In almost every national conflict there are three sides: the two conflicting parties and third parties which have no enemies in the conflict, and which may play a role either in intensifying the conflict or in encouraging reconciliation and peace. This is of course the case in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as well. In my article in the book Nonviolent Possibilities for the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict I have written about possibilities for “active nonviolence” which might be employed by the Palestinian side in its struggle for liberation,as well as possibilities for “preventive nonviolence” applicable to Israelis whose state constitutes the power occupying Palestinian land and oppressing Palestinian people. In the present article I would like to focus on the third side of the triangle,and to examine the possibilities for nonviolent intervention which might be employed by third parties which have no enemies in the conflict.

As in all kinds of nonviolent intervention,these third parties can involve states and their political leaderships,as well as groups of citizens who organize for action independently of their governments (and often in opposition to official policies). For example, the U.S. acted as a third party in the establishment of peace between Israel and Egypt. The U.N.acts as a third party when it sends peacekeeping forces to preserve ceasefires with the consent of the conflicting sides.

In this article I will focus on third-party intervention employed by citizens of foreign states who do not represent their governments, but whose power derives from the fact that they come from states which are not sides in the conflict,and as such the conflicting sides themselves have no interest in hurting them - even when their actions are seen with displeasure by one or both sides. There are various kinds of such third-party intervention:

There is direct intervention by those who come to a conflict situation with a conscious intention to act,and there are those who can unconsciously act as a third party - for example, journalists and tourists. There are those who act from afar - who send protest letters, sign petitions, and lobby foreign governments. There are those who act indirectly by aiding local activists in the confict from their positions abroad,such as foundations who help finance local activities, or non-violent trainers. Third parties can define themselves specifically in terms of nonviolence, or more generally as peace groups. I am here interested in exploring the approach of nonviolence by those who come intentionally to act as third parties.

The power of states as a third party lies in the area of realpolitik. The power of citizens as a third party lies in the area of the “public eye.” During the intifada we saw that the violence of Israeli soldiers was reduced when journalists or tourists were present on the scene (Israel, like all countries, attributes great importance to its image in public opinion, both international and domestic). The Palestinian reaction was a bit different: The presence of journalists increased violent activities, because their cameras provided a platform for Palestinian resistance; the presence of tourists, on the other hand, reduced it, since violence keeps tourists away.

A group wishing to come to the occupied territories to act as a third party will face a number of problems: Israel, as the occupying power, will not be pleased with their presence and with the reports they send back to their home audience about the injustices and oppression of the occupation. The Palestinians, on the other hand, will welcome and invite the group’s presence, since it helps them in their struggle. But here the problems begin for groups advocating nonviolence: With whom will they choose to work? On what aspects of the conflict will they concentrate? What groups will they support? What level of independence will they maintain from the local actors? What kinds of people will they recruit?

Will they work with the Palestinian Authority or with non-governmental organizations? Will they work only with organizations advocating nonviolence and human rights, or with others as well? Will they act only against the violence of the oppressor, or against all violence? Will they cooperate with organizations that reject the legitimacy of the other side, or only with organizations aspiring to peace with the enemy?

Will the third party be involved only with human rights issues, or also in the struggle against the occupation itself? Often the boundaries between these areas are blurred. In struggles involving active nonviolence by Palestinians, the participation of third parties and Israelis can provide nonviolent protection for the Palestinian activists (a combination of two kinds of nonviolence - active and third-party). Since the foreigners and the Israelis are not the enemies of the Israeli soldiers there is a greater chance that they will refrain from hurting the Palestinians among them.

When groups encounter the injustices of the occupation on a daily basis, and especially the constant harassment of Palestinians by settlers, it is difficult to maintain a balanced approach toward the two sides. It is therefore very important that there be a clear position of working for peace between the two sides, and upholding the principle of support only for nonviolent activities - even when one feels that there is “justification” for the use of violence by the oppressed side.

The aims and methods of the host side (in this case the Palestinians) are not necessarily the same as those of the third party. For example, it is very important to try to mainatain a dialogue with Israelis - soldiers, settlers, politicians, journalists, and of course the Israeli peace movement. The Palestinians are liable to disapprove of dialogue with soldiers or settlers. There is also liable to be ambivalence toward or disapproval of reporting of human rights violations by the Palestinian Authority.

Within military contexts most of the fighters are young men. Within the context of nonviolent intervention everyone can participate. There are situations where women are more effective than men, where older people are more effective than younger people, and the same can be true of children. It is also of importance which countries the people come from. It is preferable that most of the participants come from countries which have a strong influence on the region and which the conflicting sides are dependent on - in this case primarily the U.S. The religious makeup of the group can also be of sigfnificance. The settlers often try to label members of third party groups as antisemites. It will be more difficult for them to make this claim if there are Jews in the group as well as Christians (although it is certain that many will accuse them of treason). It would be interesting to see how they react to Muslim Americans.

A third-party group which comes to maintain a presence in the occupied territories can be effective only if it is able to activate large numbers of people from their country of origin. The group can be very effective, for example, if it is able to mobilize thousands of American citizens to protest to the American and Israeli governments against land confiscations, house demolitions, and other human rights offenses.

In my opinion it is also very important to prepare third-party groups carefully before they come here, especially in two main areas: 1. nonviolent training for the specific role they will play; 2. providing background on the history of the conflict and its present stage of development, as well as on the political-cultural contexts of both Israeli and Palestinian societies.

This will give the participants at least some idea of the complexity of the situation in which they are coming to act.

I would like to conclude now with a final word. Although I have focussed in this article only on the role of third parties in the conflict, it is my hope that through concerted nonviolent activities by all sides to the conflict - Palestinians, Israelis, and third parties alike - that a process of the escalation of nonviolence can be created which will help pave the way for the establishment of a just peace between our peoples.