Less than a day has passed since the Israeli navy attacked an international Gaza Freedom Movement “Freedom Flotilla,” intent on breaking Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip, in international waters. The explosion of media coverage surrounding this makes it likely the highest-profile act of (supposedly) nonviolent resistance to occur in years. But the dust has yet to settle. The boats and the activists who were aboard them are still under Israeli control, and so also, therefore, is the story of what really happened. As information comes in, here are some questions to keep in mind for thinking about this horrific event through the lens of nonviolence.

Were the activists really acting nonviolently? There has been considerable controversy thus far about who provoked whom to the violence that finally ended in deaths aboard the flotilla ships. It appears as if some people aboard took matters into their own hands and attacked the Israeli soldiers. But many of those leading the mission were seasoned activists committed to and trained in nonviolence. Their primary cargo was humanitarian aid, and their purpose was to make a political point, not engage Israeli forces in combat. If fighting broke out when armed Israeli forces arrived that is to be regretted, but that should not be mistaken for the Gaza Freedom Movement’s intentions.

How are the mission’s success and failure being measured?
Some are going to look at this and say, “See, they tried a nonviolent approach, and it ended in violence. Therefore, the mission failed, and nonviolence doesn’t work.” It would be particularly troubling for those Palestinian activists who are thinking about trading violent for nonviolent methods to come to this conclusion. But nonviolent resistance always involves self-sacrifice on the part of those who struggle for justice. Though the tragedy in the loss of life is not to be downplayed, the flotilla has already proven successful in significant ways; people around the world, including influential leaders, have responded by condemning the Gaza blockade, and millions more have learned about the international movement to transform the conflict in the region.

Was the flotilla a mission of aid or activism? Reports often describe the flotilla’s purpose as humanitarian aid. In turn, Israel offered to deliver the supplies to Gaza itself, precluding the need for the flotilla to finish its delivery. It is true that the ships carried humanitarian supplies. But the mission also had an explicitly political purpose, to resist what the activists understand as the injustice of the Gaza blockade.

Whose suffering is the media considering grievable? We already know that the Western media is more likely to concern itself with the deaths of Westerners than that of others. This is a tendency that we need to counteract. We should strive to treat all victims as if they are one of us and worthy of our deepest concern. We should also be attentive of the tendency to portray criticism of Palestinians and their advocates as plausible, and criticism of Israel as simply anti-Semitic.

What laws were violated, and why? Laws were violated on both sides. Israel attacked a ship in international waters, in violation of international law. And the flotilla intended to break the limits imposed by Israel’s blockade. On the one hand, not all laws are equal; the blockade itself has been called illegal by a United Nations report last year. On the other, not all violations are equal; Israel violated international law out of convenience, with little or no expectation of consequences (since it hasn’t suffered them for past incidents), while the activists on the flotilla intended to flaunt the blockade as an act of conscience, exposing themselves to the consequences.

Who are the activists representing? There is already a tendency in the reportage to point out the support of violent actors, like Gaza’s Hamas regime, for the flotilla. Some will contend that the activists are therefore supporters of what has been labeled “terrorism.” Attempts are also being made to link the activists to extremists in Turkey, which the Turkish government reportedly has investigated and strenuously denies. Whatever the case may be, it’s important that we not let the activists’ actions be falsely conflated with those of others. Making such conflations are very much in the interests of those who would want to justify Israel’s disproportionate violence; nonviolent resistance is often more threatening to the powerful than violent resistance because it so visibly undermines their claim to moral superiority.

How is the official story being manipulated? By conducting its own investigation before allowing any foreign journalists or authorities to participate, Israel is being careful to ensure that its version of events is the only version. The Israeli government has already been hurriedly trying to explain its own violence with allegations that the activists were armed and intent on delivering materials meant to be weaponized. If Israel were to plant weapons on the scene after the fact to distort the investigation, it would only be following the US’s example in Iraq. Since this incident took place in international waters, involving people from around the world, a truly international investigation should take place immediately.

For now, first of all, we can at least mourn the deaths of those killed on the ships, alongside those whose lives have been destroyed or ruined in the wider conflict, both Palestinian and Israeli. The refusal to tolerate and glorify violence, whether conducted by the powers that be or the disempowered, is the first step toward bringing about nonviolent change.

The above video shows some of the Free Gaza activists disembarking at Israel’s Ashdod Port after having been attacked and taken into custody 70 miles away in international waters. There is still very little definitive information coming out. The New York Times is reporting 10 deaths. But again, that number is not certain. Israel has control over the flow of information (given all 600-plus activists are locked up) and isn’t letting much out that doesn’t somehow justify its actions. For those looking to follow this breaking story with more attention given to the activist side, check out Free Gaza’s Twitter feed, WitnessGAZA.com, and The Guardian‘s live blog. There was also a compelling interview with Free Gaza boardmember Adam Shapiro on Democracy Now! earlier today. Finally, for a sense of the mainstream media coverage, check out this collage of various homepages. Is it any surprise which news source is openly defending Israel’s actions?

