Twelve years ago, I picked up a camera for the first time to film the olive harvest in a Palestinian village in the West Bank. I thought I was there to make a single documentary and would then move on to some other part of the world. But something kept bringing me back.
Prije dvanaest godina, prvi put sam podigla kameru da bih snimala žetvu maslina u Palestinskom selu na Zapadnoj obali. Mislila sam da sam ondje kako bih napravila jedan film i da ću onda ići dalje u neki drugi dio svijeta. Ali nešto me stalno vraćalo.
Now, usually, when international audiences hear about that part of the world, they often just want that conflict to go away. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is bad, and we wish it could just disappear. We feel much the same way about other conflicts around the world. But every time we turn our attention to the news, it seems like one more country has gone up in flames. So I've been wondering whether we should not start looking at conflict in a different way -- whether instead of simply wishing to end conflict, we focus instead on how to wage conflict. This has been a big question for me, one I've pursued together with my team at the nonprofit Just Vision. After witnessing several different kinds of struggles in the Middle East, I started noticing some patterns on the more successful ones. I wondered whether these variables held across cases, and if they did, what lessons we could glean for waging constructive conflict, in Palestine, Israel and elsewhere.
Sad, kada međunarodna publika čuje za taj dio svijeta, često samo žele da sukob ode. Sukob Izraela i Palestine je loš, i htjeli bi da samo nestane. Osjećamo se jednako i za druge sukobe diljem svijeta. Ali svaki put kad gledamo vijesti čini se da gori još jedna zemlja. Pitala sam se trebamo li gledati sukobe drugačije -- ne samo kako bismo ga zaustavili, weć fokusirali se na to kako voditi sukob. Ovo je veliko pitanje za mene, jedno koje sam dugo istraživala zajedno sa timom u organizaciji JustVision. Nakon što sam svjedočila nekoliko različitih sukoba na Bliskom Istoku, počela sam primjećivati neke uzorke na uspješnijima. Zanimalo me vrijede li ove varijable u različitim slučajevima, i ako da, što možemo naučiti iz vođenja konstruktivnih sukoba, u Palestini, Izraelu i drugdje.
There is some science about this. In a study of 323 major political conflicts from 1900 to 2006, Maria Stephan and Erica Chenoweth found that nonviolent campaigns were almost 100 percent more likely to lead to success than violent campaigns. Nonviolent campaigns are also less likely to cause physical harm to those waging the campaign, as well as their opponents. And, critically, they typically lead to more peaceful and democratic societies. In other words, nonviolent resistance is a more effective and constructive way of waging conflict.
Postoji znanost vezana uz ovo. U proučavanju 323 velika politička sukoba od 1900 do 2006. godine, Maria Stephan and Erica Chenoweth utvrdile su da nenasilne kampanje imaju 100 posto više izgleda da budu uspješne od nasilnih kampanja. Nenasilne kampanje također imaju manje izgleda da prouzroče fizičku štetu, onima koji vode kampanju, i njihovim protivnicima. I, kritički, najčešće su vodile do mirnijih i demokratskijih društava. Drugim riječima, nenasilni otpor je učinkovitiji i konstruktivniji način od vođenja sukoba.
But if that's such an easy choice, why don't more groups use it? Political scientist Victor Asal and colleagues have looked at several factors that shape a political group's choice of tactics. And it turns out that the greatest predictor of a movement's decision to adopt nonviolence or violence is not whether that group is more left-wing or right-wing, not whether the group is more or less influenced by religious beliefs, not whether it's up against a democracy or a dictatorship, and not even the levels of repression that that group is facing. The greatest predictor of a movement's decision to adopt nonviolence is its ideology regarding the role of women in public life.
Ali ako je to tako jednostavan izbor, zašto ga više grupa ne koristi? Politički znanstvenik Victor Asal i suradnici pogledali su nekoliko čimbenika koji oblikuju izbore taktike političkih grupacija. I ispada da najveći predviđatelj odluka pokreta da prihvati nenasilje ili nasilje nije da li je grupa lijevo il, desno orijentirana, ne da li je grupa manje ili više vjerska, ne to da li se bori protiv demokracije ili diktatora, čak ni razine represije kojima je izložena. Najveći predviđatelj o tome da li će neki pokret preuzeti nenasilje je ideologija o ulozi žene u javnom životu.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)
When a movement includes in its discourse language around gender equality, it increases dramatically the chances it will adopt nonviolence, and thus, the likelihood it will succeed.
