In the United StatesThe theory of nonviolent resistance in America may have begun with Henry David Thoreau's essay Civil Disobedience. In 1845, Thoreau refused to pay his taxes as a protest against the Mexican-American War. This essay by Thoreau heavily influenced the hippie revolt in the 1960s. The African-American Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s primarily used the tactics of nonviolent resistance, such as bus boycotts, freedom rides, sit-ins and mass demonstrations, in order to abolish racial discrimination against African Americans. This movement had some amazing success in bringing about legislative changes during this time making separate seats and drinking fountains, and schools for African Americans illegal. The success is slowly achieved as the media moves away from the presentation that protesters are troublemakers and begins to portray them as civil-right activists. The Chicano Movement of the 1960s, also called the Chicano Civil Rights Movement, and El Movimiento, is an extension of the Mexican American Civil Rights Movement which began in the 1940s with the stated goal of achieving "social liberation" and Mexican American empowerment. In the 1960s Cesar Chavez organized a campaign of nonviolence to protest the treatment of farms workers in California. These three leaders proved that people can bring about social change without using violence. As Chavez once explained, "Nonviolence is not inaction. It is not for the timid or the weak. It is hard work, It is the patience to win." 2 In segregated South AfricaThe ANC and allied anti-apartheid groups initially carried out non-violent resistance against pro-segregation and apartheid governments in South Africa, see Defiance Campaign. However, events such as the Sharpeville massacre (21 March 1960) led ANC activists like Nelson Mandela to believe in the necessity of violent (or armed) resistance. Mandela founded Umkhonto we Sizwe (the Spear of the Nation). It initially carried out acts of sabotage but later expanded to guerrilla warfare against the South African security forces, including the use of car bombs. The Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) and other groups carried out violent acts against the government. The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission accused all anti-apartheid groups of killing civilians in violent acts. The PAC's armed wing faced accusations of deliberately killing white civilians and blacks who co-operated with the government. The apartheid government regarded all violent acts by anti-apartheid groups as acts of terrorism.
In Israel and the Palestinian TerritoriesPalestinian groups have worked with Israelis and foreign citizens to organize civilian monitors of Israel military activity in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Peace camps and strategic non-violent resistance to Israeli construction of settlements and of the West Bank Barrier have also been consistently adopted as tactics by Palestinians. Citizens of the Palestinian village of Beit Sahour also engaged in a tax strike during the First Intifada. The first instances of non-violent resistance occurred in the British Mandate period
However, as indicated above, the failure of this peaceful movement led to the adoption of more violent tactics.
The Bil'in MovementBil'in is located 4 kilometers east of the Green Line, near the Israeli West Bank separation barrier. The barrier separates the village from 60 percent of its farming land. A new neighborhood of Modi'in Illit, an Israeli settlement inside the green line, is being constructed on part of this land.4 The settlements around Bil'in are said to be funded by Israeli businessmen Lev Leviev and Shaya Boymelgreen who are thereby promoting their political and economic interests. 5. Since January 2005, the village has been organizing weekly protests against the construction of the barrier. The protests have attracted media attention and the participation of left-wing groups such as Gush Shalom, Anarchists Against the Wall, Ta'ayush and the International Solidarity Movement. The protests take the form of marches from the village to the site the barrier with the aim of halting construction and dismantling already constructed portions. The protests often end in stone-throwing and rioting in which both protesters and soldiers have been injured.6 In July 2005, activists entered a metal box placed on the route of the barrier, halting its construction for a short time. Serious clashes between protesters and Israeli forces took place in September 2005 and March 2006. Solidarity conferences were held in the village in February 2006 and April 2007. 