Nonviolence in the Holy Land

Subscribe to “Nonviolence Radio” on Apple Podcasts, Android, Spotify or via RSS.

As a Palestinian, Sami and his family have suffered directly under the long Israeli occupation and more acutely now, from the current war. Sami speaks candidly about the ways in which politicians and media harness fear and exploit unhealed traumas so that violence seems to be the only response to conflict. This, he insists, is a distortion – and one that must be actively resisted. Instead of accepting the simplistic binary categories of victim and victimizer, Palestinians can envision and then work collectively through nonviolent means to realize a just future, one which they themselves have chosen. Such a path calls for broad education in nonviolence, it calls for deliberate organization, it calls for genuine leadership and crucially, it calls for love to be our primary motivation. The situation in Palestine is horrific, there is no quick fix, but when we reject fear as our driver and turn to love instead, possibilities for real change emerge

I think part of loving is to deeply understand who the other is and where they’re coming from and what motivates them to behave the way they behave and do the things they do. And in that love and care and compassion, creates space for transformation and healing. And I think that is definitely much more powerful than fear, and is key. But it’s a journey.

—

Stephanie: Greetings and welcome dear listeners to another episode of Nonviolence Radio. I’m your host, Stephanie Van Hook, and I’m here with my cohost and news anchor of the Nonviolence report, Michael Nagler. And we’re from the Metta Center for Nonviolence in Petaluma, California.

On this episode we speak with a truly remarkable guest, Sami Awad. He’s the former executive director of the Holy Land Trust in Bethlehem. With the world’s eyes on this region at this time in the conflict, especially, escalated since October 7, our discussion with Sami explores a new level of activism and understanding of nonviolence in the region, one of the most tumultuous regions in the world.

What I liked the most about this interview with Sami was the depth of his understanding of the dynamics of nonviolence, not only politically, but also what happens in the human heart and mind, and this kind of tension between fear and love.

Sami is a thoughtful, inspiring, and noble human being. And we hope that you gain as much understanding and inspiration and support from this interview as we did. Let’s turn to Sami Awad.

Sami: My name is Sami Awad. I am living in Bethlehem. I am a Palestinian. Both of my parents are Palestinians. My father is a refugee from Jerusalem and my mother is from Gaza, from the Gaza Strip.

Until last week, my mother’s family was in Gaza. We were able to take them out to Cairo a day before the Israeli army started bombing Rafah. And they were in Rafah, actually. So very, very lucky. My uncle, aunt, cousin’s, in-laws – there are still family members that are still in Gaza. We’re still very worried about them. But at least the immediate family, we were able to take out last week.

I grew up in a family that has always been committed to peace work and very deeply influenced at a young age by an uncle, Mubarak Awad. Who was heading the Palestinian Center for the Study of Nonviolence before he was arrested and deported by the Israeli army for his work in nonviolence.

And so, my life journey, my mission, has been to engage in nonviolent resistance and activism towards the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian people and to bring a just peace to this land. Which has not been an easy task for all of us, I think, for all who have been involved in this.

Part of that was in 1998, I started an organization called Holy Land Trust, which I ran for 25 years, until last year, when I decided to step away from the organization. To continue working with them, but stepping into more freelancing and doing more work on a global scale with nonviolent activism.

Stephanie: What does that look like for you today?

Sami: Well, today, I mean, this was all the idea before this war on Gaza took place before October 7. So, it’s been completely taken over by just the reality that we live in now, and then trying to advocate for at least a ceasefire to happen. Trying to advocate for nonviolence, trying to advocate also for people not to be afraid to expose the injustices that are happening, the genocide that is taking place, the growing levels of racism that are happening also in this land, that need to be addressed. So, I haven’t been able to engage at the international level as planned.

But for me, the three tiers of the work that I work in and want to continue working, as I mentioned, the first and maybe the cornerstone is nonviolent activism. The second tier, which I have been doing more and more work in the field also, maybe even at the same level of need, is to address collective trauma, inherited trauma, and how this is an important component actually, of activism that we need to – we need to be motivated not by our fear nor by our trauma as we move forward.

Many, many peace activists are activists for peace because they’re afraid of the other side, not because they honor the other side, respect the other side, or even acknowledge the atrocities that have been done to the other side. “We are afraid of you, therefore, we want to make peace with you,” and that, for me, doesn’t work. And so inherited narratives of trauma, which are key. Key, when it comes to the Palestinian Israeli situation, are some aspects of work that we have been doing.