Kada u svojim raspravama pokret uključuje pričanje o jednakosti spolova, to dramatično povećava šanse da će prihvatiti nenasilje, i samim time, šanse da će uspjeti.
The research squared up with my own documentation of political organizing in Israel and Palestine. I've noticed that movements which welcome women into leadership positions, such as the one I documented in a village called Budrus, were much more likely to achieve their goals. This village was under a real threat of being wiped off the map when Israel started building the separation barrier. The proposed route would require the destruction of this community's olive groves, their cemeteries and would ultimately enclose the village from all sides. Through inspired local leadership, they launched a nonviolent resistance campaign to stop that from happening. The odds were massively stacked against them. But they had a secret weapon: a 15-year-old girl who courageously jumped in front of a bulldozer which was about to uproot an olive tree, stopping it. In that moment, the community of Budrus realized what was possible if they welcomed and encouraged women to participate in public life. And so it was that the women of Budrus went to the front lines day after day, using their creativity and acumen to overcome multiple obstacles they faced in a 10-month unarmed struggle. And as you can probably tell at this point, they win at the end.
Istraživanje se složilo s mojom dokumentacijom političkog organiziranja u Izraelu i Palestini. Primjetio sam da pokreti koji prihvaćaju žene na liderskim pozicijama, kao one koje sam dokumentirala u selu imena Budrus, bilo je izglednije da će postići svoje ciljeve. Ovo selo bilo je pod stvarnom prijetnjom da bude izbrisano s karte kada je Izrael počeo graditi Barijeru za odvajanje. Predložena ruta predviđala je uništenje maslinika, groblja i na kraju zatvaranju sela sa svih strana. Kroz nadahnuto lokalno vodstvo, pokrenuli su kampanju nenasilnog otpora kako bi to zaustavili. Izgledi su bili protiv nijh. Ali imali su tajno oružje: 15-godišnju djevojčicu koja je skočila pred buldožer koji je htio izvaditi maslinovo drvo, i zaustavila ga U tom trenutku zajednica Budrusa shvatila je što je moguće ako prihvate i ohrabre žene da sudjeluju u javnom životu. I tako su žene Budrusa išle na prvu crtu iz dana u dan, koristeći svoju kreativnost i utjecaj da nadiđu višestruke prepreke u 10-mjesečnoj nenaoružanoj borbi. I kao što možete pretpostaviti, one su pobijedile.
The separation barrier was changed completely to the internationally recognized green line, and the women of Budrus came to be known across the West Bank for their indomitable energy.
Barijera odvajanja promijenjena je u potpunosti u međunarodno prepoznatu zelenu liniju, i žene Budrusa postale su poznate na Zapadnoj obali po svojoj nesvladivoj energiji.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)
Thank you.
Hvala vam.
I want to pause for a second, which you helped me do, because I do want to tackle two very serious misunderstandings that could happen at this point. The first one is that I don't believe women are inherently or essentially more peaceful than men. But I do believe that in today's world, women experience power differently. Having had to navigate being in the less powerful position in multiple aspects of their lives, women are often more adept at how to surreptitiously pressure for change against large, powerful actors. The term "manipulative," often charged against women in a derogatory way, reflects a reality in which women have often had to find ways other than direct confrontation to achieve their goals. And finding alternatives to direct confrontation is at the core of nonviolent resistance.
Želim stati na trenutak, u čemu ste mi vi pomogli, jer se želim uhvatiti u koštac sa nekoliko ozbiljnih nesporazuma koji se mogu dogoditi u ovoj točci. Prvi je da ne vjerujem da su žene miroljubivije od muškaraca. Ali vjerujem da u današnjem svijetu, žene imaju drugačije iskustvo moći. Pošto su navigirale da budu nemoćnije u više aspekata svog života, žene su sposobnije potajno vršiti pritisak za promjenu protiv velikih, moćnih dionika. Termin "manipulativne", često usmjeren na žene u lošem smislu, odražava stvarnost u kojoj žene često moraju naći načine koji ne uključuju direktnu konfrontaciju da bi postigle svoje ciljeve. I pronaći alternative direktnim sukobima je u osnovi nenasilnog otpora.