7 Nobel Peace laureate Mairead Corrigan, who won the prize in 1976 for her work in the Northern Ireland dispute, was hit in the leg by a rubber coated steel bullet and reportedly inhaled large quantities of teargas.8 The "Barrier" that Israel is presently constructing within the Palestinian territory was held by the International court to be contrary to international law by the International Court of Justice on 9 July 2004. The International Court held that Israel is under an obligation to discontinue building the Wall and to dismantle it forthwith. In its Advisory Opinion, the Court dismissed a number of legal arguments raised by Israel relating to the applicability of humanitarian law and human rights law. In particular the International court held that Israeli settlements were unlawful.9 A week before the International Court of Justice gave its Advisory Opinion, the High Court of Israel gave a ruling on a 40-kilometre strip of the Wall in which it held that, while Israel as the Occupying Power had the right to construct the Wall to ensure security and that substantial sections of the Wall imposed undue hardships on Palestinians and had to be re-routed. From the "The Beit Sourik Case (HCJ 2056/04)" of 30 June 2004 the standards of proportionality between Israeli security and the injury to the Palestinian residents was set by the judgment of the Supreme Court of Israel. The Israeli Government then announced that it will not comply with the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice. The Israeli Government has indicated that it will abide by the ruling of its own High Court in respect of sections of the Wall still to be built but not in respect of completed sections of the Wall.10 On September 4, 2007, the Israeli Supreme Court ordered the government to redraw the path of the wall because the current route was deemed "highly prejudicial" to the villagers 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 Bilin’s lands." The case was filed two years ago by the local council leader of Bilin, Ahmed Issa Abdullah Yassin, who hired Israeli human rights lawyer Michael Sfard to argue the case. The Israeli Defence Ministry says it will respect the ruling. 11 On September 5, 2007, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled to legalize the Israeli settlement of Mattiyahu East, built on a disputed portion of Bil'in's land to the west of the wall,12. The village of Bil'in has vowed to continue its nonviolent resistance against the wall and settlements on its land, and offered support to other villages facing similar problems. 13 On June 6, 2008, European Parliament vice-president Luisa Morgantini was injured at a protest in Bil'in. 14 In Israel, protesters against Israel's unilateral disengagement plan of 2004 used nonviolent resistance against the impending evacuation of Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip and some settlements in the West Bank. On May 16, 2005, protesters blocked many traffic intersections at 5:00pm, leading to massive traffic jams and delays throughout the country. Although the police had received advance notification of the action, they had much difficulty in opening the intersections to vehicles, eventually arresting over 400 protesters, many of them juveniles. Organizers of the protests regarded this deed only as an opening volley, with the large protests planned to begin when the Israeli authorities cut off entry into the Gaza Strip in preparation of the disengagement. In the event, large-scale civil disobedience did not occur in Israel proper, although some settlers and their supporters resisted the evacuation non-violently.
In Denmark during World War IIWhen the Wehrmacht invaded Denmark in 1940, the Danes soon saw that military confrontation would change little except the number of surviving Danes. The Danish government therefore adopted a policy of official co-operation (and unofficial obstruction) which they called "negotiation under protest." On the industrial front, Danish workers subtly slowed all production that might feed the German war machine, sometimes to a perfect standstill. On the cultural front, Danes engaged in symbolic defiance by organizing mass celebrations of their own history and traditions. On the legislative front, the Danish government insisted that since they officially co-operated with Germany, they had an ally's right to negotiate with Germany, and then proceeded to create bureaucratic quagmires which stalled or blocked German orders without having to refuse them outright. Danish authorities also proved conveniently inept at controlling the underground Danish resistance press, which at one point reached circulation numbers equivalent to the entire adult population. The Danish government also gave room (and even secret assistance) to underground groups involved in sabotage of machinery and railway lines needed to extract Danish resources or to supply the Wehrmacht. Some may argue that the classification of this kind of resistance as "nonviolent" remains debatable, but there is a strong case also to be made for the theory that it is nonviolent to save life by destroying inanimate material that is itself about to be used to destroy human life.15 Even after the official dissolution of their government, the Danes managed to block German goals without resorting to bloodshed. Underground groups smuggled over 7000 of Denmark's 8000 Jews temporarily into Sweden, at great personal risk. Workers (and even entire cities like Copenhagen) went on mass strikes, refusing to work for the occupier's benefit on the occupier's terms. After an initial response of greatly increased