The third level of work is leadership development. So, for me, we can’t also talk about nonviolence without having clear, visionary, trusted leaders that are motivating their community, that carry the vision, that are leading their people in the struggles of liberation and not just sitting in, you know, five-star hotels and mansions and talking about liberation.

And so, leadership development, nonviolence, and healing are the work that I’ve been engaged in and want to continue to engage in, as I said, locally and globally as well.

Michael: So, in that brief talk, Sami, three things have come up for me of different character. One is, are you working with Combatants for Peace?

Sami: Yes. Yeah, you know, when we look at what’s happening now, as – I don’t even know what the word is to describe it. As sorrowful, as painful as confusing as it is, as dark as it is, there are some beacons of light that are happening. And I think one major one is that there is a level of awakening within the Palestinian activist community.

I’ve been having many of these discussions, many of these discussions happen in my home, including key leaders on the Palestinian side of Combatants for Peace, that we come, and we meet together. And then really ask the questions of, who we are, where are we, what is our mission? What is our goal? What have we done that has worked? What have we done that has not worked as well in the past?

I think October 7, let me say on a positive side, was maybe a wake-up call for many of us to say that, yes, we have been doing work as activists for 25 years and more now since the Oslo peace process began, at least if not before.

And then, did we fall into a routine? Did we fall into a certain pattern of what we did and how we did things that we need to address? And so, I think we’re having really very powerful discussions that talk about, again, who are we? What are we doing? What is the language we want to speak now? How much have we been in a space where we were appeasing the other side, even in our nonviolent activism? To try to bring them into, you know, accepting us or engaging with us?

How much did we downplay our language in a way that makes them want to join? Now we’re saying, “No, we want to label things as they are. We want to speak truth to power.” We want to make it very clear we’re not looking – yes, we enjoy the friendships, but this is not the main part, the part of what we’re doing.

It’ll be amazing friendships when this occupation ends. These are the friendships we want to have. Not before, and then having these friendships become so personal that they interfere with our ability to engage in work because we are worried about upsetting them or not making them – or making them triggered by us.

So, there’s been an awakening, I think, within the activist community since October 7. And these discussions have been very, very strong, and profound. I think.

Michael: Wow, thank you, Sami. Okay. I’ll just move on to my second question, since we had such a great time with the first one. The second one was more like a comment, but I’d like to get your response to it.

You know, in this field, as you know, we talk about negative peace and positive peace. And you just gave a really devastating definition of negative peace when you said, “Some people go into nonviolence because they’re afraid. They’re afraid of the opponent.” And Gandhi would say, acting out of fear is a form of violence.

Sami: Exactly.

Michael: So that, in a way, negative peace is not nonviolence.

Sami: Yes, I fully agree with that statement. And this is why it became very important for us to address the fear. Because we know that fear is part of the collective psyche, for example, of the Jewish community in particular. They grow up in a narrative that says to them, as Jews, we have trusted so many in the past and look what they did to us. As Jews, everybody hates us. Everybody wants to destroy us. And antisemitism is alive and well. There is no denial of that. But there is also, in my opinion, an abuse of that by certain leaders to gain political clout.

One quote that also is as strong for me is, it says, “Fear is the greatest motivator of human behavior.” And then leaders know that if you use fear, people will listen to you. And then we see this politically everywhere in the US, in Europe, growing fascism. To be honest, Michael, even the left in the US is now using fear as a motivation to rally people around them. And so, this has also been negative, negative peace as well.

So, we need to definitely address fear and its history, and the way to deal with it is healing. So, we are very much engaged in creating spaces for Palestinians and Israelis collectively, where they come with very specific programs that we have created to become aware. At least become aware that many of the decisions that they’re making are motivated by fear, and that we can now create a different space where we could put that fear behind us and become motivated by something else.

Become motivated by justice. Become motivated by compassion, by understanding the other, by acknowledging the atrocities that are being committed against the other. Take responsibility. Because fear also just puts you more in the victim’s mindset. And then we need people to understand that they have responsibility in terms of what’s happening here.

Michael: You made a statement, which is of really great significance in the nonviolence field. Because there is always this specter raised because of the tremendous power of Gandhi and King and a few others, there is, of course, a school that wants to not have charismatic leaders, which I don’t agree with that school very much.

And it sounds like you agreed with me, which is quite thrilling. That you said that a leader has to at least emerge, someone who can rally, who can refocus people, has to emerge.

