Third-party Nonviolent Intervention and Peace …1065879/...what third part nonviolent initiatives...
Transcript of Third-party Nonviolent Intervention and Peace …1065879/...what third part nonviolent initiatives...
Third-party Nonviolent Intervention and
Peace-building:
The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme
in Palestine and Israel
This thesis is submitted for obtaining the Master’s Degree in International Humanitarian Action.
By submitting the thesis, the author certifies that the text is from his/her hand, does not include the
work of someone else unless clearly indicated, and that the thesis has been produced in accordance
with proper academic practices.
Joint Master‟s Programme in International Humanitarian Action
NOHA Master Thesis – 30 ECTS
Author: Karolina Göranzon
Date of submission: 6th
December 2016
Supervisor: Brian Palmer, Uppsala University
1
Abstract
This thesis explores the role of third-party nonviolent interventions as a supportive mechanism in
relation to local peace-building initiatives. A framework on violence, conflict, peace, nonviolence
and intervention is outlined in the theoretical chapters, to provide a basis for discussing the
empirical findings of the research. Through the strategy of a case study and with a mixed-method
approach of participant observations and interviews, perspectives from the context of the situation
in Palestine and Israel were gathered. Five key informant interviews with former participants of
third-party nonviolent interventions programmes were conducted, and during ethnographic
fieldwork in Palestine and Israel, four local peace-building initiatives were studied.
The findings are discussed in relation to the theoretical framework and the conclusions drawn from
the discussion is that while third-party nonviolent interventions can contribute to local peace-
building, it is mainly through decreasing the risk of escalation of violence in certain situations,
sharing information and by supporting local peace-building initiatives. In order to be effective in
this area, it is crucial that the third-party nonviolent interventions are perceptive of the local context,
and reflect on the role that they play.
2
Acknowledgments
I would like to direct my heartfelt gratitude to my key informants for sharing their time and
experiences with me in the process of this research. I am deeply grateful for the opportunity granted
to me by SweFOR to participate in the training of trainers in nonviolence, providing me with
invaluable insights into the workings of nonviolence.
I would like to thank my supervisor, Brian Palmer, for his guidance and feedback throughout the
process. To my family, friends and co-workers: your support and encouragement has been a key
motivation for me while working on this thesis.
Finally I would like to acknowledge all those who are tirelessly working for peace in different
ways, some of which I have met while conducting the research for this thesis. You are an
inspiration.
3
Acronyms
EAPPI Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel
SEAPPI Swedish Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel
EA Ecumenical Accompanier
WCC World Council of Churches
PBI Peace Brigades International
CPT Christian Peacemaker Teams
ISM International Solidarity Movement
SweFOR Swedish Fellowship of Reconciliation
ICAHD Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
UN United Nations
UNOCHA UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
AU African Union
IDF Israeli Defence Force
PLO Palestine Liberation Organisation
BDS Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
4
Table of contents
Abstract 1
Acknowledgments 2
Acronyms 3
1 Introduction 5
1.1 Research problem, relevance to the field of humanitarian action and previous research 5
1.2 Research question 6
1.2.1 Sub questions 6
1.3 Research design 6
1.3.1 Strategy, approach, methods and limitations 6
1.3.2 Disposition 9
1.4 Ethical considerations 10
2 Deterrence 11
2.1 Violence and conflict 11
2.2 Peace and nonviolence 14
3 Protection 18
3.1 Intervention mechanisms 18
3.2 Third-party nonviolent initiatives 20
4 Acceptance 24
4.1 Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel 25
4.2 Local initiatives 34
4.3 Excursus 38
5 Discussion 41
6 Conclusions 44
7 List of References 46
Appendices 52
5
1 Introduction
1.1 Research problem, relevance to the field of humanitarian action and previous research
Humanitarian interventions can be defined as:
any coercive action up to and including the use of force, with the alleged purpose of
preventing or putting to halt gross and massive violations of human rights, with or
without the consent of the receiving state as well as with or without the authorization of
the UN Security Council. (Krieg, 2013: 9).
With the inclusion of the use of force, this definition echoes the human tendency to use force as a
means to solve conflict, since this is generally assumed to be the most effective path (Stephan and
Chenoweth, 2008: 7). In the context of humanitarian interventions, I have always found this a
strange assumption, and even more so when it comes to peace-building. This thesis will explore
third-party nonviolent interventions potential as an alternative mechanism to support peace-building
in conflict settings. I have chosen to do so through the strategy of a case study, focusing primarily
on the international initiative the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel
(EAPPI), as well as by looking at different local peace-building initiatives in Palestine and Israel1.
Peace-building and humanitarian action has been linked in previous research; here I would like to
mention a master thesis by Gabriele François Casini, attendant of the NOHA Master's Programme.
Casini (2012: 6) writes that:
getting a better understanding of peacebuilding organizations and their work can provide
humanitarian actors with useful insights on how to link and complement their respective
efforts, thus contributing to implement more sustainable and effective strategies.
I agree with Casini on this issue. I also believe that nonviolence adopted as both an approach
and method can contribute much to humanitarian assistance and peace-building. Nonetheless,
violence tends to be in forefront of research (Chenoweth and Gallagher Cunningham, 2013)
(Galtung, 2009). This thesis will hopefully present a piece of the puzzle on the issue of
nonviolence and peace-building.
EAPPI has been the topic of previous theses. Emmy Sartell (2014) studied the impartiality and
neutrality of the programme in her bachelor thesis, and Louise Albansson (2005) conducted an
evaluation and reflection of the programme in her bachelor thesis. However, these research
1 I have chosen to write ‟Palestine and Israel‟ since that is the order of the names in the title of the main third-party
nonviolent intervention – EAPPPI – studied in this research project.
6
projects do not cover the same research question as this thesis.
1.2 Research question
The objective of this thesis is to explore the practise of third-party nonviolent intervention, and its
potential as a tool to enable local peace-building. My primary research question is:
In the setting of Palestine and Israel, can third-party nonviolent initiatives such as the
Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI) contribute to
peace-building locally, and if yes, how?
1.2.1 Sub-questions
Through my ethnographic fieldwork in Palestine and Israel in April 2015 when I met with local
peace-building organisations, as well as through interviews conducted during 2015 and 2016, I have
investigated the following sub-questions:
Do the conditions for local peace-building in Palestine and Israel influence third-party
nonviolent intervention, and if yes, how?
How are third-party nonviolent interventions regarded by programme-participants
themselves, as well as by people in the local context?
While the focus of this thesis is the role of the international initiatives, these sub-questions will
provide a crucial connection with local peace-building initiatives.
1.3 Research design
1.3.1 Strategy, approach, methods and limitations
The first step of my thesis involved a literature review covering aspects of peacebuilding and
nonviolence. Based on literature from peace studies and nonviolence, a conceptual framework on
what third part nonviolent initiatives was created.
In the concluding chapter of Civil Resistance and Power Politics – The experience of Non-violent
Action from Gandhi to the Present (2009), Garton Ash reflects on the lack of research on the issue
of international support to local peace initiatives. He pinpoints the difficulty in gathering data, for
7
example due to the numerous initiatives that exist, but he also emphasises the critique that all
international interventions receive to some degree, be they military, aid or nonviolent. The critique
is that of Western neo-colonialism – by supporting or standing on the side of a specific movement
that has chosen nonviolent means of resistance, the international community can be accused of
subversive activity in internal state affairs, promoting a specific method, approach or solution.
Although the challenge formulated by Garton Ash opens up the path to choose a postcolonial
perspective when writing my thesis, I instead opted out of this path. Instead, I decided to use a
multidisciplinary theoretical framework to avoid a dilemma described in Postcolonial Theory and
the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Steinberg (2009) contributes with a chapter to the book where he
examines the relationship between peace studies and post-colonialism. Due to peace studies having
evolved in a period dominated by politicisation, it has been especially influenced by post-
colonialism. Steinberg (2009: 118) even goes so far as to state that:
the distorting impact of postcolonial ideology on peace studies is clearly a contributing
factor in the record of failures in this field. This ideology has replaces research with
systematic biases that select favoured 'victims' and rejected 'oppressors', and empirical
methodology based on testable hypotheses with political formulae and incantations.
In the same volume, Lewis describes how anthropology is a field that has also been influenced by
postcolonialism, but in a different way. Postcolonialism leads to a critique of the field of
anthropology, as complicit to colonialism. This critique has been internalised by many
anthropologists today, leading, according to the author, to the politicisation of anthropology.
Not choosing postcolonialism as the approach in this thesis was not a critique of the theory in itself,
but rather posed a challenge to navigate the perceived postcolonial tendencies of peace studies and
anthropology. Adding nonviolence theory as a perspective is a way to do this. By combining
perspectives from peace studies and nonviolence, and by being reflexive throughout the research I
hope to minimise bias as much as possible. Harvey (2011: 238) writes that “the best examples of
publications arising from fieldwork make the researcher's presence, participation, experience and
reflexive processes visible”. Davies (2008: 4) defines reflexivity in the following way:
Reflexivity, broadly defined, means a turning back on oneself, a process of self-
reference. In the context of social research, reflexivity at its most immediately obvious
level refers to the ways in which the products of research are affected by the personnel
and process of doing research.
8
Research is conducted by a researcher, and that researcher brings her/his person into the research. In
order to meet the criteria of reliability, the researcher must therefore continuously reflect on how
she/he influences the research, and make that clear to the reader. (Michrina and Richards, 1996).
There are two main theories that lay the foundation for this thesis: Johan Galtung's work on peace
and conflict on the one hand, and Gene Sharps work on nonviolence on the other. Both Galtung and
Sharp have been active in these topics for a considerable amount of time, providing strength to their
theories. I have also researched other voices on the topic, through books, journal articles, as well as
websites for organisations.
My empirical material has been gathered by means of ethnographic fieldwork and the use of a
mixed-methods approach. Mixed-methods approach was chosen as a way of triangulation in order
to strengthen the reliability, validity and generalisability of the research. (Denscombe, 2016).
Ethnographic fieldwork was chosen since it generates detailed data, enables reflexivity and paves
the way for presenting both the view of the actors in the field, as well as providing multiple
perspectives. (Denscombe, 2016). Davies (2008) discusses the validity of ethnographic fieldwork in
her book Reflexive Ethnography: A Guide Researching Self and Others. She writes that
ethnographic fieldwork is commonly criticised in this area, but counters the arguments by stating
that “ethnographers in the field employ a wide range of methods from surveys to observation to
interviews”, and that “it is generally argued that validity is more likely if a variety of methods are
used” (2008: 96). There is also an added value to ethnographic fieldwork captured in an interview
with Don Kulick, where he describes that as an anthropologist, sometimes the most interesting
findings can be what you hear in the periphery, without asking a direct question (Svensson, 2015).
As a participant of a training of trainers in nonviolence organised by the Swedish Fellowship of
Reconciliation, I spent 10 days in Palestine and Israel where I met several local peace initiatives.
The main aim of the 10 days was to gather narratives from people engaged in local peace initiatives
on their perception of the space for peace-building, as well as how they experience international
preventative presence. The method I employed here was participant observation since the
organisations that we were scheduled to meet with were part of the training. Bernard (2002: 327)
explains that as participant observers, researchers: “can be outsiders who participate in some aspect
of life around them and record what they can”. During my stay in Palestine and Israel I
continuously wrote field notes, to record my observations
As part of the ethnographic fieldwork, I have conducted key interviews with individuals who have
9
been active in some kind of third-party nonviolent intervention/preventative presence. Bernard
(2002: 188) describes good key informants as: “people to whom you can talk easily, who
understand the information you need, and who are glad to give it to you or get it for you”. Sine I am
adopting a mixed-methods approach, I have chosen to use key informants to increase the
effectiveness of the interviews. The sampling technique I have used was judgment sampling or
critical case sampling. Bernard (2002: 183) writes that this kind of sampling is common when
choosing key informants in ethnographic fieldwork, since “it would be pointless to select a handful
of people randomly from a population and try to turn them into trusted key informants”. I used a
cumulative approach to sampling since this thesis is a small-scale project and because the purpose
of the sampling is explorative, meaning that the purpose of the sampling is not precision as in the
representative approach, but rather in-depth information. (Denscombe, 2016).