The Free Gaza Movement’s Freedom Flotilla was attacked by the Israeli Navy in international waters late last night. There are varying reports on the tragic aftermath. The New York Times is reporting (by way of the Israeli Trade Minister) between 14 and 16 killed, as well as 30 more injured. Free Gaza, however, just released a statement saying two were killed and 31 injured. Here is how they described the horrifying action:

Under darkness of night, Israeli commandoes dropped from a helicopter onto the Turkish passenger ship, Mavi Marmara, and began to shoot the moment their feet hit the deck. They fired directly into the crowd of civilians asleep… Streaming video shows the Israeli soldiers shooting at civilians, and our last SPOT beacon said, “HELP, we are being contacted by the Israelis.”

We know nothing about the other five boats. Israel says they are taking over the boats.

It’s clearly too soon to predict anything, but a moment has most certainly been created. Israel has exposed its willingness to break international law and fire upon unarmed civilians in a much more dramatic and potentially costly fashion than perhaps ever before. It’s not just Palestinians this time, but a group far more difficult to sweep under the carpet:  international activists, the likes of which include a Nobel Laureate and an 85 year old Holocaust survivor. Already, the story is the lead on most mainstream media websites.

Meanwhile, Israel is trying to justify its use of deadly force, saying its soldiers saw weapons on board the ship. But according to Free Gaza, there is video evidence that shows otherwise. Israel knows that if the truth sticks, the Palestinian rights movement will receive a strong shot in the arm. Already, protests have begun in Turkey, where, according to Al Jazeera:

Thousands of Turkish protesters tried to storm the Israeli consulate in Istanbul soon after the news of the operation broke. The protesters shouted “Damn Israel” as police blocked them.

Turkey is also reported to have summoned the Israeli ambassador to lodge a protest.

“(The interception on the convoy) is unacceptable … Israel will have to endure the consequences of this behaviour,” the Turkish foreign ministry said in a statement.

As this moment unfolds, it is important that the memory of the nonviolent activists killed yesterday be honored with a commitment to nonviolence by all Palestinian rights activists. It is the only way any good will come from this tragedy.

Not surprisingly, the Toronto police have purchased four Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) for use during the G-20 summit at the end of June.

As I’ve written about here and here, the LRAD is a new, controversial non-lethal weapon that was first used in the United States during the last G-20 in Pittsburgh.

While the U.S. National Institute on Deafness says that hearing noise over 85 decibels for a sustained time can cause permanent damage, the devices that the Toronto police just bought can generate sounds reaching 143 decibels.

According to the Toronto Star:

[Police spokesperson Const. Wendy] Drummond acknowledges LRADs can cause permanent hearing damage if used improperly but says Toronto police are developing guidelines for deployment. She said officers will also only use the device’s “alert” function if crowds become riotous and will use the manufacturer’s recommendation of firing short bursts, two to three seconds long.

I’ll believe that when I see it.

In Burma (as I recently noted here) hip-hop has become a vehicle for dissent against the military junta. A new article in the Global Post profiles Generation Wave (GW), one well-known group of young Burmese activists who are using this music to stoke resistance.

GW itself was formed after the “Saffron Revolution” in September 2007 when rising fuel prices provoked thousands of monks to take to the streets in protest. Civilians joined the movement, but the military junta cracked down, leaving hundreds dead and thousands imprisoned.

Following the crackdown, a group of protesters, who had been friends since high school, started GW as a way to inspire new activists inside Myanmar. Having analyzed revolutions worldwide and the opposition movement in their country they decided to focus on non-violent resistance.

In two and half years, the group has carried out what they call “action campaigns” almost every week. Their main activities include anti-government graffiti in busy places, handing out pamphlets and writing and distributing political music.

In the music video (above) for their new song “Never Give Up,” which includes images of Aung San Suu Kyi and monks protesting in the streets, Generation Wave members 9KT and MK rap with masks on to conceal their identities. In one scene, to represent the 30 members of the group have have been arrested, the pair are singing behind bars. As 9KT explains:

“We are trying to tell the government, even if they imprison us they cannot stop us fighting for freedom; we will always carry on.”

“We are telling the people that they shouldn’t give up,” he said. “Burmese youth can’t be afraid of the Burmese junta, they need to fight for freedom in our country.”

• At their commencement ceremony last week, University of Maryland graduates held signs above their caps to protest the BP oil spill and demanded clean energy now.

• Thousands of French workers marched yesterday in Paris and other cities to protest planned pension reforms.

• Dozens of teachers rallied in Karachi, Pakistan yesterday to protest delays in certain allowances.  After police charged at them with batons, they held a sit-in.

• Last week, art activists entered the London Tate Museum and filled an exhibit with oil and dead fish to protest BP sponsorship as they labeled the Gulf oil spill “the largest oil painting in the world.”  The exhibit had to be closed for cleanup.

• A hundred people protested outside the courthouse in El Paso, Texas against Obama’s plan to deploy the National Guard to the US/Mexico border there.

• Several dozen people gathered in front of the Chevron building in Houston on Wednesday to protest the connections between oil and war.  A few were arrested for trespassing on private property.

• 400 employees of the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Chicago walked out on Wednesday to protest poor working conditions.

• A hundred people protested at a Toronto Gay Pride conference on Tuesday against the decision to ban the term “Israeli apartheid” from upcoming pride events.

• Activists mass-purchased an acre of land in Scotland near Donald Trump’s planned golf resort to prevent and protest the development of the land.

On Tuesday morning, Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, took initial steps to close Democracy Village – the protest encampment on Parliament Square that sprung up earlier this month – saying it is doing “considerable damage” to the area and threatening tourism.

Metropolitan Police began by arresting veteran anti-war protester Brian Haw, who has been camped outside of the Parliament since 2001, and fellow demonstrator Barbara Tucker.

According to an article in the Guardian:

In separate moves, residents of the camp, which consists of 31 small dome tents, three communal marquees, a tee-pee and a pair of compost toilets, woke up to find notices from Johnson’s officials demanding they leave immediately tucked under their groundsheets.

[...]

The camp includes communists, climate change protesters, opponents of the war in Afghanistan, anarchists and homeless people and features a communal vegetarian kitchen, an IT tent and a “peace garden” with an oak sapling surrounded by vegetables growing in the ground.

Whether the government will actually be able to get rid of Haw and the camp on charges of trespassing is yet to be seen. He has already successfully resisted many legal attempts to end his protest and is determined to stay put. As the BBC reported:

Speaking outside the court, Mr Haw also set out his intention to remain in the square for the rest of his life.

“We’re there because our country is committing infanticide, genocide, the looting of nations.

“I’m determined to be there until they kill me. How much longer will that be?”

People all across Zurich were dropping like flies on Tuesday as part of a flash-mob protest against the proposed building of nuclear power stations in Switzerland. The action simulated what might happen if a nuclear radioactivity disaster were to occur. Plus it apparently references the recently cancelled ABC show FlashForward. Hopefully, unlike the show, it met with a stronger audience reaction.

Zubi Advertising Services, an independent Hispanic ad company based in Miami, decided to take on the issue of racial profiling in Arizona by creating what it calls the “Gringo Mask.” Unfortunately, some seriously humorless people took offense to the slang term and caused enough of a controversy to warrant a local TV news piece and force a formal apology. Now, the following appears in place of the once downloadable mask:

We understand from your responses that some people might equate the word “Gringo” with an ethnic slur.  We do not.  It is simply a slang term used to describe Caucasians, and we don’t assign any negative connotations to it.  In fact, the mask communicates that looking this way will keep you above suspicion of being an illegal immigrant in Arizona, a positive thing not a derogatory one.  We hope everyone will view the mask the way we do…a comical tool to convey a message and raise awareness about an issue that is important to all Americans.  If the campaign has been taken in a different light by some, we sincerely regret the misunderstanding.

The irony that white people would be offended by a term no more disparaging than “redneck” in the face of greater racial injustice is truly frustrating. But at least the controversy brought more attention to the issue—which, as Zubi also noted, was its primary goal.

Thanks to your involvement, the GringoMask has achieved its primary objective to raise awareness of the potential for racial profiling by enforcement of Arizona SB 1070.  GringoMask was not a commercial product or intended to be a long term project, but a piece of satire to promote discussion and thought.

In addition to raising awareness, the mask was used to promote dialogue between people of different opinions in the hopes of arriving at better solutions than SB 1070, and to show solidarity with Americans of every race and color across the country that found this law unfair in its targeting of a specific ethnic group even if only implicitly.

For more on the many creative ways people are finding to act in solidarity with Arizona’s Latino community check out this great piece in Yes! Magazine called The 21st Century Civil Rights Movement.

A San Francisco band called Monarchs hired three Latino day laborers to pose as the band members in a music video for their song “Mexicans.” Both the video and the song pay tribute to the hard work of the immigrant community in the face of a largely ungrateful America. In an interview with the Phoenix New Times, one of the band members explained the lyrics as such:

The chorus of the song goes: “Braceros, you’re the future now/ Everyone says, no one knows what town.” This references the Bracero program, where hundreds of thousands of Mexicans were brought here during World War II to fill a shortage of manual labor (primarily in West Texas). By the 60′s, the program was shuttered, but the idea of hiring cheap farm labor from Mexico had already been established. So fast forward to now, and the literal and figurative descendants of these Braceros are no longer just a group to be exploited. Their numbers are so great, their imprint so established, that they are, by any metric, the future of our country. Everybody kind-of knows this already, and so a lot of people’s response is to look at the issue and say, “not in my town.” But the truth is, if you look around, they are already pretty much in everybody’s town. The end of the song repeats the phrase “14 Mexicans in a van.” This phrase has proven somewhat controversial when we play the song live, but it’s really just telling it like it is. Every day you have all these people coming up from Latin America, using every bit of money they have for the privelege of crowding into a van or whatever, risking all kinds of calamity just to come here and work some difficult job. That’s heroic when you think about it. It should make people feel like John Wayne in some WW2 movie: “that’s the kind of man I’d like to have in my regiment.” But instead, our xenophobia gets in the way and we try to build electrified fences and legalize racial profiling to keep these relentlessly hard-working, self-made people out! What a world.