Now to the second potential misunderstanding. I've been talking a lot about my experiences in the Middle East, and some of you might be thinking now that the solution then is for us to educate Muslim and Arab societies to be more inclusive of their women. If we were to do that, they would be more successful. They do not need this kind of help. Women have been part of the most influential movements coming out of the Middle East, but they tend to be invisible to the international community. Our cameras are largely focused on the men who often end up involved in the more confrontational scenes that we find so irresistible in our news cycle. And we end up with a narrative that not only erases women from the struggles in the region but often misrepresents the struggles themselves.
Sad do drugog potencijalnog nesporazuma. Puno sam pričala o svojim iskustvima na Bliskom Istoku, i neki od vas možda sad misle da je rješenje problema u educiranju Muslimanskih i Arapskih društava kako bi više prihvaćali žene. Ako bismo to učinili, oni bi bili uspješniji. Oni ne trebaju takvu pomoć. Žene su bile dio najutjecajnijih pokreta koji dolaze s Bliskog Istoka, ali one su nevidljive u međunarodnom društvu. Naše kamere su većinom fokusirane na muškarce koji često završavaju uključeni u različite scene sukoba koje smatramo neodoljivima za naše vijesti. Završavamo sa pričom koja ne samo da briše žene iz borbi u regiji već i krivi interpretira borbe.
In the late 1980s, an uprising started in Gaza, and quickly spread to the West Bank and East Jerusalem. It came to be known as the First Intifada, and people who have any visual memory of it generally conjure up something like this: Palestinian men throwing rocks at Israeli tanks. The news coverage at the time made it seem like stones, Molotov cocktails and burning tires were the only activities taking place in the Intifada. This period, though, was also marked by widespread nonviolent organizing in the forms of strikes, sit-ins and the creation of parallel institutions.
U kasnim 1980ima, ustanak je započeo u Gazi, i brzo se proširio na Zapadnu Obalu i Istočni Jeruzalem. Postalo je poznato kao Prvi ustanak, i ljudi koji se sjećaju tog događaja većinom u sjećanje prizivaju ovako nešto: Palestinci bacaju kamenje na Izraelske tenkove. Izvještaji u to vrijeme prikazivali su kamenje, molotovljeve koktele i goruće gume kao jedine aktivnosti koje su se događale u ustanku. Ovo razdoblje, ipak, je obilježeno i raširenim nenasilnim organiziranjem u oblicima štrajkova, sjedenja i stvaranja paralelnih institucija.
During the First Intifada, whole sectors of the Palestinian civilian population mobilized, cutting across generations, factions and class lines. They did this through networks of popular committees, and their use of direct action and communal self-help projects challenged Israel's very ability to continue ruling the West Bank and Gaza. According to the Israeli Army itself, 97 percent of activities during the First Intifada were unarmed.
Tijekom Prvog ustanka, čitavi sektori Palestinske civilne populacije mobilizirale su se, kroz generacije, fakcije i klasne linije. To su učinili kroz mreže popularnih vijeća, i njihovo korištenje direktnog djelovanja i društvenih programa samopomoći izazvalo je sposobnost Izraela da nastavi vladati Zapadnom obalom i Gazom. Prema Izraelskoj vojsci, 97 posto aktivnosti tijekom Prvog ustanka bile su nenaoružane.
And here's another thing that is not part of our narrative about that time. For 18 months in the Intifada, women were the ones calling the shots behind the scenes: Palestinian women from all walks of life in charge of mobilizing hundreds of thousands of people in a concerted effort to withdraw consent from the occupation. Naela Ayesh, who strived to build a self-sufficient Palestinian economy by encouraging women in Gaza to grow vegetables in their backyards, an activity deemed illegal by the Israeli authorities at that time; Rabeha Diab, who took over decision-making authority for the entire uprising when the men who had been running it were deported; Fatima Al Jaafari, who swallowed leaflets containing the uprising's directives in order to spread them across the territories without getting caught; and Zahira Kamal, who ensured the longevity of the uprising by leading an organization that went from 25 women to 3,000 in a single year. Despite their extraordinary achievements, none of these women have made it into our narrative of the First Intifada.