Sami: Yes. Yeah. I think for us as Palestinians, this has been a question for me that I’ve been in for a long time. This is why I actually started doing the leadership training programs in the Palestinian community, because in a way, I could say we have too many leaders, but we don’t have leadership.

We don’t have clear leadership that is really able to unite the community. Our sad reality is we have leaders that are tribal leaders representing political parties. They’re trying to gain politically for their party based on, you know, putting others down or even struggling or having conflict with others, as we see between – for many, many years and until now between groups like Hamas and Fatah, each one trying to gain power in a situation where we have nothing, absolutely nothing.

Sometimes I compare this like people fighting over who’s going to be standing on top of the trash dump instead of asking, how can we all come together and clean this mess that we have been put in? So, for me, leadership is key, is important. We have leadership that are, again, ready to not just speak a vision and inspire people but are ready to be on the ground.

This is what Gandhi did. This is what King did. They were on the front lines of demonstrations. I’ve been in so many demonstrations here that we organized, Michael, where Palestinian leaders come to join us. And as soon as it reaches that hot zone where, you know, where it’s ready to have that tension between us and the army, they’re the first ones to leave, many of them, not all of them, but many of them will just turn around and go back.

They got their photo op, they got on the camera. You know, they got the interview on TV, and that was it. This is not the leadership that we want. And then I will even add to this and say that part of our work is to also build up the capacity of young leaders, which are very important for us.

This is key motivation. And, as important, women leaders in the Palestinian community, which were very, very strong, and very, very powerful until the Oslo peace process began, and the Palestinian Authority was created. And this absolute male masculine energy took over and women were sidelined for all the work that they did. And now we see, like all – most of the leaders in the Palestinian community are men.

Even somebody like Hanan Ashrawi, who was a woman leader for many years, you know well. She’s been sidelined. You know, given sort of like a spokesperson position at best. And so, for us, bringing young leaders and women leaders in full force in the Palestinian community is key as well.

Stephanie: Sami, as you’re speaking, first of all, I just want to pause and see if, you know, you’ve covered a lot of ground – has anything struck you as you’ve been speaking, that you want to go into a little bit further before we guide into another place? How are you feeling?

Sami: No, I’m feeling good. We’ll see where we go. I mean, I think it’s important at some point to talk about what – I don’t even know the answer to it, but what is nonviolence in the midst of all what’s happening now?

Stephanie: I do have a lot of questions about the various aspects and angles of nonviolence. One is that fear is the greatest motivator for politicians in particular, I think is what you mean.

Sami: It’s what the politicians use to motivate. So, fear is the greatest motivator of human behavior. And politicians know how to play that game very well. That’s – yeah.

Stephanie: Do you think love could be the greatest motivator?

Sami: Yeah, yeah. No, for me, I mean, I think a big part of the work we’re all doing is to conquer fear with love, for sure. And that’s what we want. But I think to really make that happen, I think we also need to understand how deeply fear has also been embedded in love itself. And how many people, you know – fear has, there is a certain understanding of love that I think is really missing.

I think most people who engage in love, if it’s at the personal or the collective level, still have this component of fear in them. Fear of losing a loved one, fear of being alone, fear of separation, fear of judgment. A lot of fear comes in love relationships. And so, this is something very important for me that we work on, which is how to also free love from fear itself.

And for me, there is a love that I think is very powerful and can be motivational. And that is when we talk about love that is unconditional, for example. Like, how can we love somebody despite the triggers, despite how, you know, their behavior that makes us feel insecure or something? And then how can we be part of that healing journey for them?

To love somebody, in my opinion, means to unconditionally love them. And then for me, you know, my history connected to this has been – I always say how I began to discover Jesus when I let go of Christianity. And then I started studying Jesus independent of Christianity. And then one key statement, a commandment, actually, not just a statement that he told his followers in the midst of a very brutal occupation that they were living in under the Roman occupation, which is, love your enemy.

And then I went on, it was my spiritual journey to understand what does it mean to love somebody? What does it mean when he is telling Jews who lived under a very violent, brutal occupation to love their enemy? He didn’t say, “Make peace with your enemy.” He didn’t say, “Resolve a conflict with your enemy.” He didn’t say, “Reach a peace treaty with your enemy.” He said, “Love your enemy.”

And then I think part of loving is to deeply understand who the other is and where they’re coming from and what motivates them to behave the way they behave and do the things they do. And in that love and care and compassion, creates space for transformation and healing. And I think that is definitely much more powerful than fear, and is key. But it’s a journey.