In total I conducted five key informant interviews. The interviews were semi-structured; I prepared
questions and topics (see Appendix 1) to cover during the interviews, but I stayed open to topics
and questions that arose during the interview discussions. The interviews were recorded, with the
permission of the informants and their consent to the interview explicitly given in the beginning of
the recording, and parts of them have been transcribed. As my informants are Swedish, the
interviews were conducted in Swedish.
The strategy for presenting the empirical data in this thesis is in the form of a case study. Case
studies are especially designed with the purpose of highlighting the general by looking at the
specific (Denscombe, 2016). The case study strategy is often criticised for the limited
generalisability of its findings, as well as being more suitable as a strategy to describe a situation
rather than analysing it. However, a case study is especially relevant when it comes to small-scale
research projects since it focuses the research to one field, and encourages the use of more than one
research method. (Denscombe, 2016). This is one of the main reasons why I chose this strategy. The
critiques of the strategy are compensated by combining the strategy with a mixed-method approach,
as well as by analysing the findings in relation to the theoretical framework presented.
The design of the case study is single-case, with the case being the situation in Palestine and Israel,
which will be presented briefly in the third chapter. The reason for this is that the local narratives in
my empirical data are from this specific context. The case study will be the basis of my discussion,
but since I have gathered material from contexts other than the situation in Palestine and Israel, and
that is relevant to the thesis topic and research questions, I have chosen to present this material as
well, in an excursus. The material gathered, both primary and secondary, will be and discussed
10
through mainly empirical analysis in relation to the theories presented in the first two chapters of
the thesis.
1.3.2 Disposition
This thesis has five main chapters: an introduction, two theoretical chapters, one empirical chapter
and one analytical chapter. The introduction sets the scene for the thesis. The first theoretical
chapter, Deterrence, presents the main theories that serve as the approach for this thesis. The second
theoretical chapter, Protection, presents different mechanisms for international intervention in
conflict settings, proceeding with the United Nation's (UN) mechanisms and concluding with the
concept of third-party nonviolent intervention. The empirical chapter, Acceptance, presents the case
study and the findings of the ethnographic fieldwork. In the discussion chapter, these findings are
discussed in relation to the theories and mechanisms presented in the two theoretical chapters.
Following the discussion chapter, the conclusion summarises the research findings and possible
answers the research questions presented above.
The names of the three middle-chapters correlate to the traditional approaches to security within
humanitarian interventions. (Brooks, 2015).
1.4 Ethical considerations
Denscombe (2016) writes that one of the challenges of ethnographic fieldwork is that it is a method
that it can lead to ethical dilemmas when it comes to the notion of informed consent more
frequently than other methods do. As mentioned above I attained and recorded the consent of my
key informants prior to conducting the interviews. On the first training occasion I asked for some
time to explain my research and let everyone know that if they did not want to be part of my
research, they could tell me. I repeated this at later stages as well. The response from the group was
enthusiastic and supportive. When it comes to the participant observation aspect of my research,
namely the meetings with the local peace-building initiatives, I talked to the representatives after
the sessions to explain my research and receive their oral consent, which was granted.
11
2 Deterrence
2.1 Violence and conflict
Johan Galtung (1969) emphasises that in order to understand peace, we have to understand violence.
I struggled with this notion at first, since I agree with several authors that peace studies tend to
focus on violence and conflict, rather than nonviolence and peace. (Chenoweth and Gallagher
Cunningham, 2013; Johansen, 2009; Mayton II, 2009). However, I decided to include a brief
section on violence and conflict, since Galtung is one of my main sources and outlining a
theoretical approach on violence and conflict is one of the steps in the discussion of the situation in
Palestine and Israel.
Violence
Eisner (2009) argues that a general theory of violence is challenging, since there are so many
dimensions of violence that relates to different local contexts – and that in order to combat violence
one needs to be aware of all these dimensions and local contexts. Instead, Eisner (2009) looks for a
meta-theory of violence that would serve four purposes. First, a meta-theory of violence should be
able to see patterns between different kinds of violence and what causes these manifestations.
Second, it would show that some kinds of violence occur in different contexts and would set out to
discover if the causes are similar. Thirdly, it would have to be an interdisciplinary theory, combing
theoretical perspectives from biology, psychology and sociology. Lastly, a meta-theory of violence
would set out to see if effective methods for preventing violence share common principles.
Eisner (2009: 42) defines violence as 'intentional but unwanted infliction of physical harm on other
humans', and although this definition is limited, he makes some interesting observations. As a step
to outlining a meta-theoretical framework of violence, he commences by discussing violence as a
means to achieve a goal, i.e. violence as an instrument, and that this is an idea that is supported
across different disciplines.
Galtung's (1969) definition of violence is much broader than Eisner's, and not just limited to the
physical form. Galtung's definition outlines six different distinctions to violence. The first one is
between physical and psychological violence. The most common is the perception that violence is
something that can be seen, i.e. something physical, but Galtung also highlights that violence that
cannot be seen, i.e. psychological violence, and is violence nonetheless. The second distinction that
Galtung makes is whether the approach to influence is positive or negative. By this he means to
12
draw attention to whether violence is administered by imposing an action on someone (negative), or
by reducing the effect of an already on-going act of violence (positive). While the positive violence
is a reduction of violence to a certain extent, it is still a kind of power-play, through which the
violence is hidden, similar to the way in which psychological violence can be hidden. The third
distinction relates to the object of violence, i.e. whether or not an act of violence has to result in
harm. Threat of violence is covered within this distinction, as is destruction of inanimate objects.
(Galtung, 1969).
The fourth distinction relates to the subject – the actor who performs violence. This distinction
encompasses the very important definition of personal/direct and structural/indirect violence. The
category of personal/direct violence is comprised of all types of violent acts where the subject is a
person/s. Within the category of structural/indirect violence we find the types of violence that exist
without a physical person(s) inflicting them. The relationship between personal and structural
violence is often interlinked – structural violence can be maintained by personal violence, whereas
personal violence can erupt due to structural violence. The fifth distinction outlines the differences
between intended and unintended violence. When it comes to consequences of violence, focus is
usually placed on intended violence, but this allows the consequences of unintended violence to,
potentially, be overlooked. Structural violence can fall into the category of unintended violence, and
if attention is not brought to the fifth distinction, the consequences of structural violence might be
overlooked. The sixth and last distinction that Galtung makes is between manifest and latent
violence, where manifest violence is observable and on-going, whereas latent refers to violence that
might easily erupt but is currently not present.
Though there are more distinctions that can be made, the aforementioned are the main ones
identified by Galtung, with an addition made later that Galtung (1990) connects to the fourth
distinction of direct or structural violence. This addition is cultural violence, (Galtung, 1990) and it
is the last distinction I will mention here. Cultural violence refers to those phenomenon or facets of
cultures that may validate the use of any kind of violence. “Cultural violence makes direct and
structural violence look, even feel, right – or at least not wrong.” (Galtung, 1990: 291). Examples of
cultural violence can be certain kinds of ideologies, religions, art – even languages. Galtung
explains the inter-play between direct, structural and cultural violence as a triangle (see Appendix
2). By outlining these distinctions, and in reference to that on principle of “peace is absence of
violence” (Galtung, 1969: 167), Galtung argues that peace should be structured in the same way as
violence.
13
Böhm and Kaplan (2011) connect violence to the psychological notion of revenge, a phenomena
that is present in many conflicts around the world. Perceived reasons behind revenge can legitimise
violence in a similar fashion to how Galtung explains that cultural violence can legitimise direct and
structural violence. The authors illustrate that the urge of revenge leads the person into a spiral of
revenge that is necessary, but not easy, to end. The revenge spiral also creates interplay between
people's identity as victim and perpetrator, where the urge of revenge lead to victims becoming
perpetrators of violence. Böhm and Kaplan (2011) also illustrate how revenge and violent outlets
for revenge manifests on a societal level, facilitated by group identification, de-humanisation of the
other and shared experiences of violence in the past.
Conflict
Galtung (1996; 2010) defines conflict as a situation where the goals of the actors involved are
incompatible. This contradiction can lead to the occurrence of behaviours (violent behaviours or
behaviours not involving violence), as well as be influenced by people‟s emotions and assumptions
(attitudes). Galtung (1996: 72) presents Contradiction, Behaviour and Attitude/Assumptions in the
form of a triangle (see Appendix 2) that together illustrates a situation of conflict. The three
different corners of the conflict triangle and the violence triangle relate to each other so that
Behaviour corresponds to Direct Violence, Attitude/Assumptions correspond to Cultural Violence,
and Contradiction corresponds to Structural Violence. (Galtung, 2010). Behaviour is usually
manifest and conscious, whether both attitudes/assumptions and contradictions can be either latent
and unconscious, or manifest and conscious. Galtung also points out that a conflict featuring these
dimensions can either be violent or it can be a constructive conflict. If a conflict manifests itself in a
violent formation in either of the dimensions or in all of them, Galtung argues that they can be
transformed in order to achieve a constructive conflict. (Galtung, 1996).
In a conflict formation, the disharmonious aspect of the formation is dominant. But in
no way should that make us blind to the cooperative, harmonious aspects that may very
well be the basis on which conflict transformation can build. (Galtung, 1996: 80).
Åkerlund (2001) also reiterates that conflicts do not have to be violent, and that they can be handled
differently. If any of the actors to a conflict do resort to violence, this immediately changes the
direction of that conflict, making all parties involved more prone to use violence. This creates as
spiral not unlike that of Böhm and Kaplan's (2011) revenge spiral described above. What is more,
when war has broken out due to one or all of the actors of a conflict resorting to violence, all parts
14
of the communities are usually urged to be a part of the war. (Åkerlund, 2001).
2.2 Peace and nonviolence
A lot more could be written about violence and conflict, but the purpose of the previous section was
to illustrate that even though violence is an instrument used to solve conflict it has various
dimensions that need to be understood in order to discuss peace. Sponsel (1994) reiterates Galtung‟s
notion that in order to study peace one first has to understand the different aspects of violence, but
Sponsel (1994) also notes that:
While this work is certainly very important, it is insufficient: nonviolence, peace and related
phenomena also deserve serious systematic attention, as research and teaching foci,
following the positive concept of peace. Nonviolent and peaceful societies appear to be rare
– not because they are, in fact, rare, but because nonviolence and peace are so rarely
considered in research, the media, and other arenas. (Sponsel, 1994: 18).
Therefore, the following section will focus on peace and nonviolence, with the emphasis on
nonviolence.
Peace
The concept of peace brings us back to where we left off with Galtung (1969). The distinctions
outlined in the previous chapter constitute the basis for Galtung's definition of peace, which is
divided into two parts. The first part of the definition is negative peace, which is the absence of
personal/direct violence, and the second part of the definition is positive peace, which is the absence
of structural/indirect violence (1969: 183). Galtung (1969) argues that peace research needs to focus
on both negative and positive peace. Sponsel (1994) describes the two dimensions further by giving
the example that negative peace has a focus on security, stability and order, whereas positive peace
has a focus on freedom, equality and social and economic justice.
The above definition of peace by Galtung is violence-oriented. Galtung (1996: 9) also adds a second,
conflict-oriented definition of peace: ”peace is nonviolent and creative conflict transformation”.
This dimension of peace corresponds close to Galtung's conflict triangle discussed above. In order
for a violent conflict to become a peaceful conflict, or a nonviolent conflict, there needs to be focus
on transforming both the behaviours (direct violence), attitudes (cultural violence) and
15
contradictions (structural violence). Åkerlund (2001) discusses various ways in which attitudes,
contradictions and behaviours can be transformed and finds that nonviolence as a method is
effective when it comes to influencing behaviours.
Nonviolence
Johansen (2009) introduces nonviolence as a word that is commonly used to specify certain issues,
and is therefore often connected to another word, such as action, communication etc. Nonviolence
is elusive to define, but in this thesis I am inclined to adopt Stellan Vinthagen's (2016) definition.
