🤥 Palestinians are incapable of resisting in ethical ways. The only language they understand is violence.

The Israeli military occupation of the Palestinian people on their land is not only unethical but illegal. Under international law, the Palestinians have the right to resist this illegal, military occupation, even through armed struggle.

Under international law, there is a right to resist that is closely related to the principle of self-determination. And the right to resist and to self-determination arises in situations of colonial domination, foreign occupation, and racist regimes that deny a segment of the population political participation, as is the case of Israel in its occupation of the Palestinian people.

It is both lawful and ethical to fight for one’s rights and resist occupation. This constitutes an act of self-defense and a fundamental political and human right. International law sanctions the use of force, when necessary, for resisting occupation. The United Nations General Assembly has explicitly reaffirmed the Palestinians’ right to resist Israeli military occupation, including through armed struggle.

Numerous United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolutions endorse national liberation movements in their right to independence and self-determination, even through armed struggle. Res. 2105 of 1965 condemned Portuguese colonialism in Guinea-Bissau. When this resolution was adopted, the peoples of Guinea-Bissau were engaged in armed liberation struggle. In the same resolution, the UNGA requested all states “to provide material and moral assistance to the national liberation movements in colonial territories.” This right is affirmed in the context of the right to self-determination of all peoples under foreign and colonial rule, including the Palestinians.

Nonviolent resistance is a vital component of Palestinian resistance to Israel, including boycotts, peaceful protests, general strikes, hunger strikes, and “Intifadas.” Since the struggle with the Zionists began, Palestinians have employed nonviolent means of resistance. These means have had some impact but have largely been disregarded by Israel and its allies. Consequently, armed resistance against Israel has become a final and imperative option for Palestinians in their struggle for liberation from foreign occupation and self-determination.

Palestinian armed struggle arises from Israel’s persistent rejection of all meaningful peace initiatives, alongside its exceptionally aggressive military occupation—the longest in modern history. Furthermore, Israel’s use of disproportionately violent military force to respond to all forms of Palestinian resistance, including nonviolence, have necessitated the recourse to armed struggle.

In 1936, Palestinians staged the longest anticolonial general strike in history to protest the British Mandate of Palestine and Britain’s transfer of its Mandate of Palestine to the Zionist movement.

In 1976, thousands of Palestinians peacefully demonstrated against Israeli seizure of Palestinian property in Israel’s north, only to be met with deadly violence.

In 1987-1993, the Palestinian’s First Intifada enraged Israel in its boycott of Israeli goods and Israeli taxes. This Intifada was met by Israel’s iron fist policy of killing unarmed Palestinian activists, house demolitions, and mass detentions.

In 2005, the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement was launched to challenge international support for Israeli apartheid and settler-colonialism through nonviolent boycotts, divestment, and sanctions. Israel and its allies have responded to the BDS with very harsh and punitive measures.

In 2018, Israeli soldiers shot and killed tens of unarmed protesters and journalists engaging in the peaceful Great March of Return in Gaza.

Other examples abound.

The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) was founded in 2005 as a non-violent counterpart to the Second Intifada. The BDS has been blocked at every turn by Israel’s Western allies, particularly the U.S., where 35 states have passed laws or issued executive orders to prosecute companies that boycott or divest from Israel. Leaders and activists have faced professional censure and other punitive measures for their participation in the BDS. Resolutions on college campuses to boycott and divest from Israel are often passed among student assemblies and bodies only to be overridden or vetoed by campus administrations.

Israel and its allies undermine all forms of nonviolent resistance and efforts aimed at ending the occupation of the Palestinian people. As of December 18, 2023, the U.S. used its veto 45 times to overturn resolutions critical of Israel. Since 1945, the U.S. used its veto 89 times to overturn UN Security Council resolutions. Over half of these resolutions were critical of Israel, and 33 were directly related to Israel’s illegal and military occupation of Palestinian territories and/or its use of military violence to oppress the Palestinians under its occupation. The U.S. exploits its veto power in other international contexts to discredit investigations, rulings, and findings made by the International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice, which have been critical of Israel.