I want to say that it’s been one of my biggest disappointments since October 7 was in seeing how many Israeli peace activists that I’ve worked with, connected with, been in spaces with, engaged in nonviolent resistance with, immediately, immediately on October 7 itself fell into the trap of absolute fear from the other and even calling for violence towards the other.

And this is why I say it’s the greatest motivator. Because if you’re not really embedded and stable and have deep roots in love, then that tree can fall very quickly and then fear takes over. And so, yes, love is ultimately the greater motivator. But my fear, my problem at this time is that, sadly, in the world we live in, fear and separation are the motivations.

Stephanie: I was just reading in Thérèse of Lisieux, a Catholic mystic, who said on this topic of loving your enemy, that it’s not enough to love your enemy, you have to prove it.

Sami: Yes, I love that. I jokingly say sometimes, when I was in that question of what Jesus meant by loving the enemy, you know, I would say like, should I go to checkpoints and open my arms out to Israeli soldiers and say, “I love you, Come and – now give me a hug?”

And so, love, there is a proof to it, component as well. It’s not just words. It’s actions. It’s deeds. It’s energy that you bring into the space. It’s an opening, an invitation. So, there is action for sure when it comes to love as well.

Stephanie: And I think in that same context, it was something like the greatest – that before Jesus was crucified, that he gave another commandment which was even greater than loving your enemy, which was love one another the way that I’ve loved you.

Sami: Yeah. And yeah, for sure. And his story, his journey of his life is one where it was expressing love and living love and teaching love and being unconditional in love. And not separating between different tribes and different people and different groups when it comes to love. And even being challenged by himself, like when he showed love to the enemy, and he showed love to the – I think it was, there was a woman who was from a different identity group that even challenged him to heal her because he didn’t want to heal her initially.

And then she challenged him, and he did heal her. And for him to be in the humbleness of it, and accepting that he also has his learning to do when it comes to this from the enemy, from others. So, yeah, for me, everything that Jesus did was an embodiment of love and transformation and healing.

And then this is why, for me, it’s very important then to talk about him and to talk about his teachings in that way.

Stephanie: And on that topic again, of fear, and as you said, you know, love is sort of hiding behind fear in a way. That in the work of the trauma work and of, you know, getting to this place of nonviolence from this place of unconditional, fierce love, detached love, even, I wonder what you think that fear is doing there.

Why is fear so intertwined with love?

Sami: Yeah, yeah. It’s a big question. I mean, I think part of it is, we grow up in communities and in identities that promote separation and promote division. Starting with family, you know, now it’s about the nucleus family. It’s not about the bigger community that we are part of. It’s my father and my mother and my siblings.

And then there is the other. It’s my school, and then there is the other. Everything is polarized, everything is dualistic, everything is divided. And in that, because of these narratives we grow up in, there is this illusion of security that we have to create around my identity, my narrative, my people, my tribe.

And the illusion is that this identity creates a sense of security for me to be part, to belong to something. And then the moment that is challenged by something else or by a new narrative that comes into play, then immediately fear of losing comes up. And I think fear of losing is the biggest fear that we have, not just losing life but losing, losing connection, losing community, losing identity.

And to be honest, this is what I see a lot within the Israeli community. That for so many years now, decades, it’s been embedded in them that the state of Israel, this state is the only safe place for you. This state is the only place that you could come to that will protect you when the rest of the world begins to attack you. This is why you have to –

So, the love for the state of Israel is coming completely from an ideology of promoting fear of the other. That if you don’t love Israel and you don’t give everything to Israel, your commitment, your vows, your money, your vote, then you are with the other, you are with the enemy. You are allowing. So fear – this is why I keep saying fear is a great motivator.

And then many, many Israelis and talking to them, especially when it comes to trauma healing work, there is this fear of who are we, even now, without the state? And yes, the state has problems. And yes, the state has issues. And yes, the state is not doing good things. But, you know, there’s always this, but we go back to it. And we need to fix it. We need to make it better.

But it’s still this whole nation that is completely embedded and motivated by fear. And again, I’m not denying the past that created this, but to say that there is an abuse of this at this time that is taking place, that’s making people completely lost in it.

So, yes, separation and division and dualism is key in promoting fear and dismantling love in spaces. When we talk about love, it’s about community. It’s about oneness. When you love somebody, you are creating something new with them. It’s not just the I and the they. It’s the we that comes out, that emerges. It’s the new creation that comes out of love.