According to classical nonviolence research, nonviolence is defined as actions that are undertaken
without violence or by refusing to do certain actions of violence. Vinthagen (2016) expresses that
this is an incomplete definition, since nonviolence is more than an action without violence and that
everything that is done without violence is not nonviolence. Instead, Vinthagen (2016) proposes a
definition of nonviolence that has two dimensions: without violence and against violence. The
nonviolent act is a combination of utilising both elements at the same time. Research on
nonviolence needs to be undertaken in a way that describes both the possibilities and limitations of
the method. When descriptions and followers become too dogmatic, it creates one of the largest
obstacles for a wider discovery of nonviolence. (Vinthagen, 2016).
Historically, two dimensions of nonviolence can be found, pacifist nonviolence and pragmatic
nonviolence. (Johansen, 2009). The two dimensions are not mutually exclusive, but are often used
at the same time and overlap in various ways. Pacifist nonviolence is a somewhat misleading term.
Traditionally, this kind of nonviolence can be found in religious movements, where violence is
viewed as something that is wrong and sinful, and prohibited by the religion itself. Pacifist
nonviolence is characterised by the notion that using violence can never be justified, not even if the
reason behind using violence, or the purpose of it, is viewed as good or desirable. The reason why
referring to this dimension of nonviolence as pacifist is misleading, is because it implies passivity.
Many religious traditions (along with the teaching of Mahatma Gandhi, who is categorised as part
of the pacifist tradition) in fact distance themselves from passivity, indicating that it is a form of
violence not to stop violence. Gandhi, in particular, coined nonviolence as something larger than
merely not performing violence. Nonviolence should influence your whole life, all parts of it.
Especially Gandhi's constructive programme stands out here – that a person should change an
unjust system, while at the same time living in a way that is compatible with the way one would if
the change had already taken place. (Johansen, 2009). Gandhi's ideas and nonviolent lifestyle is
sometimes referred to as principled nonviolence.
16
Pragmatic nonviolence is the type of civil resistance that takes place with peaceful means, through
nonviolent actions. Pragmatic nonviolence is strategic and technical, and which nonviolent tool is
used depends on what is deemed most effective for the situation. (Johansen, 2009). It is within the
tradition of pragmatic nonviolence that Gene Sharp has been the most active. Sharp (1973) states
that unjust, violent systems are maintained by power, and when that power is supported and obeyed
by people it can keep the system going. Therefore, nonviolent action is when people stop supporting
and obeying the power, and employs various means to do so. Essential to Sharp's (2012) pragmatic
nonviolence is that it is equally strategic and involves training in nonviolent methods, similar to the
way the military complex works.
Sharp (1998) also categorised the different methods of nonviolent action. The first such category is
Protest/Persuasion. This category includes methods like demonstrations, petitions, formal
affirmations of opposition or support and symbolic public acts (such as mock funerals to mourn the
dead) among other things. Protest/Persuasion are methods that are peaceful and serves the purpose
of showing opposition to violence/injustice. The second category of nonviolent method that Sharp
(1998) presents is Non-Cooperation, which are methods that involves people terminating their
cooperation with unjust and violent structures, people, activities, institutions or regimes. These
methods include different kinds of social, strikes and boycotts. The third category of nonviolent
methods is Intervention. The methods within the Intervention-category are more confrontational
than the methods of the first two categories, and include such methods as hunger-strikes, sit-ins,
nonviolent occupation and creating alternative social institutions in the place of unjust ones.
Together, the methods in the three categories count up to 198, effectively disproving that there is a
lack of alternative methods to violent ones. (Sharp, 2012). Many of the methods are used almost
every day by groups that work on issues such as the environment and gender equality, but the
strategies are not always explicitly referred to as nonviolent. (Johansen, 2009).
Essential to nonviolence is also the refusal to dehumanise people with other sympathies than one‟s
own, to separate the person and the problem. ”It is not me against you but you and me against the
problem”, as Nagler (2014: 14) phrases it. Nagler (2014) writes that when one meets and treats
people with respect and dignity this amplifies the respect and dignity. Here is a clear parallel to
what Böhm and Kaplan (2011) writes, that de-humanisation is one of the phenomena that fuels the
spiral of revenge and violent outlets of revenge, mentioned in the previous chapter.
In a similar way, nonviolence can be divided up into direct nonviolence, structural nonviolence and
cultural nonviolence, providing a contrast to Galtung's (1969; 1990) categories of violence.
17
(Johansen, 2009). Direct nonviolence encompasses nonviolent techniques and methods as a way to
resist and confront violence in various forms. Structural nonviolence refers to constructive
structures in society that promote and enable nonviolent components of a society, such as
inclusiveness and accountability to function. Nonviolent social structures ensure that any arising
conflicts can be handled nonviolently, with methods that are categorised as direct nonviolence, but
also processes such as reconciliation and conflict transformation. Cultural nonviolence refer to
elements of for example culture and religion that addresses ways in which to act nonviolently and
that celebrate nonviolence. Johansen (2009) talks about an elusive culture of nonviolence that has
been present throughout history but like nonviolent conflicts today, has been given less attention
than the culture of violence that is war, injustice and inequality. Direct, structural and cultural
nonviolence interact and reinforce each other. Pinpointing cultures of nonviolence in history, but
also today, has been made difficult by the lack of recognition of how essential nonviolent behaviour
is. (Johansen, 2009).
There have been studies looking at the success of nonviolent civil resistance to unjust regimes. It
has been found that these kinds of resistance often generate a higher success rate than violent ones.
(see for example Stephan and Chenoweth, 2012; Roberts and Garton Ash, 2009 and Johansen,
2009). I will not go into details about these and other similar studies, since it is outside the scope of
the thesis. Johansen (2009) does however point out that while these kinds of movements are
successful in getting rid of an unjust reign, the success to establish a just society after this is usually
less of a success. The reason, Johansen (2009) argues, is that the movements focus on pragmatic
nonviolence, and do not plan enough on the issue of what is to follow. This highlights the
importance of not separating principled (or pacifist) nonviolence and pragmatic nonviolence, but
rather to integrate the two traditions.
18
3 Protection
3.1 Intervention mechanisms
International military interventions in conflict settings are referred to as humanitarian interventions.
(Krieg, 2013). The definition of humanitarian interventions quoted in the introduction is
problematic in itself, and warrants further research beyond the scope of this thesis in order to be
fully explored. However it poses a good introduction to the second theoretical chapter of this thesis,
where some of the mechanisms that exist in order for the international community to intervene in
conflict settings will be presented.
Gawerc (2006) presents definitions to three approaches to supporting peace as a third-party:
peacemaking, peacekeeping and peace-building. Peacemaking is the process of mediation or
negotiation to get parties to a conflict to end the conflict. Peacekeeping is when a third-party steps
into a post-conflict setting in order to prevent reoccurrence of violence, or in Gawerc's (2006: 439)
own words: “third-party intervention to keep apart warring groups and maintain the absence of
direct violence (or reduce it)”. Peace-building is the more long-term effort, focusing on different
aspects of society and includes various activities, initiated at grassroots level and adaptive to the
local context and how it changes.
The intention of peace-building is to create a structure of peace that is based on justice,
equity, and cooperation (i.e., positive peace), thereby addressing the underlying causes
of violent conflict so that they become less likely in the future. (Gawerc, 2006: 439).
The UN has a similar, but somewhat different take on what peace-keeping is compared to Gawerc.
They refer to all the different methods of supporting peace as peace and security maintaining efforts,
and have some additional activities as well. The UNs definition of peacemaking corresponds with
what Gawerc presents. Peacekeeping refers to the troops deployed following a ceasefire or an
agreement with the aim of providing support when what has been agreed is carried out. In order to
defend themselves and civilians, the peace-keeping troops are allowed to use force. Peace
enforcement is an activity initiated when there is an on-going conflict, and involves forceful means
such as military action. The UN also carries out conflict prevention activities such as early warning,
mediation and fact finding missions. Peace-building activities have similar elements as to what
Gawerc writes above, but the UN peace-building activities focus more on a state level than on
grassroots level. (United Nations Peacekeeping, 2014).
The UN notes that in recent years it has become rare with peace and security maintaining efforts
19
that include just one of these activities, rather they often include several of the above-mentioned
activities. (United Nations Peacekeeping, 2014). This is mimicked by Last (2003) in his chapter in
Conflict Prevention: Path to Peace or Grand Illusion, where Last investigates multifunctional
observer missions. A multifunctional observer mission combines civil administration, military
observers, police-training missions, civil affairs, elections and security forces to name a few. Last
(2003) writes that experience shows that the kind of missions that are the most successful at
preventing violence from erupting or reoccurring are not purely military missions (such as the UN
Observer Mission in Liberia. UNOMIL, and UN Observer Mission in Sierra Leone, UNOMSIL),
but rather the missions that combine civilian and military components.
Mediation is typically performed by actors such as the UN, regional organisations such as the
African Union (AU), governments or even prominent individuals in the international community.
Katia Papagianni (2012) argues that because of the limitations of the above-mentioned actors, the
space for non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and private actors to engage in conflict
mediation has increased. Reasons for this are for example that the UN and governments cannot
always engage with all parties to a conflict because it might result in the legitimisation of said party.
In a similar manner, parties to conflicts may not want to engage with UN and governments because
they suspect that there are hidden agendas. Papagianni (2012) points out that because peace-
building through mediation is a long-term effort, it creates space for various actors to get involved
at different stages of the path.
Gawerc (2006) also highlights the necessity to look at peace-building as involving various actors, at
various levels and at various times. One such level that is often overlooked is the grassroots level,
even though it is often highlighted as fundamental to peace-building efforts. Building the capacity
of local initiatives and creating space for their activities at different stages of a conflict is critical if
peace is to be enduring and effective. Gawerc (2006) also mentions the various challenges the
peace-building at grassroots levels face, which include lack of support from the government,
resentment from the community and lack of access to dissidents, among other issues.
I would like to borrow here from the approach to safety and security of humanitarian action. Brooks
(2015) describes the three approaches or strategies that are commonly used to ensure safety and
security for humanitarian staff. The first approach, acceptance, is seen as the basis for all
humanitarian action. It not only refers to the consent of the state where the operation is set up, but
also to the acceptance of local stakeholders, including local authorities and beneficiaries. The
second approach, protection, is a strategy put in place whereby the security risk is reduced by
20
reducing the vulnerability of the humanitarian intervention. The third strategy, deterrence, goes a
step further. Deterrence moves to reduce the security risk by use of threat, for example armed
security guards. (Brooks, 2015).
Each of these strategies gives rise to dilemmas:
While these high-profile protective and deterrent measures may have protected some
humanitarian workers from attack in the short term, in many cases they not only severely
limited humanitarians' ability to deliver aid to populations in need but also jeopardized their
perceived neutrality, raising new security concerns. (Brooks, 2015: 14).
Acceptance, on the other hand, takes a longer time to achieve, especially in relation to beneficiaries.
The focus of deterrence is security, rather than safety, a status-quo rather than a change in the
situation which creates more space for humanitarian actors in which to act. This echoes Sponsel's
(1994) description of security as a focus in the endeavour for negative peace. It also correlates some
to the activities involved in supporting peace described in this section, and the lack of effectiveness
that can arise from putting them in action separately.
Chaulia (2011: 207) puts it like this: “Military humanitarianism is a feint to exacerbate a violent
environment by injecting more armaments and combatants to prolong war”. This is a strong critique
not only towards humanitarian interventions as military interventions to protect civilians, but also
towards adding more weapons to an already volatile situation – no matter who wields them.
“Violence breeds violence”, as Åkerlund (2001: 75) so elegantly phrases it, again mimicking the
spiral of revenge (Böhm and Kaplan, 2011) described in the previous section. Chaulia (2011) also
criticises the international community for not practising what they preach in the sense that they aim
to promote peace, but instead by its action legitimises the use of force, in part through military
humanitarian interventions, but also through what the author (2011: 221) refers to as “its violent
structural roots”, i.e. that humanitarianism (like peace studies and anthropology, mentioned in the
introduction) has a colonialist burden. What Chaulia (2011) proposes as a remedy to this
inconsistency is that the international community focus instead on local actors that are trying to
mitigate the violence.
3.2 Third-party nonviolent initiatives
This brings us to the concluding theoretical section of this thesis. What has been illustrated in the
previous chapters and sections is that various dimensions within violence, conflict, peace and
21
intervention are interlinked. Following this section as well as the next chapter on my empirical
findings, the theoretical perspectives presented here will be discussed in relation to the case study.