I ovdje je još jedna stvar koja nije dio priče iz tog razdobla. U 18 mjeseci Ustanka, žene su bile one koje su povlačile poteze u pozadini: Palestinske žene svih uloga bile su zadužene za mobilizaciju stotina tisuća ljudi u orkestralnom trudu da se povuče pristanak iz okupacije. Naela Ayesh, koja je težila da izgradi samoodrživu palestinsku ekonomiju potičući žene u Gazi da sade povrće u svojim dvorištima, aktivnost koja je bila ilegalna zbog Izraelske vlade u to doba; Rabeha Diab, koja je preuzela donošenje odluka za čitav ustanak kada su muškarci koji su ga vodili bili deportirani. Fatima Al Jaafari, koja je progutala letke s naputcima ustanka kako bi ih proširila bez da ih uhvate i Zahira Kamal, koja je osigurala dugotrajnost ustanka vodeći organizaciju koja je narasla od 25 žena do 3000 u jednoj godini. Unatoč nevjerojatnim postignućima, nijedna od ovih žena nije ušla u priče Prvog Ustanka.
We do this in other parts of the globe, too. In our history books, for instance, and in our collective consciousness, men are the public faces and spokespersons for the 1960s struggle for racial justice in the United States. But women were also a critical driving force, mobilizing, organizing, taking to the streets. How many of us think of Septima Clark when we think of the United States Civil Rights era? Remarkably few. But she played a crucial role in every phase of the struggle, particularly by emphasizing literacy and education. She's been omitted, ignored, like so many other women who played critical roles in the United States Civil Rights Movement.
To radimo i u drugim dijelovima svijeta, također. U našim povijesnim knjigama, na primjer, i u našoj kolektivnoj svijesti, muškarci su javne osobe i glasnogovornici za borbu za rasnu pravdu u Americi, šezdesetih godina. Ali žene su također bile kritična pokretačka sila, mobilizirajući, organizirajući, i izlazeći na ulice. Koliko nas misli na Septimu Clark kada mislimo na borbu za građanska prava u Americi? Vrlo malo. Ali imala je ključnu ulogu u svakoj fazi borbe, pogotovo naglašavajući pismenost i obrazovanje. Gurnuta je po strani, ignorirana, baš kao i mnoge druge žene koje su imale važne uloge u pokretu za građanska prava.
This is not about getting credit. It's more profound than that. The stories we tell matter deeply to how we see ourselves, and to how we believe movements are run and how movements are won. The stories we tell about a movement like the First Intifada or the United States Civil Rights era matter deeply and have a critical influence in the choices Palestinians, Americans and people around the world will make next time they encounter an injustice and develop the courage to confront it. If we do not lift up the women who played critical roles in these struggles, we fail to offer up role models to future generations. Without role models, it becomes harder for women to take up their rightful space in public life. And as we saw earlier, one of the most critical variables in determining whether a movement will be successful or not is a movement's ideology regarding the role of women in public life.
Ovdje se ne radi o zaslugama. Ovo je promišljenije od toga. Priče koje pričamo važne su za to kako se vidimo, i kako vjerujemo da su pokreti vođeni i kako pokreti pobjeđuju. Priče koje pričamo o pokretu kao što je Prvi ustanak, ili borba za građanska prava važnije su i imaju presudan utjecaj u izborima Palestinaca, Amerikanaca i ljudi diljem svijeta kada budu donosili odluke suočeni s nepravdom i ohrabre se suočiti se s njom. Ako ne uzdignemo žene koje su imale ključne uloge u tim borbama, nećemo uspjeti ponuditi uzore budućim generacijama. Bez uzora, postaje teže da žene zauzmu svoje mjesto u javnom životu. I kako smo vidjeli ranije, jedna od ključnih varijabli u odlučivanju hoće li pokret biti uspješan ili ne je ideologija pokreta po pitanju uloge žena u javnom životu.
This is a question of whether we're moving towards more democratic and peaceful societies. In a world where so much change is happening, and where change is bound to continue at an increasingly faster pace, it is not a question of whether we will face conflict, but rather a question of which stories will shape how we choose to wage conflict.
Ovo je pitanje o tome da li se krećemo prema demokratskim i mirnim društvima. U svijetu gdje se događa tako puno promjena, i gdje se promjena nastavlja događati sve brže, nije pitanje hoćemo li naići na sukobe, već pitanje koje će priče oblikovati kako se odlučimo voditi te sukobe.
Thank you.
Hvala vam.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)