And for me, this is like – this is my dream for this place and this land. What is the new that we can create? When we look into the peace treaties that have been offered, the Oslo peace process. A peace process. Even leaders won Nobel Peace Prizes on it. Like the greatest honor of peace. If we look deeply on it from that lens, it wasn’t a peace process. At best, we could say it was a security process to put like a positive note on it. It was negotiating security, and security means there is fear. And so, when there is fear, we need to negotiate the best security mechanism for us.

Israelis were negotiating from a place of, how do we maintain a Jewish nation, a Jewish state? Because, again, of how the world has treated us, how the world has seen us, the fear and the trauma that we have experienced. And then we have to deal with those Palestinians that are in this land. We wish they were not there, but because they’re there, we have to find a certain arrangement for them.

And the Oslo peace process failed because that arrangement was only about how can we control the Palestinians in order to maintain security. How can we create a Palestinian Authority to help us suppress the Palestinians in a way to maintain security for Israel and the Jews?

And that failed. The Palestinians’ leadership on the other side was also motivated by fear. The PLO at that time had lost its legitimacy in the global community when Yasser Arafat stood with Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War. You know, the faucet of financial support from the Gulf state was cut, diplomatic negotiations with the US and Europe that were secret were ended.

He was motivated by fear of losing everything. So, he jumped into the Oslo peace process again from a place of fear. Both sides were motivated by fear. And for me, yeah, when we talk, imagine if they were motivated by love in that way, like by a deep understanding, compassion, care, a desire to reconcile the grievances that were created by both sides, a desire to even apologize and mend what we have done to you. We would definitely not be in this situation. But sadly, that’s not the motivation that was there.

Stephanie: You’re here at Nonviolence Radio. I’m Stephanie Van Hook. I’m with Michael Nagler. And we are speaking with Sami Awad from Israel-Palestine about the work of nonviolence in the region.

A while ago, we had interviewed Ali Abu Awwad from Taghyeer, and he said something that ties into something that you said earlier about the victim mentality. He said, “When we stop seeing ourselves as victim or victimizer, that’s really the basis for being able to move forward together.”

Can you speak to the – again, that kind of tension between love and fear within this identity of a victim or victimizer when, clearly, we can be both victim and victimizer at the same time? So, how do we release ourselves from that space? How do you do that in your work?

Sami: Yeah, so again, for me, it comes down to motivation. And what is that motivation for action that it creates? At first, we cannot deny the reality that we live in. On that scale, there is a victim and there is a victimizer, there is an oppressor and oppressed, there is an occupier and an occupied.

The question is, being the victim, what do I do? What do I engage in? How do I behave? Do I allow myself to completely surrender to victimization, which means my action is about blaming, complaining, seeking entitlement, not taking responsibility, not taking action, labeling everything as impossible because of what they’re doing to us? And so, there is a consciousness of victimization that I can choose to be in.

And there’s another consciousness of victimization, which is, yes, I am a victim, but I have power. Yes, I am a victim, but I can unite my people around the call. Yes, I am a victim, but I can have a vision for the future. And I can engage in action to bring a better day for me and my people, and for the victimizer themselves as well.

I think it’s not about denying the reality, but it’s about saying that I make a choice. Everything in life is a choice. And then again, we see this on a personal and then the collective. This is why, for me, always, the personal and the collective are intertwined. We learn from each other. A person who is abused in a relationship and is a victim has a choice.

And sometimes we think we don’t have a choice because fear takes over. But we always have a choice. Then what is that choice that we make in the midst of the oppression, of being victimized? It’s not about denying it. I think that’s very important.

And then I fully agree with you. Yes, I can be a victim in the context of an occupation, but I can be a victimizer in the context of how I connect to my neighbor, or how I connect to my family or my children.

And so, we all have that, we all have that component in us to be both at the same time. I don’t want to belittle the reality that we live in and to say no, that at that mega political level, that is the reality, and we need to address it from that point about how do we empower the victim, and how do we – and this is a key part of nonviolence, is how do we pull power away from the victimizer?

I think many people just completely ignore the component of nonviolence, which is the need of nonviolence to pull power away. Michael, Mubarak, Gene Sharp, talk about this. That we need to – yeah, so, when it comes to the power dynamics, it’s where the shift needs to happen.

Stephanie: Yeah, Michael and I were listening to a practitioner of restorative justice from Northern Ireland the other day, and he was working with victims of sexual assault, I think at one point.