Most of the common forms of third-party intervention focuses on security. Johan Galtung (2007)
argues that if we are to relate conflict, violence and peace, peace needs always to be the focus.
Åkerlund (2001) writes that locating and supporting initiatives at local levels within society that
have peace as its focus is an important step for third-parties to take. What makes that support even
stronger is if the supportive international body itself has peace at its core.
When outside actors intervene in a situation where there is conflict, the goal is often to get the
parties to negotiate, for example when it comes to diplomatic interventions. However, Galtung
(2010) identified this as another faulty approach, since the parties may not be in a place where they
are ready for this. Rather another approach could be to create an arena for narratives and dialogue to
take place.
Although some of the mechanisms described in the previous section of this chapter do not use force
or weapons as a tool, they are not what is meant by third-party nonviolent action in this thesis.
Åkerlund (2001) describes one form of third-party nonviolent intervention, namely preventative
presence. With this, an international organisation is present in an area of conflict and aim to stave of
violence. Most commonly, preventative presence is a form of protection for individuals and/or
organisations that work for peace. The mere presence of an international volunteer is what is
supposed to hold of violence. It also aims to give the individuals and/or organisations that they
support a chance to do their work. Åkerlund (2001) points out the very important distinction
between supporting organisations and individuals working for peace on the one hand, and support
one party to the conflict. By nonviolently supporting a party to a conflict, Åkerlund writes, the
conflict could intensify rather than ease and lead to further violence. An important element in third-
party nonviolent intervention must be to include ideas from the principled (or pacifist) dimension of
nonviolence.
Third-party nonviolent intervention can be put into action as accompaniment. Mahony (2013)
writes about the accompaniment model and how the idea of accompaniment aims to influence the
situation on the ground in different ways. These include preventing violence against people
involved in peace-building locally; strengthen the agency and morale of local peace-building
initiatives as well as creating an international base for advocacy.
22
Sharp (2000) writes that while sympathies from third-party actors may not influence the outcome of
a conflict in a crucial way, they can be important if they lead to open support or direct action. While
the third-party support that Sharp has looked at has been mainly symbolic, it has showed room for
improvement when it comes to effectiveness. One such are of improvement that Sharp highlights is
to offer capacity building to local initiatives. He does, however, place a very strong emphasis that
while the area of third-party nonviolent intervention does have a lot of possibilities, it should always
be initiated in support of a local initiative. (Sharp, 2000).
Boothe and Smithey (2007) make a similar point. While commending third-party nonviolent
intervention as a mechanism with potential to support peace-building, they also highlight the
possible negative side-effects of undermining local actors. The argument the authors make is that
the preventative presence aspect of third-party nonviolent interventions rely heavily on the power
dynamics of the international volunteers and that this aspect maintains inequalities such as racism.
Boothe and Smithey (2007) argue that in order to avoid this, third-party nonviolent initiatives
should include reflexive training in recognising and problematising structural inequalities inherent
in the intervention itself. At the same time, third-party nonviolent interventions should aim towards
being as diverse as possible. (Boothe and Smithey, 2007).
Johansen (2009) reflects on the role of third parties when there is on-going nonviolent civil
resistance in a country. He touches briefly on the occurrence of external political, moral and
financial support, and the lack of research on the effect this different kinds of support has on the
nonviolent movements. ”One crucial question is, if some intervention from abroad is important,
necessary or sufficient for local movements to be victorious.” (Johansen, 2009: 157). Johansen
(2009) points out that this is an area of research that should be studied further.
Coy (2012) brings up an interesting aspect of accompaniment in an article that compares the third-
party nonviolent intervention of Peace Brigades International (PBI), Christian Peacemaker Teams
(CPT) and International Solidarity Movement (ISM). The three organisations, while applying the
accompaniment model, do it with slightly different approaches. Mainly the author looks at the
extent to which the different organisations are neutral, as well as the extent to which they participate
in and support activities that fall into the category of civil disobedience. Coy (2012) finds that a
higher level of neutrality enables the organisation to continue their work in supporting local peace-
building initiatives longer, since physical intervention and taking part in activities that are outside of
the law in the country where they are can lead to that the organisation loses legitimacy. In a similar
way to how neutrality in humanitarian action allows organisations greater access to people in need
23
of assistance, so too does neutrality when it comes to third-party nonviolent intervention contribute
to fulfilling the aim of intervening in the first place.
Eddy (2014) takes the discussion of approaches to third-party nonviolent intervention through
accompaniment a step further and links it to the two dimensions within nonviolence – principled
and pragmatic. He too looks at CPT and ISM and finds that depending on which of the two
dimensions a participant on one of the organisations adheres to, the behaviour of the participant can
differ. Eddy (2014) found that if a participant followed pragmatic nonviolence too dogmatically,
this could influence the movements negatively, putting far too much focus on the differences
between the parties, and forgetting to separate the person and the system. The participants who had
a more principled outlook, Eddy found to be more open and sympathetic. The conclusion is that it is
important to be aware of the dimension one adheres to in order to avoid the risks involved. In order
to do this, Eddy (2014) recommends that rather than viewing principled and pragmatic nonviolence
as two separate approaches, third-party nonviolent interventions would benefit from viewing the
dimensions more as a continuum.
24
4 Acceptance
Before presenting my empirical data, I will start this chapter by giving a short background to the
context of my case study. Several volumes could – and have been – written about this, but I will
only give a brief insight. At the core the contradiction may appear to be a basic one where there are
two people laying claims on the same land area, but with the years other dimensions have
developed. (Landguiden, 2015).
The conflict dates further back than the foundation of the Israeli state in 1948. Palestinians and
Israelis have lived in the area for centuries, and the countries have been the subject of many
conquests, occupations and different administrations through the years. This section will focus on
the modern history of, since the end of the World War II. After the end of the war, the UN proposed
that the area should be divided into one Jewish and one Arab state. The Arabs did not accept this
proposition, and when the Jewish state of Israel was declared, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Saudi
Arabia and Yemen launched an attack. A ceasefire was declared in 1949, and by then Israel had
expanded its territory, diminishing the Palestinian state and around 700 000 Palestinians had fled to
refugee camps in the Jordan-occupied West Bank and the Egypt-controlled Gaza. Around 160 000
Palestinians remained in Israel. (Landguiden, 2016).
During the 1950s, the Palestinians began to organise their resistance. The support for an Arab state
was still found in surrounding countries, and in 1967, Egypt, Jordan and Syria launched a war
against Israel. What followed was the so-called Six-Day War, which concluded with the Israeli
seizure of several new territories, including Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In the 1973
October-War, Israel saw another victory against the neighbouring countries, and the Palestine
Liberation Organisation (PLO), who had lead the Palestinian resistance, changed their tactics. The
liberation of Palestine should be achieved through not only military means, but political as well.
PLO was granted observer-status in the UN in 1974. (Landguiden, 2016).
During the 1970s the so-called Israeli settlements on occupied territories increased and the
frustration among the Palestinians grew. In 1987, a civilian uprising referred to as the first Intifada
began. Collective punishment and low-intense warfare was Israel's response and the situation
became increasingly untenable. When Jordan revoked their administrative responsibility for the
West Bank in 1988, PLO declared an independent Palestinian state, which was recognised by
around 80 countries. This move lead to that PLO recognised the possibility of a two-state solution
25
to the conflict and in a way indirectly recognised the state of Israel. (Landguiden, 2016).
In the beginning of the 1990s, a peace process was initiated between Palestine and Israel. The result
of the negotiations was the Oslo accord, which was signed in 1993. The agreement gave limited
Palestinian autonomy in the West Bank and Gaza. PLO declared Israel's right to exist, and Israel in
turned recognised PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people. The accord was not a peace
agreement, but a roadmap for the continued road to a solution of the conflict. The parties disagreed
on the meaning and the opposition on both sides tried to sabotage the process. Islamist movements
began carrying out suicide attacks against civilian Israelis and retaliatory attacks followed. Israel
initiated the construction of a so-called safety barrier towards the West Bank, built primarily on
Palestinian land. In 2000, a second Intifada was initiated by Palestinians, resulting in the Israeli
occupation of the West Bank. (Landguiden, 2016).
After the failure of the peace-process many failed attempts have followed. The key issues to solve
are the dual claims on Jerusalem as capital, the faith of the Palestinian refugees and their
descendants, as well as the existence and questionable legality of the settlements on Palestinian land.
These issues, together with the on-going violence on the ground lead to the failure of peace
processes in 2000, 2002 as well as 2013/2014. (Landguiden, 2016).
The violence and conflict has repeatedly resulted in wars between Palestine and Israel, mainly
focused in Gaza, the latest one in the summer of 2014. Small-scale violence targeting civilians
continues on both sides, often resulting in retaliatory attacks. While the two-state solution is still
internationally considered to be the most viable, the continued violence as well as the failure to get
a dialogue going leads to the idea slipping further away. (Landguiden, 2016).
4.1 Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel
The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI) is an international
programme established in 2002. It is coordinated by the World Council of Churches (WCC) and
was initiated following a request from 13 church leaders in Jerusalem to enhance the international
presence in Palestine and Israel. Since its establishment, over 1,500 people from all over the world
have participated in the programme. The programme has a clear vision and mission (EAPPI, 2016a):
Vision – a future in which the occupation of Palestine has ended and both
Palestinians and Israelis enjoy a just peace with freedom and security based on
26
international law.
Mission – to witness life under occupation, engage with local Palestinians and
Israelis pursuing a just peace, to change the international community‟s involvement
in the conflict, urging them to act against injustice in the region.
The programme follows the model of accompaniment, described above, and has six key principles.
The first principle is protective presence, the aim of which is to decrease violence against civilians.
The second principle is monitoring human rights violations. The Ecumenical Accompaniers (EAs)
write reports on their observations of abuses they cannot prevent and share these reports with the
UN. The third principle is to stand with local peace and human rights groups, through which they
hope to strengthen the credibility and capacity of the work of both Palestinian and Israeli peace
initiatives. The fourth principle is advocacy, which is something that is a strong focus for the EAs
once they return home. They share their stories and experiences with different actors and raise
awareness in the hope that this can contribute to changing policy for the better. The fifth principle is
impartiality. This principle entails that they are not biased in the conflict, but are working for human
rights and adherence to international humanitarian law. (EAPPI, 2016b). The sixth principle is
nonviolence, which is described in the following way:
Nonviolence is a way of living that rejects the use of violence and seeks to bring
change through the engagement of individuals and groups peaceful strategies. We
believe nonviolence is the only way to a true and lasting solution to conflict. Our
actions are nonviolent and we support all people working nonviolently for peace in
Israel and Palestine. (EAPPI, 2016b)
The kind of activities that the EAs engage in during their three months in Palestine and Israel
differs depending on where they are stationed, what time of the year they are in the field as
well as their own resources and capacities. Gunlög, one of my key informants told me that the
tasks that the EAs engage in should always be grounded in the local context. But the overall
idea is that of preventative presence through accompaniment.
“The Accompaniment programme is more about having a preventative presence, that our mere
presence should deter or prevent the occurrence of violence or harassment, so the method itself is
not really about that we will intervene, but more that by being there in a way has intervened.”
This was Helena's, one of my other key informants, way of describing it. It was mirrored by Gunlög
who said:
27
“We appeared in our vests that you may know what they look like, and the idea behind it is that we
should suppress flare-up of violence by our presence. And to show solidarity with groups working
nonviolently, both Palestinians and Israelis.
Maria, one of my key informants who I interviewed both as a former EA, but with a main focus on
her time with Peace Brigades International (PBI) in Nepal said the following;
“There was more emphasis on SEAPPI (Swedish Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in
Palestine and Israel) to maybe not perform as much, but that there is a great value to only show
oneself. So that the international presence in place can have an extremely strong symbolic value.”
Helena also said: “we should be visible, show that we are there, for all, all parts.” The intensity
would also differ depending on the timing.
