of the authors in that collection of essays was Israeli peace activist Gila Svirsky. While that essay was written well before the current violence in Gaza began, Svirsky’s analysis of the role of the feminist peace movement is even more important now. The following is reprinted with the kind permission of the author.
On Ending The Israeli Occupation And Getting To Peace With The Palestinians
by Gila Svirsky
Let me begin by telling a story. A few years ago, two busloads of Israeli peace activists—women and men mixed—traveled to a small Palestinian village where two homes had been demolished by the Israeli a
rmy. When we got out of the buses, soldiers blocked our access to the village and demanded that we leave. Instead, we began to walk along the main road toward another entrance, knowing full well that this would also be blocked by the soldiers. Suddenly, one of the women broke away and began to walk across the field directly toward the village. It seemed so simple, and a group of us followed her, spreading out to make it harder for the soldiers to stop us.The soldiers came at us quickly, grabbing us to prevent our progress. I made a quick head count of them and climbed up on a mound of earth to call out, “There are many more of us than soldiers, just walk peacefully, no violence.” Soon the soldiers were running back and forth to stop more of us from going through the field. Although the soldiers were blocking us only with their bodies—twisting arms, pushing, grabbing—I guess it was the rifles slung across their backs that prevented more of the larger group from following us. In the scuffle, seven of us made it past the soldiers and walked the 10 minutes through the fields into the village.
Inside the village, we found the demolished homes and families living in a tent. The father took us on a tour of the ruins of his home. As he was talking, I had a call on my cell phone from someone in the group outside, who told us that, following negotiations with the army, an official delegation of the peace activists who remained behind would be allowed to join us in the village. Within a short time, we saw a group walking toward us along the road.
It was at that moment, as they approached, that we looked around at ourselves and something struck us: The seven of us who had taken the risk, broken through the soldiers, done all the hard work, and reached the village were all women. While the “Official Delegation” coming down the road…were all men.
Does anything ring familiar to you about this story? In Israel, as is often the case in many countries, women may be doing much of the hard work for peace, but they are rarely part of the “official delegation”—they rarely represent the movement publicly. And when the voices of women are heard, it’s often the result of an exhausting struggle.
But there is more to the feminist peace movement in Israel than wanting to be heard. It is what we have to say that is also different. First, let me mention a few of the ten women’s peace organizations in Israel to give you a more concrete idea of what we do:
• There is the Women in Black movement, which has held a dramatic vigil every single Friday for the past 20 years in public locations in Israel—women dressed all in black and standing silently for one hour every week with a sign that carries a simple message: “End the Occupation.”
• Another feminist peace organization in Israel is called New Profile. These women work to end the militarization of Israeli society. They also support and encourage women and men who refuse to do army service in the occupied territories.
• A third, the Bat Shalom organization has worked to build a common political platform for peace with Palestinian women in a partnership called The Jerusalem Link.
• Last, let me mention Machsom-Watch, which means Checkpoint Watch. The women of Machsom-Watch patrol and monitor checkpoints wherever Israeli soldiers block the movement of Palestinians, documenting the brutality and humiliation that take place there daily, bringing this to the attention of the Israeli public and authorities, as well as the international community.
The ten women’s peace organizations work together in a framework called the Coalition of Women for Peace. You can find more details about these activities on their website.
The feminist peace movement is different than the mixed-gender peace movement in a number of ways. First of all, our strategies have been more varied. In addition to vigils and demonstrations, we have engaged in a wide variety of activities. We organize humanitarian aid as a political statement: helping Palestinian families with the olive harvest, providing school supplies and even medicines and infant food during crisis situations. We try to make the occupation visible to Israelis who prefer not to know what is happening by holding street theater, teach-ins, and even bus tours of the occupied territories and separation wall. In order to mobilize local and international public opinion, we run urgent-action email lists, international campaigns and websites in English, Hebrew, Arabic and Russian. We engage in Gandhi-inspired direct action—we once “lay siege” to the Israeli Ministry of Defense, in an effort to get them to understand the cruelty of this tactic. Our siege, of course, didn’t last as long as the terrible siege now choking Gaza. We have blocked bulldozers with our bodies, chained ourselves to olive trees, and confronted soldiers in efforts to prevent further destruction of Palestinian homes and property. Much joint work has also been done with Palestinian women to prevent construction of the separation wall. Some of our actions have ended in arrests or injury. Israeli women have also participated in dialogue groups with Palestinian women, but this has not always been easy or successful. If peace could be won by effort alone, the women’s peace movement would have achieved it long ago. But in the world of chauvinist realpolitik, good intentions are clearly not enough.