And he said that one of the stories was that this woman had the opportunity to be in the room with the person who had raped her, but he wasn’t going to apologize for what he did. And so, the guy was like, “Well, we could call off the session because you’re not going to get what you want.”

She said, “No, we’re going to go through with it because he’s never going to have that power over me again. It’s not that I want his apology. I don’t want him to ever have that power over me again.”

Michael: She showed that she wasn’t destroyed by what he did. That was her triumph in that situation.

Sami: Yeah. And not make him decide what the discourse of the conversation would be. But he decides he wants to apologize or not, that’s not, that’s not important to her. Yeah, that’s beautiful. I love that.

Michael: You know, at the end of Man’s Search for Meaning, which is Viktor Frankl, the psychiatrist who was in Auschwitz for two and a half years. At the very end, when the camp is liberated, he’s walking out of the camp with a fellow prisoner, and they walk past a wheat field. And the other prisoner runs into the wheat field and starts trampling the wheat. And so, Frankl says, “What are you doing?” And the guy says, “They did this to me, so I’m going to do this to them.”

And there’s just like such a stark allegory of this man let himself be destroyed by his victimization. And Frankl, for some, you know, God’s grace descended on him or something and he didn’t let himself be destroyed. So, I’m guessing that when you do a lot of trauma work with both camps, actually, that this is something that you emphasized, not to let yourself be, not to adopt what your enemy tells you you are.

Sami: Of course. Of course. And then we see this fully in history, where unhealed trauma creates a cycle of, a new cycle of victim and victimizer, of oppressor and oppressed. And we all know this is a big part of this reality that we live in. The fact that there was no real deep healing work for the Jewish community after the Second World War when it comes to trauma healing, it was never addressed at that level.

It was just, in a way, coming out from guilt and shame that the international community had to make up for the Jewish community. But until today, there hasn’t been a real reconciliation process. And we see this, and then we see that that lack of healing has created this system that we have lived in for many, many years that has completely now exposed itself.

And then it’s violence. And then it’s sad. It’s really sad. Like, it’s not easy for me to create a comparison between how they were treated and how they’re treating us. This is not the point. But to say that the lack of healing of the Jewish community has created a community where they are committing atrocities against another people.

And to say that in the future that the lack of healing for Palestinians from the traumas that they are facing will result in them creating violence and atrocities against others. If it’s another group of people, if it’s different identity groups within the Palestinian community, if it’s gender-based, religious-based, to say that the Palestinians are excluded from that cycle, it’s not going to happen if we don’t engage in trauma healing as soon as we are able to move in that space for the Palestinians.

So, peace, any peace that comes in the future, in my opinion, needs to be deeply embedded in truth and reconciliation and trauma work for both communities.

Michael: We recently interviewed Ofer Cassif, and he had a very interesting image for this. He talked about Israelis and Palestinians living side by side, but not looking each other in the eye. That they are really not seeing one another on a human level.

In other words, they’re trying to coexist rather than live together. And that kind of thing has never lasted.

Sami: Yeah, I fully agree. And not just that, I will add to it. We’re living next to each other, coexisting – and I think that’s what he was also meaning, with completely different narratives of who we are and who the other is.

We’re not even listening to each other’s stories. We’re not even listening to each other’s pain and narratives. So, the Israelis are living their own complete narrative. And actually, it’s interesting because part of the conversations we’re having is how media is being presented on both sides. And the absolute contrast with what the Israeli media’s presenting, what Palestinian media’s presenting.

And it’s not about truth or not like it’s that’s, you know, the media is media. But it’s just the stories, the narratives that are being presented by one, and how the same experiences presented by the other is a completely different story. And then people, this is what they’re listening to. That’s what they’re hearing, and that’s then what they’re sharing as their experience.

We need to find that space where – and it’s not even about creating one story. I mean, it’s about just beginning to really listen to the other and then seeing the other eye to eye, and honoring and respecting the other, trusting the other for their experience and what can be built with them.

Stephanie: We have a good friend, Amery, who is an artist. In his art, he tries just to bring people together to build relationship with each other, whether it’s like rolling a ball back and forth in a park. That is his art in a way. And so, I’d love to move into this question of what nonviolence looks like in this situation right now. And yeah, let’s just open that up.

Sami: Yeah. So, I’ll begin by saying that nonviolence in the midst of war and violence is not something very easy to engage in. It’s sad to say this, but when the emotions are so high, when the arms are so powerful and strong, and the use of weapons is so easily done, all of us, all of us, we’re all in a place where we are in the question of what can we do?