Helena was stationed in Tulkarem in the northern West Bank (see appendix 3, image 1). She told
me that in this part the context was very much influenced by problems caused by the walls. In the
mornings they would stand by the farm gates that the farmers used to reach their lands. Another task
was to be present at one of the big checkpoints where many workers, students and people with
appointments to see a doctor passed through each morning. They would also visit a Palestinian
village nearby, situated in the zone between the green line and the wall. During the harvesting
seasons the EAs in Tulkarem would help out. They were also on call to be present according to
needs, for example when there was a house demolition. In the area on the West Bank surrounding
Tulkarem there are also a lot of road blocks, but all of them are not manned at the same time. If one
of them was manned all of a sudden, the EAs would receive a phone call informing them of the
situation and asking them to go to the road block to observe. Helena also found it important to
participate in the daily lives of the Palestinians she met, and attend occasions such as sport events
and theatre, to not just be there at the farm gates and checkpoints, but also during joyous occasions.
A large part of what the EAs do is reporting. The reports are shared with mainly United Nation‟s
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), but also with the Red Cross and Save
the Children. “Large organisations that may not have the same opportunity to be among the locals
in the same way,” Helena added. There is also the aspect of advocacy and information sharing once
the EAs return home. According to Helena, this is something that is especially requested by the
parties. “Come, see and tell”.
Gunlög was stationed in East Jerusalem and had a variety of tasks. Aside from doing a lot of
walking around, her team had a weekly schedule that involved presence at the entrances to the
Haram esh-Sharif/Temple Mount on Fridays in connection to worshippers attending the prayer in
28
order to observe if there were restrictions imposed by the Israeli military and police and if so, what
the reason for the restrictions could be. Sometimes the restrictions lead to protests and skirmished,
that, which the EAs would report, also in this case to OCHA, the Red Cross and United Nations
Children‟s Fund (UNICEF). On the Fridays Gunlög would also participate in a weekly returning
demonstration against the occupation held by the movement Women in Black, which is an example
of how the programme cooperates with a local Israeli peace-building initiative.
“Often other internationals would come and join in this and the more you are, the better it feels to
stand there of course. They have been there since the 80's and they are really my heroines these
persevering women.”
This was the only demonstration they participated in, but the EAs would also be observers at other
demonstrations, in order to deter deterioration. One such demonstration was organised by
Palestinians who protested against the restrictions of their right to own land in Jerusalem. ”We
observe and they see that we are there and feel support from that. So you could say, we support
nonviolence initiatives, both Palestinian and Israeli.”
Gunlög also had checkpoint watch as part of her duty. At the Abu Dis checkpoint a lot of school
children pass through in order to attend school. Gunlög and her colleagues would count how many
school children were let through and check for build-up in the lines. If that was the case, the EAs
would get involved in order to try to get the military to upon up another lane.
On Tuesday mornings, Gunlög and her team were on checkpoint watch at Qalandia checkpoint. The
task was again to count and register how many people passed through on their way to work, school,
hospital appointments and the like, and if someone was refused to pass through, the EAs would try
to find out what the reason was, document it and share it with OCHA.
The EAs in East Jerusalem were also on call in case there had been a house demolition. They would
then receive a text from OCHA, go to location of the demolition and report back to them what had
happened. If there had been people living in the demolished house, Gunlög and her team would
follow up with the family afterwards to make sure that they had some place to live.
”You always get there, if it is close you might get there while it is happening, but we don't stand in
front of the machines, we don't do that, that is not our task to confront in that way but rather to be
present and support and morally show solidarity and report.”
The team preceding Gunlög's had had a task that involved accompanying Palestinian school
29
children through Israeli areas on their way to school in order to prevent harassment. Gunlög's team
followed up with the school if this was needed, but they said that it was not a problem at the
moment.
”When I think back on it, the mission is to both be there, the preparations, the implementation and
then home to recount the experience and that is actually where I feel that I have been of most use, if
that is what you should measure. […] I usually end my talks saying that for the sake of both the
groups there has to be peace, an end to the occupation. It is an absolute condition if there is to be
just peace, because it is not only peace that is needed.”
Anna was stationed in Ramallah during her three months as an EA. She had various tasks, including
checkpoint duty. As part of one of the first teams of EAPPI, a main part of her mission was to get to
know and solidify the relationship with the local churches, since it had been church-leaders who
requested the programme in the first place. Mainly she spent time with youth groups and
participated in their activities.
Another task Anna had was to visit a social centre in a refugee camp. The social centre was a place
for women to meet, as well as a place where children with different disabilities could come. While
rewarding, it was a sometimes difficult task due to the language barriers. However, they did give
English lessons to the women, since it had been requested so that the women could talk to the
Israeli soldiers when they entered the camp and find out what they wanted. The EAs would also join
the staff of the social centre on home visits in the camp. Usually these were social visits, but
sometime it was also requested after there had been raids by the military.
Anna highlights two particularly strong incidents that she experienced. Both took place at
checkpoints. The soldiers stopped a woman from going through the checkpoint, but would not let
her go back. Instead they held her at the counter without explaining what the problem was. Anna
noticed that the woman was really uncomfortable and as it turned out she needed the bathroom, but
was too shy to say this even to Anna, let alone to the soldiers. In the end, after Anna had tried to
find out why the woman could not move forward, she was allowed to go back the way she had
come. “It was not like the soldiers did this just to be mean”, Anna comments. “They just did not see
this woman as a person with needs”.
The second incident that stayed with Anna was when she and her fellow EAs arrived to checkpoint
watch only to find that two students had been arrested. They were sitting down with their hand tied
behind their backs. Again, there was no explanation as to why this had happened. Anna and her
30
team got the feeling that this time, all that was needed of them was to insist that they release the
students. This gave the soldiers a reason to do so, without losing face.
With the background of my own training in nonviolence methods, I was interested to find out a bit
more about the kind of training they had received before going on their mission. Usually it
consisted of a couple of occasions in Sweden and a more intense training once they arrived in
Palestine and Israel. The main focus of the training before going on the mission was to learn about
the context and the history, to get the facts. During the training in Palestine and Israel, they meet
their predecessors and receive hand-over from them. This is also the time for introductions to
people and organisations they will work with. Helena emphasised the importance of this in relation
to working for example in the refugee camp in Tulkarem.
As far as training in nonviolence goes, the participants in the programme have received different
amounts of trainings depending on when they took part in the programme. All of my informants did
however mention that they practised role-playing of different situations they might face while on
mission. Gunlög said that they did receive some training in nonviolent methods.
“When I think back on the training, it's not what I remember most, but we had half a day and I think
it was nonviolence trainers from SweFOR. We did understand the emphasis on the importance of
trying to see the person, even in the military.”
“I had probably felt that we could have done a little more before with the nonviolence role-play
because it is actually not the major focus of the training”, Helena continues. “But it was
nonviolence and some nonviolent interventions without actually having the word for it, I would say.
So I think one could work more with it to get even more out of it – it is also a security for those
going on missions to know what it could mean and how it could be used.”
Helena, who rarely interacted with settlers but mostly with the military felt that it was in these
meetings that the nonviolence training could come be useful. One time, during the harvest, Helena
and one of her colleagues were helping a Palestinian family to pick olives in their olive grove, close
to an Israeli settlement. There were some soldiers in the vicinity and the EAs were there mostly the
prevent harassment, which had occurred earlier years, leading to families having to leave the grove
or having the olives stolen. On this occasion there was a demonstration going on in the nearby
village and after a while the soldiers came and said that they had to stop the harvest. Helena and her
colleague started to ask the soldiers why they had to leave when they had clearly not participated in
31
the demonstration. The discussion went on for a while and this gave the Palestinian family time to
continue the harvest for a while and fetch the tractor so that they could transport the picked olives.
“Our perception and what we were told by the families was that we had given them that time by
being there.”
Gunlög told me of an event that occurred when she visited the EA team in south Hebron hills. They
spent the day accompanying sheep headers who grazed their sheep close to an outpost where it
often happened that the settlers came down onto the pastures to provoke and take over. While she
was there she could see the settlers moving about, but they never came down in the valley. ”I want
to think it was because they saw that these international vests were there.”
Anna thought it was difficult to say whether or not the training came to use. What she found most
valuable was that the group consisted of people from different age groups and with different life
experiences. This created an opportunity to take on different roles in situations that arose – as one of
the younger team members, Anna could more easily talk to younger soldiers for example. She
remembers a couple of occasions when she thought that the nonviolence aspect of the mission
became especially palpable. Once, she and some of her fellow EAs were invited to participate in an
Israeli peace-coalition's demonstration near the border to Gaza. They were walking in a chain and
the Israeli police came running towards them in order to break them up. “I remember that my first
thought was that the best thing to do was to sit down and sing”, Anna tells me. More people sat
down, and Anna continues: “I thought that I would not have thought of this on my own, but the
nonviolence training had at least given some tools for such situations when I would have gotten
very scared otherwise”.
Perceptions
On the issue of how they themselves perceived their role, Helena said that she has always viewed
her role as a small one, and that she is not the important part in the context of the programme, but
rather that she was a part of a puzzle that many contribute to. People recognised the vest and what it
meant. “I see that as something very positive, that it is not up to a specific person, but that there is a
link, you get to carry the torch for a while”.
Gunlög also told me that she perceived her role as small, and that sometimes it felt insignificant,
especially in situations where they could not intervene. Sometimes she even felt as part of the
system, but then she would remind herself that this is not the case, that the presence of the EAs
32
demonstrates that the situation is not forgotten. “We should contribute to this feeling of hope, that
this can't go on forever. I think that is important. For individuals our presence can matter, it's like
the shells on the beach, you can't help all of them, but it matters to those you do help.”
During the times when Anna doubted the added value of the programme, a comment by a social
worker she had met in the refugee camp would strengthen her. The woman had told Anna that even
though the refuges would joke about the EAs, they also expressed that they were happy about their
presence. It gave them a feeling of not being forgotten.
Anna told me about that as an EA, she felt that her safety lied in that she was not a threat. That
resulted in a certain freedom to act and a certain confidence. It is difficult to say if this is true or
false, Anna maintains, but it is the way she experienced it. As an EA you are not expected to
literally use your body as a shield, but if some form of confrontation took place, Anna‟s experience
was that the soldier would still feel that he/she has the upper hand, because they do not view the EA
as a threat to their security. “Perhaps in this sense one can create space through one‟s vulnerability”.
Helena told me that it was simpler to build a relationship with the Palestinians she met than with the
Israelis, and the reason for this was that she mainly met Israelis who were soldiers, and then they
are in a role. “There are so many barriers”, Helena explained, and the soldiers reaction to her and
her teammates presence was very wide-ranged, from curious and talkative to ashamed. Sometimes
she even felt that the soldiers were a bit scared of their presence, especially the younger soldiers.
There was also the constant balancing between perhaps being too engaged. “How do I keep my role
and my mandate, how do I stay accountable?” She described is as a grey area that the team has to
navigate without any guidelines, and that the discussion of what is too much and what is too little
interaction was on-going. Anna also habitually met soldiers and she remembers how
incomprehensible it was to her that someone could even contemplate using violence against her. At
the same time she also noticed that the soldiers she met reacted differently to their presence, yet her
lasting impression was that they were scared.
She shares a memory with me of when she and a couple of the other EAs were in a minibus at a
checkpoint. The other passengers had left to be checked, but they had been asked to remain in the
vehicle. When this was going on, Anna spotted a young soldier through the car window, standing
behind a concrete block with a gun point straight at them. The EAs got the impression that this man
was so scared that if they so much as sneezed, that gun would go off. “He was shaking with fear and
there was this kind of latent violence that had nothing to do with aggression or any kind of belief in
33
justifications of violence, just plain fear. At an individual level, when toy are standing there with
your weapon behind a concrete block, nothing matters, there is only fear.” Anna tells me that she
has carried this picture with her home to share during her talks, especially if people accuse the
programme of being only on the side of the Palestinians, and not seeing the Israelis. “But I can tell
them that I this soldier, I was there also for his sake, because if you are that scared when you are on
your job, then there is something wrong with the system, he is forced to stand there even though it
is plain to see that he is losing it.”
Gunlög shared another story from when she was in Hebron. She was sitting outside that Synagogue,
wearing her vets, when a soldier walked up to her and started to tell her that the EAPPI programme
was anti-Israeli and the she should not be sitting there wearing her vest. This was the only time she
experienced that a soldier cared about her presence. Even though she did try to strike up a
conversation with him about it, she ended up taking the vest of. Looking back, Gunlög told me, she
would perhaps have done things a little differently, maybe ask him why she should take the vest of,
or keep wearing it but walk away. However, at the time, taking the vest off felt like the thing to do.