The women’s peace movement is also distinctive because it has been more progressive than the mixed-gender peace movement. We took positions that were considered radical well before the mixed groups did. Israeli women signed a peace treaty with Palestinian women long before Rabin and Arafat did it on the White House lawn, and our principles went beyond the general assertion of ending hostilities. Our treaty called for establishment of a Palestinian state side-by-side with the state of Israel, the recognition of Jerusalem as the shared capital of both states and some sort of resolution for the Palestinian refugee problem, though we never managed to articulate a solution on which both sides agreed. But the women’s movement did challenge ourselves to look at this difficult issue and not ignore it, as most people have. We will continue to work to come up with a solution that can be acceptable to both sides.
The feminist peace movement is also distinctive because it has a broad social vision. We view the conflict as integrally related to social, economic and gender issues. Indeed, the conflict with the Palestinians directly affects both gender inequality and oppression of the poor. Why gender inequality? Because in a society at war—where it is predominantly the men who are risking their lives in army service and making military and political decisions—men and their views become valued and privileged over women and our views. This entrenches inequality for women, leaving us at a disadvantage in competing for jobs, political office and social status. A man who has been an officer in the army or served in a combat role or simply given three years of service to the country has an advantage over a woman in applying for a job. And I don’t have to point out all the retired generals who parachuted out of the army directly into senior elected office, including several prime ministers (Rabin, Barak, Sharon).
The conflict also deepens poverty, as Israel sinks vast resources into illegal settlements and the military occupation at the expense of social needs inside Israel—housing, education, health, care for the elderly and other needs. And since women are more likely to find themselves among the poor, they become the first victims of inadequate social services. In general, socioeconomic issues become marginalized in the face of the conflict. Because of this link, the feminist peace movement takes a broader perspective of war and peace, connecting them to social issues, including gender.
This has led us to a new strategy, which we call “Reframing Security.” In this campaign, we try to broaden the understanding of security in Israel so that it will include all aspects of “human security”—a society that cares for its poor, reduces violence, protects its natural resources and coexists in peace with its neighbors. Indeed, this campaign seeks to instill the understanding that “a just peace agreement is the best way to promote security.” In the “Reframing Security” campaign, we invest our best efforts in outreach to populations that do not share our views, engaging them in ways we hope will change their minds. This new strategy also reflects our conviction that we must focus on changing attitudes inside Israel, though it is often easier and more satisfying to be talking to international audiences or Palestinian allies.
Let me mention one more important way that the feminist peace movement is distinctive from the mixed movement: We advocate that women must be equal partners in the negotiations for peace, giving full support to UN Security Council Resolution 1325. Women must become part of the negotiations because this is only fair and just, but also because agreements must reflect the needs of all those affected by them, not just the men. Therefore the input of women is critical. Above all, we note that women are more likely to come up with a decent agreement, one that is considered a win-win situation for both sides. Indeed, it defies logic to choose military men as negotiators—men with portfolios of brutal crimes against each other, generals who have honed the art of war and who measure their success by the unconditional surrender of the other. I believe that any mother would have more experience than most generals in the art of resolving differences amicably.I have tried here to give a sense of how the feminist peace movement has become the most vibrant and interesting part of the peace movement in Israel. And yet despite all this, the Israeli media have virtually ignored our activity. This has been frustrating and infuriating. We are left trying to get our message out primarily by email and websites, but the Israeli public sees us very little. Some of this “ignoring of us” is surely related to how women continue to be silenced or regarded as marginal to the main business of society. It is not surprising that the only major article written about us in the Israeli newspapers was entitled, “The Pariahs.” Although many of our views have reached the mainstream of public opinion, the fact that we are strong and outspoken women does not endear us to a society in which “macho” is the revered standard.
Finally, the vision of the feminist peace movement in Israel is much broader than “separation”—the right of Palestinians to political self-definition and a state. Our movement calls for a deep-seated change of priorities. This means not just ending the Israeli occupation, but shaping a shared future of cooperation. It means opposition to the militarism that permeates both societies, an equal role for women in negotiations for peace and a society that cares more about education, health, art and the poor than it does about maintaining a deadly arsenal. It means a world in which we share our resources, rather than fight about them.
The conflict between Israel and our Arab neighbors has taken a terrible toll in human life and suffering, particularly from the Palestinian people. True courage and fortitude are at the very heart of survival of the Palestinians, struggling to stay alive, to keep their families together, to hold onto their humanity in the face of adversity too terrible to imagine.
But, ultimately, this occupation, like every other in history, will come to an end. The general parameters of that ending are already drawn and in agreement. What we need now is leadership committed to swiftly concluding this era awash in blood, leadership that understands the price we pay in death and destruction for every hour of delay. What we need now is leadership with expertise at reconciliation and rapprochement. What we need now are women.
———-
Gila Svirsky is a veteran peace and human rights activist. She has been a member of Women in Black since its founding 20 years ago and cofounded the Coalition of Women for Peace in 2000, which brings together ten women’s peace organizations and magnifies the feminist voice for peace in Israel. Currently, she serves as chair of B’Tselem, Israel’s foremost human rights organization in the occupied territories.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.