You know, we’re seeing demonstrations happening around the world. Millions and millions of people. We’re seeing politicians that are probably going to lose elections because of their stance, and they’re still advocating for violence and for this war to continue and for more weapons.

So, on one level, I would say, we – I can’t be always optimistic and say, yeah there is a nonviolent solution at this time. At this time, I think it’s very difficult. And I think it’s very important for us to honor that within us as activists. To actually acknowledge despair as it exists within the community and not to play around it. And in that place, to create conversations of how do we move, and where do we move, and what are we creating for any future work we want to do?

We definitely know that at the end of this war, there isn’t any political agenda out there that is going to promote a just peace to this situation. We’re going to fall back into a reality of fear, and victimization, and victimhood, and oppressor, and oppressed, and power dynamics the same way. Yeah, maybe a different political map of it, but that same energy is still going to be present.

And that, I think, is where we will have an opportunity to engage. And so, in a way, when the dust settles from this atrocity that we’re facing, it’s going to be our time to take charge, to move forward in work. And these are the conversations we’re having with activists.

It’s not to say that we cannot engage. We do the best that we can, which is creating advocacy. Many, many of us are on webinars and Zoom calls around the world talking about nonviolence, talking about the Palestinians, talking about the rights of the Palestinians, creating more international support, the momentum for a just peace in this land. Because that is an opportunity that we have to work with.

But none of us are able to go now and stop a tank from shelling a house in Gaza. Even though there are many conversations – I’ve been in conversations with women leaders from around the world that are talking, let’s bring 100,000, 200,000 women to come and stand. And even with their willingness to understand that some of them might even lose their life in this.

And then there’s conversations happening around that, for sure. But to understand even that is going to be difficult to do. And we’re still engaging in the conversations at this level of activism and action. But there is a time that will come that I think many people will look back and say, “Violence has not worked. What we did in 2023 and ‘24, with so much death and destruction, did not achieve anything for both people. And we need a different route.”

The power dynamics will still stay there. And I think that will be the door opening for us to say there is a way, which is nonviolence, which is a more powerful force, which is also a force that will have the negative and violent response from the oppressor towards it. And this is something we need to engage in.

You know, I think, as I said, we’re having all these conversations now, and I think part of the conversations is to actually present nonviolence as a powerful force that many people lost touch with. Nonviolence became, again, like the negative peace, the negative nonviolence that Michael talked about, which is let’s get together, let’s do a sit-in somewhere.

To be very honest, in many nonviolent actions that are joint Palestinian/Israelis, there was pre-negotiations with the army that we will be there for an hour – or you’ll be there for an hour. After an hour, we’ll start shooting. And the demonstrators would leave before the hour ended because they did not want to engage in the clash. And now what we’re saying is, “No, if we want to engage in nonviolence in the future, we have to be ready for that clash. We have to be ready for the response, the violent response from the other side.” To reclaim nonviolence for its core and its power, I think is the opportunity that we have ahead of us.

Stephanie: Yeah, I’ve heard comments that this conversation is extremely difficult to have because people have said Palestinians have tried nonviolence with the specific emphasis on the Great March of Return and that you had so many people joining that and that the soldiers just shot people down. So, how do you respond to that?

Sami: Yeah, I mean, I always say the March of Return was an example. I also say that the March of Return was and could have been much stronger if it was much more organized and much more embedded in a unified Palestinian cause of resistance. That it’s the West Bank and Gaza coming together, it’s leadership that was missing.

And then sadly, like in the First Intifada, where that was a very strong example of nonviolence that actually achieved great results for us, it’s, one, honestly, I would say corrupted leadership wanted to ride the wave and took it over, that it began to collapse. And many people who were organizing the March of Return were not committed – were not part – or supporters of Hamas.

And then, sadly, I would say at one point, again, leaders saw an opportunity for them to gain power and they rode that wave. And of course, you know, once – nonviolence and this is something that we always learn in nonviolent resistance and activism, even Gandhi talked about the army of nonviolence. You have to be trained in it.

This is not just about, you know, let’s go out and do it. Then we’re missing this: we’re missing the schools, the education, the training of nonviolence, as if you are trained to join an army. The only thing different is the weapons that you use are different. And so, there’s a sense of discipline, there’s a sense of camaraderie, there’s a sense of steadfastness, of willing to sacrifice, understanding this, that is missing, I think, I would say at this level, in most of the global, nonviolent movement, not just here.