From the Palestinians there were more open reactions: “Thumbs up at a checkpoint when we were
there. Look, pointing towards the eyes – you see us. There was this feeling that we do see, that there
is someone who sees”, Helena tells me. People would also ask her to retell what she has seen and
experienced. Gunlög had similar experiences; the Palestinians would smile and thank the EAs at the
checkpoints. From the Palestinian and Israeli peace-initiatives, Gunlög felt a sense of welcome,
since they has an on-going cooperation with them.
Gunlög also described that she sometimes felt a sort of fatigue from the people she met in East
Jerusalem, that after so many years of organisations reporting what is going, the situation has still
not resolved. This fatigue could lead to indifference at times. Anna had an observation that was
somewhat similar. “Could the presence of international actors, not so much trigger violence, but
rather lead to that situations of confrontation arise that may not have to have happened had they not
been there? Are we skilled enough to identify the situations where we go from being a preventative
presence to being spectators? When I discussed this with my team members there were different
opinions, but I still think it is something we have to reflect on.”
Even though Gunlög sometimes felt as merely a spectator, she still expressed that she is supportive
of the mandate that the programme has. If the approach had been more confrontational than
supportive, then there would be greater risks. Gunlög encountered ISM during her time in Palestine
34
and Israel, and she felt that their confrontational approach, while perhaps satisfying in nature, also
made it more difficult for the organisation to be active, since the Israeli authorities are less than
happy with them. Instead, the more transparent way in which EAPPI works is something that is
more difficult to criticise.
To this day, Anna often meets people who are working in international context and who have
participated in EAPPI. ”There is something you learn that strengthens the will to keep on working
with these issues. That makes me thing that there has to be some experienced feeling that one
actually made some difference even if one cannot pinpoint exactly what that difference entailed.
Otherwise, people would give up.”
4.2 Local initiatives
In this section I will present the peace initiatives that I visited during my time in Palestine and Israel.
I choose to call them “initiatives”, to include organisations, networks, programs and the like. I will
give a brief description of each initiative and present relevant findings from my meetings with them.
Israeli committee against house demolitions
The first initiative I met with during my field research was the Israeli Committee against House
Demolitions (ICAHD). This is an Israel-based initiative that focuses on mapping, prevention and
information on the demolitions of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem. ICAHD was founded in
1997 by a group of eight peace activists from Israel. (ICAHD, 2016a). The goal of the group reads
as follows:
As Israelis, we believe that the only chance for a genuine peace is one that enables the
Palestinians to experience sovereignty and full civil rights.. A just peace will also provide all
the peoples of our region with the security, dignity, freedom and economic opportunities
they deserve The future may witness the emergence of a regional confederation enhancing
the viability of each of our societies to cope with a global reality. (ICAHD, 2016b)
The group's main focus is to end the Israeli demolitions of Palestinian homes, primarily through
rebuilding the homes that have been destroyed repeatedly. If they are informed of a planned
demolition, ICAHD try to prevent the demolition, but there is usually very little time to prepare.
The group is normally informed of a demolition once it has already been initiated, and therefore
35
they focus on the reconstruction, as well as meeting the family who lived in the home that was
destroyed. (ICAHD, 2016b).
Ruth (2015), the ICAHD group member whom I met during my time in Palestine and Israel, took
the group I was part of on a tour of Jerusalem to demonstrate the reality for both the Palestinians
living under the occupation and also the activists of the group. The closeness of the Israeli
settlements and the Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem clearly demonstrates a confrontational
surface, and Ruth informed me that settlers often argues with her and her fellow activists during
actions. Engaging in such arguments is another action that ICAHD takes in order to influence the
public opinion in Israel on the question. The main audience for this is not the settlers but the
broader public, and the aim is to influence government policy, if possible. ICAHD hopes to
mobilise both Israelis and Palestinians to participate in their work. (ICAHD, 2016b).
The work of ICAHD also involves information sharing and advocacy in the international
community, including sharing reports and information with the UN. The group has several chapters
based abroad to enable the spreading of information among a broader audience. I asked Ruth (2015)
what, according to her, would be the best move on the international communities' side in order to
promote peace, and she said that the Boycott, Divestments, Sanctions (BDS) movement is the best
way to go for people in other countries who wants to make a difference on the ground.
Shministim
Shministim is more a movement than it is an organisation or a network. The word Shministim is the
Hebrew word for students who are in the twelfth grade. This is when students are drafted into the
Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) for the three-year mandatory military service. The Shministim
movement then, consists of students who have openly refused to do the mandatory military service
in protest of the occupation of Palestinian territories as well as the oppression by the military. The
consequence for refusing to do the military service is to serve time in prison. (Just Vision, 2014).
Sahar (2015), the woman that I met in Jerusalem who is part of the Shministim movement, shared
that there are several reasons for not conscripting. Certain religious groups are exempt from the
drafting, and others are exempt due to psychological reasons. What makes the Shministim different
from these categories is their refusal to do military service based on conscientious objections. Sahar
(2015) told me that they want to work against the militarisation of the Israeli society. Aside from
the time in prison, the Shministim often faces difficulties in gaining jobs since the military service
36
is seen as the basis for hiring someone. Sahar (2015) also shared that reactions from the Israeli
community towards people who have refused to do the military service are very strong, and can
result in alienation from the mainstream Israeli society.
The militarisation of the Israeli society can be seen in the public room – Sahar (2015) gave the
example of the many public holidays where military events are linked together with religious
celebrations. In her experience it was also very prevalent in school, even at younger ages. Sahar
(2015) said that it is phenomena such as these that contribute to the normalisation of the militarised
Israeli state, but that she and her fellow movement members believe that this can be changed, but
that it will be an extensive process.
Tent of Nations
Tent of Nations is yet again more intangible than simply being referred to as an organisation. In
truth it is a Palestinian farm situated southwest of Bethlehem in a hilly area completely surrounded
by Israeli settlements. The family, Nassar, who lives there, have done so since 1916 when they
bought the land from Turkey. The Nassar family have retained the farm through all subsequent
administrations and have documentation of ownership from the Turkish (Ottoman) authorities. In
1991 Israel declared the land on which the Nasser farm is situated to be part of the state of Israel
and since then there have been on-going court procedures where the Nasser family has to repeatedly
demonstrate their claim on the land. (Tent of Nations, 2016a).
I met Daoud (2015), who is the head of the Nassar family when my group spent a day at the farm.
He said that he normally sees people react in three different ways when living in violent situation.
The first reaction is to use violence as a response – which often triggers more violence in retaliation.
The second reaction is to resign oneself to one's fate – to become a victim. The third reaction is to
give up and leave the area. Based on their observation of these three paths, the Nassar family felt
that they could not follow either of them and moved to formulate their stance:
We refuse to be victims
We refuse to hate
We are acting in a different way because of what we believe in
We believe in justice and peace and that justice will prevail
37
This has led them to follow a fourth way in reaction to the situation that they are living under: a
nonviolent, creative and positive way of resistance.
The Nassar family invites members of the Palestinian and the Israeli societies – as well as the
international community – to come and visit them. They also organise summer camps for children
and are running a project to empower women. Both the children's camps and the women's project
are meant to build capacity and confidence among the participants. These activities provide women
with the opportunity to learn practical skills, and give the children participating in the summer camp
a space for recreation and respite from the situation they are living in. Tent of Nations also
organises work camps at key points in the agricultural cycle, where people are encouraged to come
and assist with, for example, the harvest or planting of olive trees. (Tent of Nations, 2016b).
Tent of Nations also offers a volunteer programme for international volunteers. The volunteers live
and work at the Nassar farm for different time periods and assist in the daily work as well as in the
activities described above. (Tent of Nations, 2016b). Daoud (2015) explained that since they started
to receive international volunteers in 2002, there has been a decrease in settler violence, and that the
international presence secures their presence on their own land. The 'come and see' aspect of their
activities helps to raise awareness of the situation between the Palestinian and Israeli societies, and
also illustrates that there is a different way than the conventional ways of resistance.
Holy Land Trust
Holy Land Trust is a Palestinian organisation based in Bethlehem. It was founded in 1998 as an
effort to support the peace process, but following the second intifada they realised that more was
needed. The organisation started to educate students and leaders in nonviolence as a way to step
away from the cycle of violence. The organisation aims to build the capacity of people living within
the context of the conflict through providing them with tools rooted in nonviolence, social justice,
compassion and love. (Holy Land Trust, 2016a). The organisation runs a variety of projects. For
example, they rebuild homes on the West Bank that have been destroyed; empowerment projects
for girls; conflict prevention training programs for youth leaders; connecting international
volunteers with local farmers during harvest to assist with the work, but also to provide a level of
protection against aggression from settlers; and a Peace Research and Learning Centre for trans-
disciplinary international research on nonviolence, peace, conflict resolution and other issues. (Holy
Land Trust, 2016b).
38
While in Bethlehem, I met Antwan (2015), who is the Director of Programs at Holy Land Trust. His
very person exuded peace and he told us of how the organisation strives to create a humane peace,
and to create the conditions for that peace while the conflict is still on-going. One way of doing this
is to work with reconciliation and healing – an effort that is usually left until later in the process
following the end of a conflict. Antwan (2015) noted that Holy Land Trust had observed that
because the conflict between Palestine and Israel is such a protracted one that has been handed
down for generations, work with reconciliation and healing is very much part of the process to
achieve peace.
Antwan (2015) believes that it is this non-linear way of thinking that will contribute towards
building a positive peace. It is important to honour, remember and express the past, but without
letting it define how people act now and what is planned for the future. Both communities carry
collective memories that influence how they choose to act today: the Israelis carry a collective
memory of being persecuted; the Palestinians carry a collective memory of being occupied. These
experiences affect the peace process, and cannot be ignored, but they do not have to be a hindrance
either.
The voice of Holy Land Trust and Antwan (2015) was truly pragmatic and there is one quote in
particular that really sticks in my memory: “Don‟t be pro one side, be pro-peace. The more people
are pro one side, the more people die on the ground”.
4.3 Excursus
So far I have presented the findings from my key interviews with former Eas as well as from my
participant observations from meeting Palestinian and Israeli peace-building initiatives. As
mentioned in the introduction, I conducted five key interviews. Only three have been presented so
far, and the findings from the remaining two interviews will be briefly presented in this excursus.
The reason I have chosen to include them even though they are not part of the case study context is
to demonstrate some other perspectives and experience of third-party nonviolent intervention
initiatives other than EAPPI. These perspectives poses an interesting point for discussion in the
chapter the follows this one.
Peace Brigades International (PBI)
39
Maria and I talked about her two years in Guleria in western Nepal, 2009-2011. She was there as
part of a PBI-team on the request of a Nepali organisation called Advocacy Forum. The main task
was to act as accompaniers to human rights activists and witnesses in trials, who were under threat.
The hope was that perpetrators of violence and abuse during the war would be put on trial, and PBI
was involved in finding witnesses and subsequently ensuring the safety of those witnesses.
Maria, who had previously been an EA in East Jerusalem, told me that the training she received
from PBI before going to Nepal was substantial, and involved a lot of roleplaying of situations you
might face during the mission, how to interact with different people you might meet and how the
context has a vital impact on this. The training was very practical and was also a part of the
selection process.
There were a lot of challenges for the process with the trials. At the end of her mission, not one trial
had been actualised. It was difficult to see if the work of PBI was efficient or not, Maria told me, as
well as to decide when it was time to leave. In that sense the model is limited compared to larger
organisations with humanitarian and development mandates, since they have guidelines on when to
leave, while in PBI all decisions are taken by consensus, Maria continues. The different
organisations have different limitations.
”The added value was that we were there on the ground”, Maria told me. This was something that
was appreciated by the people and organisations she met, but it was still difficult to know what
impact it had, since there is no way of knowing what would have happened if they had not been
there.
Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT)
Annika, also a former EA, had been on mission with CPT in three turns during 2013 and 2014. Her
station was in Suleiman i northern Iraq, where CPT teams are present to partner with communities
and villages who are affected by the cross-border operations against the Kurds from Iran and
Turkey. The tasks involved accompanying of civilians in order to document and report how they
were affected and to share that information internationally.