repression, the war-distracted Germans abandoned strike-breaking efforts in exasperation. The Danish resistance against the Nazis proved highly effective16, but it raises characteristic questions about the efficacy of nonviolence. The Danes clearly lost very few lives, while annoying and draining their foreign occupiers. But some people wonder whether the Danish strategy might not have failed abysmally if applied in other countries occupied by Germany and where German forces ruled through naked terror. It almost certainly would have proved a more painful strategy for Denmark in such a circumstance (as in the case of the successful but agonizing nonviolent resistance to apartheid in South Africa), but as in the case of the Gandhian solution of perfect global surrender to the Nazis followed by perfect global non-cooperation with them, many questions of efficacy remain in the realm of the hypothetical. And due to the decentralized and various nature of nonviolent advocacy, questions about possible compatibility with violent resistance, or even about precise definitions of "nonviolent tactics" have no categorical answers. In Germany during World War IIEven in Berlin, capital of the Third Reich, Nonviolent Resistance was effectively used to save Jewish lives. In 1943, Frau Israel and other non-Jewish ("Aryan") women protested against the deportation of their Jewish husbands to Auschwitz. The women were in real danger of being massacred themselves. At one point, the SS set up machine guns on Rose Street where the protest was held. In the end, however, the deportations were halted, and some men came back from Auschwitz with their numbers tattooed on their arms. The Nazis planned to exterminate both the Jewish men and their non-Jewish wives after the end of the War, but this was prevented by the victory of the Allies. The White Rose student group, including Sophie Scholl, distributed leaflets encouraging Germans to stop Hitler. The Confessional Church (Bekennende Kirche) was a Christian resistance movement in Nazi Germany. In Norway during World War IINorway's teachers, in spite of great suffering, successfully prevented the Nazification of Norway's educational system and society attempted by collaborationist leader Vidkun Quisling. The farmers of Larzac (France)In 1971, the French government announced their intention to extend the military camp on the Larzac plateau, an arid area in southern France where they claimed that "almost nobody lived". Local farmers strongly disagreed with this assessment and, inspired by the example of Lanza del Vasto (a philosopher and follower of Mahatma Gandhi who had gone on hunger strike for two weeks in their support), they embarked on a campaign of non-violent resistance. In 1972 the farmers' struggle attracted worldwide media coverage when they brought 60 sheep to graze on the lawn under the Eiffel Tower in Paris. The issue became a famous cause among many groups, from ecologists to conscientious objectors, and in 1973 100,000 people attended a demonstration in Paris in support of the farmers of Larzac. The fight lasted until 1981, when the newly-elected socialist French President François Mitterrand abandoned the project. see also: José Bové Against nuclear weaponsAmong the most dedicated to nonviolent resistance against the U.S. arsenal of nuclear weapons has been the Plowshares Movement, consisting largely of Catholic priests, such as Dan Berrigan, and nuns. Since the first Plowshares action in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania during the autumn of 1980, more than 70 of these actions have taken place. A film was made about the first plowshares action17. Many of these actions were in the U.S., but several took place in other nations. Typically they involve symbolically damaging weapons of mass destruction, thereby following the biblical mandate to "turn swords into plowshares."
In the Pacific
In the Middle-EastIn India-occupied KashmirIn ChinaThe Mohist philosophical school disapproved war. However, since they lived in a time of warring polities, they cultivated the science of fortification. During the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, an unknown man was famously photographed putting himself in the way of a column of tanks. In CzechoslovakiaIn the 1968 Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, the Czechoslovakian citizens responded to the attack on their sovereignty with passive resistance. Russian troops were frustrated as street signs were painted over, their water supplies mysteriously shut off, and buildings decorated with flowers, flags, and slogans like, "An elephant cannot swallow a hedgehog." In IrelandDuring the Irish War of Independence, 1919-1921 and the recent Troubles in Northern Ireland, nationalists used many non-violent means to resist British rule. Amongst these was abstention from the British parliament, setting up a local government, tax boycotts, setting up a local court system and a local police force. However, the efficacy of these acts is unknown since they occurred in tandem with violent resistance. In SingaporeSee also
Publications
References
External links
| |