So, yeah, it was an example. And then we could definitely build on it more. And to say, yes, the other side will engage in violence. And by the other side actually engaging in violence, it actually is a proof of the success of nonviolence, as we know, it’s not that it failed. It actually showed success. When the other side uses violence as a response.

Stephanie: So there were two intifadas, right?

Michael: Yeah.

Sami: Yes.

Stephanie: Where this – where the Second Intifada was more grounded in nonviolent action. Or the first one was?

Sami: The first one.

Stephanie: The first one. Okay, so Third Intifada? Is that a conversation that’s taking place, or what would be your vision of a Third Intifada?

Sami: I think what we need to – it’s probably coming, the Third Intifada. It’ll probably eventually come. But I think there are certain things that need to be in place for that intifada to happen.

It cannot just be another sporadic, you know, movement or resistance that – because even between the intifadas, we had many of these things that have happened where it could have launched the second or could have launched the Third Intifada, but then it quickly died out. And so, I go back to the issue of leadership and vision.

You know, the sort of the three circles that I use in our training work is you need nonviolent resistance as a strategy. You need leadership and a vision. You cannot have two only of the other. You have leadership and you have nonviolence. Without a vision, you’re going nowhere. You have leadership and a vision without a community that is committed and engaged in violence, you go nowhere. You have nonviolence and a vision, without leadership, you’re going nowhere.

And so, for me, if we want to engage in achieving that, that level of the Third Intifada or intifada that has a great potential of succeeding, we need to start doing the groundwork for it and preparing for it.

And I think this is part of the conversations that we are having within the Palestinian community and leadership within the Palestinian community. What is the leadership that we need? What is the vision? What are we struggling for? What is it that we want and that we need to come to an agreement on this? And again, sadly, within the Palestinian community, we don’t have a clear vision.

You know, the two-state solution was imposed on us. Most people do not support the two-state solution, at least in the way that it was presented. And most people have seen on the ground the reality that with the expansion and building of new settlements of the apartheid wall and the confiscation of land and water, that that solution wasn’t a working solution to start with.

Then again, I even mentioned that they show fear. How it was motivated by fear. And so, we need to come together, and I would say, as Palestinians first and ask what is the vision we want? And then invite Israeli partners and activists to join us in these discussions. But again, I think one of the big challenges is that since Oslo, everything had to be done jointly.

And I would say this is probably in my memory, and you could correct me, the only liberation movement where members of the oppressor had a voice as equal to the oppressed in what is the strategy and what is the vision and what is the tactic. Like, you know, the civil rights movement wasn’t bringing white people and black people to talk about what is the vision, what to create.

No, it’s the black community saying this is what we want to achieve. In South Africa, this is – the LGBTQ community, this is what we want. And we invite solidarity. We invite people to join us in this. The Black Lives Matter wasn’t, you know, some, you know, like a 20-year-old white person from Seattle coming in and saying, “Yeah, I like your movement, but I think you need to do this and that.”

This is what we get as Palestinians from our Israeli friends. And we need to say, “No, this is what we want to achieve, and you need to trust us and not be afraid of us. And join us at some point and help us achieve this, this vision and the goal and create a new future for all of us. But you don’t have a veto or a say in deciding it.”

So yeah. So, it starts by the Palestinians coming for a vision and start training and the strategies of nonviolence that we will use, start building momentum around it, creating a movement around it, bring in more people. Nonviolence is, it means mass popular movement. It’s not just the 20 of us going into a demonstration or tying ourselves to trees as nonviolence. These are actions that are happening.

A movement of nonviolence means that the greatest majority of the Palestinian community are committed at one level or another to it.

Stephanie: Well, that’s our show today. You’ve been here at Nonviolence Radio where we explore nonviolence all over the world. And today our guest was Sami Awad from Israel-Palestine speaking about nonviolence in the region. We want to give a shoutout to our mother station, KWMR, to all of the people who help make this show possible including Matt and Robin Watrous, Sophia Pechaty, Francesca Po helping out on social media. To Bryan Farrell and the friends over at Waging Nonviolence who help syndicate the show, as well as friends on the Pacifica Network, thank you for sharing Nonviolence Radio with a much wider audience.

If you want to learn more about nonviolence, visit us at www.MettaCenter.org. And you can also found the show at www.NonviolenceRadio.org.

Until the next time, please continue to study nonviolence, practice nonviolence and take care of one another. The world needs you. Until the next time.