The training Annika received before going was also more substantial then the training she received
before her mission as an EA. Before the training the potential participants of programme also visits
a CPT team in the field. The reason for this is that part of the training is to reflect upon which team
40
to join, depending on where one is most suited and needed. Reflection was a large part of the
training, both in relation to one‟s own role in the team but also towards other groups. A theme in
this was to deal with how to be an ally to a person experiencing structural violence that one is not
subject to.
Apart from this they also received training in direct nonviolent action and civil disobedience,
because the teams are allowed to participate and initiate civil disobedience if it is deemed necessary.
This was a major difference to EAPPI, Annika told me, and it was also subject to a lot of on-going
internal discussions. Confrontation had a bigger focus in CPT before but after reflecting and
discussing the problematic aspects of this attitude it has been toned down. ”It is about self-
understanding”, Annika told me. ”It is important to look at oneself as a support to local actors, since
they are the one who knows best and will remain even after CPT has left.”
The people she met were not used to getting attention from outside and were happy that someone
cared and that they could share their experiences with them, Annika told me. The local partners saw
CPT‟s presence as valuable and that they would leave a gap if they were not there. However,
Annika felt the sometimes their presence felt a bit unclear and it was difficult to know if they made
any difference.
Although the teams already consist of people from both the northern and southern hemisphere,
Annika hopes that the diversity will increase. While diversity could contribute in making the work
stronger and more grounded it is important to remember that the global network is part of the
context. ”If something happens there is a network to spread the information fast, the programme is a
tool for that.”
41
5 Discussion
In the following chapter I will discuss the findings of my empirical research by connecting them
with the theories and perspectives presented in Chapters one and two. This analysis will lead to my
conclusion where I set out to answer my research question and sub-questions. I will commence by
connecting the theories of violence and conflict to the findings from my fieldwork.
The spiral of violence and revenge is difficult to get out off, as stated by Böhm and Kaplan (2011).
Recognising the patterns that cause violence to erupt could be a first step, not just in the meta-
theory of violence that Eisner (2009) discusses, but also in specific situations where violence occurs.
One such pattern in the conflict between Palestine and Israel that surfaced during my fieldwork was
that of the militarisation and the idea that there are no alternatives to violence. Sahar emphasised
how the militarisation of the Israeli society made choosing alternative paths for solutions difficult.
By outlining the three different paths that people tend to see as the possible responses to violence,
Daoud pointed out the oversight of a more constructive path. One of the first activities that Holy
Land Trust did was education in methods of nonviolence in order to break the cycle of violence.
Eisner‟s (2009) effort to find common principles for effective methods of preventing violence is
another part of his meta-theory that relates to this thesis. Is third-party nonviolent interventions such
an effective method, and could nonviolence be a principle for effective prevention of violence?
If we are to understand what effective prevention of violence is, recognising what kind of violence
occurs in a situation is important. Galtung‟s (1969) dimensions of violence can be of assistance
when doing this. In the context of my fieldwork I saw evidence of some of these different
dimensions. The occupation and the house demolitions protested by ICAHD are manifestations of
structural violence. The complex system with the checkpoints and the road blocks that the Eas
observed and reported on is both a sign of structural violence, but also signifies the negative and
positive dimension of violence. The negative influence of violence can be seen when a person is
refused passage through a checkpoint. What Galtung (1969) refer to as the positive influence of
violence is evident from Helen‟s rendition that at times some of the road backs scattered around the
West Bank are not manned, thus occasionally resulting in less restrictions in movement. The aspect
of de-humanisation, that Böhm and Kaplan (2011) write is a facilitator of violence, also occurs.
Helena said that it was difficult to know how to interact with Israeli soldiers because they are in a
role and that this created barriers. The de-individualisation that occurs in the military is a form of
de-humanisation that makes interaction with soldiers difficult. The Palestinians in turn are de-
humanised through, for example, the system of the checkpoints, as illustrated by Anna in her story
about the woman who was refused to pass through the checkpoint.
42
It is difficult to say where in the conflict triangle the situation in Palestine and Israel commences,
but there are manifestations in all three areas. To mention a few there is the basic contradiction on
borders described briefly in the background to the case study. In the previous sections I outlined
some examples of violent behaviours. Some of the stories told by the Eas in the interviews also
show signs of negative attitudes that create a basis for further contradictions to grow. What comes
to mind is Anna‟s experience that some of the Israeli soldiers she met were very scared. Is it
possible to transform these situations into nonviolent manifestations and peace?
The various tasks that the EAs do and how they change is related to what the situation requires at
that particular time and in that particular place as well as the competencies found on the team.
Gunlög‟s team in East Jerusalem had many set tasks, but they also varied compared to previous
teams. Helena‟s experience was more to be on call to be present in case something happened, which
she related to the strong influence of the wall and the checkpoints in her area. The interview with
Annika, presented in my excursus, also gives example of this flexibility, since the participants in
CPT missions can adapt to an arising situation and use civil disobedience if the deem it necessary.
Another piece contributing to the picture of what the situation in Palestine and Israel looks like can
be painted by turning to the manifestations of peace and nonviolence. Here we have the aspects of
negative and positive peace, as well as principled and pragmatic nonviolence, to commence with.
Examples of both principled and pragmatic nonviolence can be found in the local peace-building
initiatives included in the chapter above. ICAHD‟s attempt to prevent house demolitions is an
example of pragmatic nonviolence. By working with reconciliation and healing of memories while
the conflict is still on-going, Holy Land Trust show signs of principled nonviolence. Educating
people in methods of nonviolence is pragmatic violence. Shministim are taking a clear principled
stand when refusing to participate in the mandatory military service. Tent of Nations refusal to see
the surrounding settlers as their enemies also fall under principled nonviolence. EAPPI also
demonstrate both principled and pragmatic nonviolence. While they are not confrontational to the
same extent as perhaps CPT, the model of accompaniment is pragmatic, as is preventative presence.
The solidarity and support toward local peace-building initiatives indicates the programmes strive to
contribute to peace-building in the long-term as well. Besides this, the Eas demonstrated an
adherence to principled nonviolence in their attitudes, as illustrated by for example Helena‟s and
Anna‟s observation of the barriers created by the role a soldier has.
Another theme found in several of the interviews was the importance of peace-building being
locally owned and led, something that is supported by Chaulia (2011). Annika mentioned that the
43
global network that CPT constitutes is a tool to support and raise awareness of what local actors
experience. The Eas felt that an important part that they could contribute with and where they did
have an added value was when it came to returning home and share their experiences. While the
local peace-building initiatives should take the lead and therefore also be more active locally,
international advocacy provides an opportunity for support from international actors. This is
supported by Last‟s (2003), Papagianni‟s (2012) and Gawerc‟s (2006) arguments that the work for
peace need to take place at different times, different levels and through different mechanisms.
Preventative presence and accompanying are the main models for the third-party nonviolent
interventions presented in the third chapter. In relation to this it is important not to support a
specific party to the conflict, but rather to support organisations and people working for peace, as
highlighted by Åkerlund (2001). This is something that EAPPI is adamant about. Gunlög, for
example, mentions how her team worked with both Palestinian Israeli protestors and supported their
demonstrations. Anna‟s story about the terrified soldier at the checkpoint and how it made it clear to
her how untenable the situation for all people is also shows that EAPPI do not side with a party.
This is supported by Coy‟s (2012) discussion about neutrality as an important component of third-
party nonviolent interventions. The local peace-building initiatives that I met with also placed
emphasis on not taking sides. Tent of Nations‟ refusal to be enemies, and Antwan‟s call to be pro-
peace rather than pro one side indicates this.
When it comes to how the Eas were regarded, it seems that the reactions the Eas received from the
people they met were generally more positive than the way in which they regarded themselves. My
key informants among the Eas more frequently expressed their doubts in relation to the
effectiveness of their presence. This was also present in my interviews with Maria and Annika,
indicating that this is perhaps a perception not exclusive to EAPPI, but an apprehension that is
common in other third-party nonviolent interventions as well. Notwithstanding, this hesitation can
also be a strength, since it results in a self-reflexivity that for example Boothe and Smithey (2007)
identified as an important element in third-party nonviolent interventions. This seem to be a more
structured part of the trainings of the PBI and CTP teams that Maria and Annika described, but the
Eas showed that they reflected upon this as well.
Through the strategy of acceptance, not threat, third-party nonviolent interventions in conflict
settings may indeed be efficient. The absence of threat was mentioned by Anna in relation to EAPPI.
She felt that there was a sense of vulnerability that created space for their work to continue.
44
6 Conclusions
As the case is with most small-scale research papers such as this, the researcher barely gets to
scratch the surface of the area, and usually the result is more questions than answers. However, with
these concluding remarks, I will set out to answer the research question and sub-questions presented
in the introduction.
Do the conditions for local peace-building in Palestine and Israel influence third-party nonviolent
intervention, and if yes, how?
Yes, the conditions for local peace-building have an influence because they illustrate that the
requirements and opportunities for peace-building vary depending on the location and timing. This
makes it clear that different actors are needed at various moments in a given context. This requires a
high level of flexibility in the preparation and implementation of third-party nonviolent
interventions.
How are third-party nonviolent interventions regarded by programme-participants themselves, as
well as by people in the local context?
The Eas seemed to be generally met with appreciation and curiosity, but with elements of
scepticism and fear as well. The programme-participants of third-party nonviolent interventions
interviewed in this research project gravitate towards placing the value not on themselves as
individuals but on what the programme stands for as well as on the support for local peace-builders.
This creates a condition for the participants to continuously reflect on their role, and how it interacts
with the local context, a reflexivity that can strengthen the relevance of the programme.
In the setting of Palestine and Israel, can third-party nonviolent initiatives such as the Ecumenical
Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI) contribute to peace-building locally,
and if yes, how?
Yes, third-party nonviolent interventions such as EAPPI can contribute to peace-building locally.
As discussed above, through the aspect of preventative presence the programme can contribute to
peace-building locally by – to a limited extent – preventing that a situation escalates into violence.
By achieving this, the programme can lead to negative peace. Through their open support for local
peace-building initiatives, as well as through reports and sharing of information about the situation
in Palestine and Israel, EAPPI also connects local voices for peace in Palestine and Israel to the
local arena in the Eas home countries, as well as to the international community at a global level.
45
This component of the programme contributes to positive peace, by supporting local peace-building
initiatives that work against both structural and direct violence.
One of the limitations I discovered with my research during the process was that conducting a
single-case study limited my chances for comparison. If I had decided to look at two examples of
third-party nonviolent interventions, either in the same context or in different contexts there would
have been an opportunity for more in-depth comparison. Comparison was part of my discussion on
a small scale, through my excursus, but the discovery of this limitation lead me to identify a gap for
future researches to fill: comparing the effectiveness of different third-party nonviolent intervention
programmes in place in different contexts.
The scope of my research was also a rather small one, which is only natural given the level of the
thesis. This observation, however, lead me to determine another area for future study. Since the
focus of this thesis was the role of an international initiative, the space to explore local peace-
building initiatives was limited. Yet, some insight on the matter was given and it demonstrated that
much more could be discovered. A specific topic that comes to mind is to what extent local peace-
building initiatives adhere to the different dimensions of nonviolence in policy and practise.
That said, the conclusions drawn from this thesis will hopefully prove useful for future research on
the topic. Similar to the way my informant Helena described that as an EA you could be part of a
puzzle with many constructors, so too can this thesis be a part of the much larger project of
researching peace.
46
7 List of References
Literature
Albansson, Louise. (2005) EAPPI – det Ekumeniska Följeslagarprogrammet i Palestina och Israel
– En deskriptiv utvärdering och reflektion. Bachelor Thesis. Lunds University.
Bernard, R. (2002). Research Methods in Anthropology – Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.
3rd
ed. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
Boothe, I. and Smithey, L. (2007) „Privilege, Empowerment, and Nonviolent Intervention‟, Peace
& Change, Vol 32 (1), pp. 39-61. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0130.2007.00408.x
[Accessed 10 November 2016].
Casini, Gabriele. (2012) The impact of conflict transformation on the work of grassroots
peacebuilding organizations in Colombia and Israel/Palestine. Master Thesis. Uppsala University.
