For a long time, I have been thinking about the words by an old wise Chinese man who said that politics is a necessary tool to harvest the fruits of war or a resistance. I was puzzled on how could we practice that on ground. Should politics and armed resistance walk side by side? Or one should follow the other? I’ve always believed in armed resistance, but I’ve also known that politics is needed.
After years of thinking and while standing on the top of one of the Galilee mountains, I finally came to a conclusion. In short, I believe that the armed resistance is meant to force the enemy to recognize the rights of the oppressed. Politics and negotiations role is to achieve the rights, or the maximum possible, after they’re recognized.
Alot of our leaders talked about the relations between both. But they only did that to excuse their hang on to one of them. They never could explain the role of each. In our case, the armed resistance didn’t achieve anything because politics came in too early in our struggle. And politics never achieved anything because the enemy never recognized our rights yet. On the contrary, they still persist and call on expelling the rest of us from our land. We should not be negotiation on our rights. We should negotiate on how to achieve them after they’ve been recognized. Politics is the art of possibilities.
We should not confuse intellectual and cultural struggle with politics. Negotiations and politics are not forms of struggle. They are the fruits of the struggle. They harvest the fruits of our struggle.
We should not also confuse armed resistance and struggle with destruction and random wars. Armed struggle is meant to force the enemy to recognize our rights not to find the excuse to deny them.
The Palestinians must plan their struggle based on right foundations. We should recognize our mistakes and learn lessons from our past and past resistance all over the world.