Does Protective Presence Still Work?

As of recently, a lot of people have repeated a new mantra: protective presence doesn’t work anymore. Andrey X wrote a great piece on this for Vashti Media recently, and he brings up incredibly important points.

Yet in a lot of conversations I’ve had recently, people, especially those who don’t engage on the ground regularly and haven’t over time, have started to take this as face value. Two people asked me in a conversation a few days ago: is this work really worthwhile anymore? Maybe it’s become a choice of ego rather than one of actual action.

And let’s be clear: there is certainly reason to question this tactic. Tourist visa holders, including two Jewish women, have been deported. This olive harvest season has been the most violent and with the least access for Palestinians. And solidarity activists have gotten beaten up more than once alongside Palestinian residents. If the idea is to de-escalate, and the state is constantly escalating, then it’s not unreasonable to say protective presence doesn’t work.

But I’d still like to bring up some points that are crucial for our understanding:

1. Protective presence was never meant in and of itself to stop or end ethnic cleansing. It is an act of solidarity that works to slow down these processes, both by being on the ground and aiding in de-escalation in real time, and by supporting legal causes over time. But it’s always been clear to long-term solidarity activists that this is something that buys us time until the international community steps in. Protective presence can’t and won’t prevent ethnic cleansing in and of itself, and we shouldn’t put this method on a pedestal, but rather recognize its part in the greater puzzle.

2. The situation is getting more and more violent, but over time, protective presence has allowed people to stay on their land. Places with a lot of solidarity activity and local Palestinian organizing have been able to resist Israel’s ethnic cleansing better thus far.

3. In some places, de-escalation is almost impossible now, and in others it still works. Just because a tactic doesn’t work somewhere doesn’t mean we should abandon it everywhere.

4. Tactics are constantly changing—both those by the state and their settler-backed militias and by organizers fighting against it. The way organizing works in the field today and the manner in which we show up looks completely different than it did a decade ago. Protective presence has become a singular term for a lot of different tactics. In reality, those tactics change with the ground. Right now, there’s a need for change and diversity of tactics.

5. The answer can’t be to turn away from showing up. The more people active in the movement for justice, the harder it is for the state to consistently maintain their level of violence. This is why, yes, it’s still important to show up. Yes, it’s also getting more risky. Palestinians on the ground are still asking for support, which means new and seasoned solidarity activists and Palestinians themselves need to think through new means. The answer is to engage more, not to disengage.

6. And most importantly—going back to the first point—ethnic cleansing can actually only end when multiple players decide it’s time for it to end. Protective presence is one strategy to slow down the process while also bringing attention to this issue to wider audiences so that together we can pressure people in power to put an end to this violence. There’s no one answer, but many answers that need to happen in parallel to end the dispossession of Palestinians from their lands.

You can join Center for Jewish Non-Violence, Achvat Amim, or ISM or find other ways that makes sense for you to contribute. Protective presence is one strategy, and no single strategy can be relied on in full. There is no better time than now to be present and part of a growing movement for justice in the land.