Chaulia, S. (2011). International Organisation and Civilian Protection – Power, Ideas and
Humanitarian Aid in Conflict Zones. London, New York: I.B. Tauris.
Chenoweth, W. and Stephan, M. (2011). Why Civil Resistance Works: Logic of Nonviolent Conflict.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Chenoweth, E and Gallagher Cunningham, K. (2013) „Understanding nonviolent resistance: An
introduction‟, Journal of Peace Research, Vol 50 (3), pp. 271-276. Available at:
http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/50/3/271 [Accessed 12 May 2015].
Coy, P. (2012) „Nonpartisanship, interventionism and legality in accompaniment: comparative
analyses of Peace Brigades International, Christian Peacemaker Teams, and the International
Solidarity Movement‟, The International Journal of Human Rights, Vol 16 (7), pp. 963-981.
Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2011.642144 [Accessed 22 November 2015].
Denscombe, M. (2016). Forskningshandboken – för småskaliga forskningsprojekt inom
samhällsvetenskaperna (P, Larson, trans). 3rd
ed. Lund: Studentlitteratur. (Original work published
2014).
Eddy, M. (2014) „„We Have to Bring Something Different to this Place‟: Principled and Pragmatic
Nonviolence Among Accompaniment Workers‟, Social Movement Studies, Vol 13 (4), pp. 443-464.
Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2013.833853 [Accessed 22 November 2015].
47
Galtung, J. (1969). „Violence, Peace and Peace Research‟, Journal of Peace Research, Vol 6 (3), pp.
167-191. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/422690 [Accessed 6 March 2015].
Galtung, J. (1990) „Cultural Violence‟, Journal of Peace Research, Vol 27 (3), pp. 291-305.
Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/423472 [Accessed 10 Oktober 2016].
Galtung, J. (1996) Peace by Peaceful means – Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization.
Available at: http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.its.uu.se/lib/uppsala/reader.action?docID=10369641
[Accessed 23 October 2016].
Galtung, J. (2009) „Introduction: peace by peaceful conflict transformation – the TRANSCEND
approach‟. In: Webel, C. & Galtung, J. eds. Handbook of Peace and Conflict Studies. Abingdon,
Oxon; New York: Routledge.
Galtung, J. (2010). A Theory of Conflict – Overcoming Direct Violence. Oslo: Transcend University
Press.
Garton Ash, T. (2009) „A Century of Civil Resistance: Some Lessons and Questions‟. In: Roberts,
A. and Garton Ash, T. eds.. Civil Resistance and Power Politics – The Experience of Non-violent
Action from Gandhi to the Present. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gawerc, M. (2006) „Peace-building: Theoretical and Concrete Perspectives‟, Peace & Change, Vol
31 (4), pp. 435-478. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0130.2006.00387.x [11 June
2015].
Harvey, G. (2011) „Field Research: Participant Observation‟. In: Stausberg, M. & Engler, S. eds.
The Routledge Handbook of Reserach Methods in the Study of Religion. Abingdon, Oxon; New
York: Routledge.
Johansen, J. (2009) „Nonviolence – More than the 47bsence of violence‟. In: Webel, C. & Galtung,
J. eds. Handbook of Peace and Conflict Studies. Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge.
Krieg, A. (2013) Motivations for Humanitarian Intervention – Theoretical and Empirical
Considerations. Available at: http://link.springer.com.ezproxy.its.uu.se/chapter/10.1007/978-94-
007-5374-7_3 [Accessed: 9 May 2015].
Last, D. (2003)Mina sidor - „Early warning and prevention of violent conflict: The role of
multifunctional observer missions‟. In: Carment, D. & Schnabel, A. eds. Conflict Prevention: Path
to Peace or Grand Illusion? Tokyo; New York: United Nations University Press.
Lewis, H. (2009) „The Influence of Edward Said and Orientalism on Anthropology, or: Can the
48
Anthropologist Speak?'. In: Salzman, P. and Divine, D. (eds). Postcolonial theory and the Arab-
Israel conflict. London: Rouledge.
Mahony, L. (2013) 'The Accompaniment Model in Practice', Fellowship, Vol 77 (7/12), pp 12-16.
Available at: http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.its.uu.se/docview/1440790008?pq-
origsite=summon# [Accessed 22 October 2016].
Michrina, B. & Richards, C. (1996). Person to person : fieldwork, dialogue, and the hermeneutic
method. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Nagler, M. (2014) The Nonviolence Handbook: A Guide for Practical Action. Available at:
http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.its.uu.se/lib/uppsala/reader.action?ppg=1&docID=10844258&tm=14
80000283733 [Accessed 14 November 2016].
Papagianni, K. (2012). 'Political engagement, mediation and the non-governmental sector'. In:
Wolff, S. & Yakinthou, C. eds. Conflict Management in Divided Societies: Theories and Practices.
Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge.
Sartell, Emmy. (2014) Ekumeniska följeslagarprogrammet – Neutralitet och opartiskhet i en
asymmetrisk konflikt. Bachelor Thesis. Lunds University.
Sharp, G. (1973). The Politics of Nonviolent Action: Part One: Power and Struggle. Boston: Porter
Sargent Publishers.
Sharp, G. (1998). The Politics of Nonviolent Action: Part Two: The Methods of Nonviolent Action.
7th ed. Boston: Porter Sargent Publishers.
Sharp, G. (2000). The Politics of Nonviolent Action: Part Three: The Dynamics of Nonviolent
Action. 7th ed. Boston: Porter Sargent Publishers.
Sharp, G. (2012). From Dictatorship to Democracy. 4th ed. London: Serpent's Tail.
Sponsel, L. (1994). 'The Mutual Relevance of Anthropology and Peace Studies'. In: Sponsel, L. &
Gregor, T. eds. The Anthropology of Peace and Nonviolence. Boulder, Colorado; London: Lynne
Rienner Publishers.
Steinberg, G. (2009) 'Postcolonial theory and the Ideology of Peace Studies'. In: Salzman, P. and
Divine, D. (eds). Postcolonial theory and the Arab-Israel conflict. London: Rouledge.
Stephan, M. and Chenoweth, E. (2008) 'Why Civil Resistance Works: The strategic logic of
nonviolence', International Security, Vol 33 (1), pp. 7-44. Available at:
49
http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/isec.2008.33.1.7 [Accessed 31 October 2016].
Vinthagen, S. (2016). Motståndets Sociologi – Kampen mot förtryck med fredliga och frihetliga
medel. Sparsnäs: Irene Publishing.
Åkerlund, A. (2001). Transforming Conflicts and Building Peace – Experience and Ideas of
Swedish Civil Society Organisations. Stockholm: Sida Studies (no 13).
Web sources
In order to determine the date of publication or when a website was last updated, I used the online
tool found on this website: https://centralops.net/co/.
EAPPI. (2016a) About EAPPI. Available at: https://www.eappi.org/en/about [Accessed 15
November 2016].
EAPPI. (2016b) Our Mode is Accompaniment. Available at: https://www.eappi.org/en/our-model
[Accessed 15 November 2016].
Holy Land Trust. (2016a) About us. Available at: http://www.holylandtrust.org/about-holy-land-
trust.html [Accessed 14 November 2016].
Holy Land Trust. (2016b) Programs & Projects. Available at:
http://www.holylandtrust.org/programs--projects.html [Accessed 14 November 2016].
ICAHD. (2016a) History of ICAHD. Available at: http://icahd.org/who-we-are/history-of-icahd/
[Accessed 11 November 2016].
ICAHD. (2016b) Our Mission and Vision. Available at: http://icahd.org/who-we-are/mission-
vision/ [Accessed 11 November 2016].
Just vision. (2014) Glossary – Shministim. Available at:
http://www.justvision.org/glossary/shministim [Accessed 11 November 2016].
Landguiden. (2015) Israel-Palestina. Available at: http://www.landguiden.se/Konflikter/Israel-
Palestina [Accessed 8 November 2016].
Landguiden. (2016) Fördjupning. Available at: http://www.landguiden.se/Konflikter/Israel-
Palestina/Fordjupning [Accessed 8 November 2016].
Svensson, J. (2015) Forskarprofilen: Don Kulick. Available at:
50
http://www.uu.se/perspektiv/forskarprofiler/forskarprofilen-don-kulick [Accessed 21 November
2016].
Tent of Nations. (2016a) History of Daher‟s Vinyard. Available at:
http://www.tentofnations.org/about/dahers-vineyard-land-history/ [Accessed 11 November 2016].
Tent of Nations. (2016b) Welcome to Tent of Nations – An Educational & Environmental Family
Farm. Available at: http://www.tentofnations.org/about/about-us/ [Accessed 11 November 2016].
United Nations Peacekeeping (2014) Peace and Security. Available at:
http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/peace.shtml [Accessed 22 November 2016].
Images
Encyclopaedia Britannica (2007). West Bank – Region Palestine. Available at:
https://global.britannica.com/place/West-Bank [Accessed 18 November 2016].
Interviews
Göranzon, K. and Johansson, H. (2015). The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine
and Israel. 15 April 2015. Bethlehem, Palestine.
Göranzon, K. and Galmén, G. (2015). The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine
and Israel. 10 May 2015. Saltsjö-Boo, Sweden.
Göranzon, K. and Pettersson Hjälm, A. (2016). The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in
Palestine and Israel. 9 November 2016. Uppsala, Sweden.
Göranzon, K. and Spalde, A. (2015). Christian Peace Maker Teams in Iraq. 19 April 2015. On road
to Jenin, Palestine.
Göranzon, K. and Vesterlund, M. (2015). Peace Brigades International in Nepal. 16 April 2015.
Bethlehem, Palestine.
Participant observation
Holy Land Trust. (2015) Presentation by Antwan Saca. 16 April 2015. Bethlehem, Palestine.
Israel Committee Against House Demolitions. (2015) Presentation by Ruth Edmonds. 13 April
51
2015. Jerusalem, Palestine and Israel.
Shministim. (2015) Presentation by Sahar Vardi. 13 April 2015. Jerusalem, Palestine and Israel.
Tent of Nations. (2015) Presentation by Daoud Nassar. 15 April 2015. Tent of Nations, Palestine.
52
Appendices
Appendix 1 – Interview guide
General information
I will start each interview with a short description of my thesis and what role the interviews play. I
will ask the informants for their consent to participate in the research, have the interview recorded
and to be mentioned by name. Since all my informants are native Swedish speakers the interviews
are conducted in Swedish.
Introductory questions
When were you an Ecumenical Accompanier/participant in a third-party nonviolent intervention
programme?
Where were you stationed?
Why did you apply?
What training/education did you receive?
What were your main tasks and activities?
Topics to cover
Nonviolent approach
How was nonviolence used during the mission?
How did you perceive the methods?
Which aspects of your nonviolence training were useful (if at all)?
Can you describe a situation in which you had to rely on a particular technique of nonviolence?
Being a third-party to the conflict
How did you view your own role as a third-party to the conflict?
How did you relate to the people you met?
Reception
How did the people you met regard you as an ecumenical accompanier/participant in a third-party
nonviolent intervention programme?
How did they perceive the approach of the programme?
53
Other stakeholders
Did you meet any other third-party, and if so, how did you perceive their role?
Note
Since I will use a semi-structured approach during my interviews, the above questions and topics
are merely a guide to get the interview started.
54
Appendix 2 – Galtung's triangles of violence and conflict
Galtung's triangle of violence
Direct violence
Cultural violence Structural violence
Note: The manifestations within the triangle can appear in any order, and each version paints a
different picture of the on-going situation.
Source: Galtung, J. (1990) 'Cultural Violence', Journal of Peace Research, Vol 27 (3), pp. 291-305.
Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/423472 [Accessed 10 October 2016].
Galtung's triangle of conflict
Behaviour (B)
Attitude/Assumptions (A) Contradiction (C)
Note: The conflict process can originate in either of the parts and lead to different scenarios.
Source: Galtung, J. (1996) Peace by Peaceful means – Peace and Conflict, Development and
Civilization. Available at:
http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.its.uu.se/lib/uppsala/reader.action?docID=10369641 [Accessed 23
October 2016].
55
Appendix 3 – Map of the West Bank
Image 1: Map of the West Bank, Palestine. Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica