The olive harvest has become synonymous with settler violence. The 2008 harvest saw a record high for attacks on Palestinian farmers and their land, capping a succession of increases. Violence on that scale has not materialised this harvest, which has instead been defined by its use as a political football. Propaganda from parties on both sides of the wall has distorted the facts on the ground. Such tactics do worse than cheapen the suffering of victims. They have further damaged the already fragile economy of Palestine's most valuable commodity.
In recent weeks there have been numerous reports of mass tree burning, particularly in the farms around Nablus. PA official for settlement activity Ghassan Daglas announced the destruction of 150 trees in Burin, a hub of carnage last year. Similar and larger figures came out of the villages of Laben, Al Sawya and Deir Ammar, by Daglas' statistics making 3,400 trees destroyed in 2009. PGFTU (Palestine General Federation of Trade Union) spokesmen alleged "thousands of trees burning in Jamain". The official line is one of large-scale destruction.
This is not a views shared by farmers in the region. Issam Sheddahah, a lifelong resident of Burin and a former victim of settler violence expressed surprise at these figures. "Last year they (settlers) burned many trees, but this year so far it has been quiet." Abu Hassan, whose farm lies closer to the infamous settlement of of Itzhar agreed, "No settlers have attacked us in this harvest". Al Sawya, further south from Nablus, also contradicted official reports. Farmers there claimed "good relations" with the surrounding settlers, continuing to harvest within 100 yards of settlements. What evidence there was for vandalism lay deep in the security zone, where Palestinians have no access. Fares, a member of Al-Mubadara and steering committee leader for Al Sawya suggested "the farmers are scared to talk about the settlers", but conceded the harvest had been unusually peaceful. "I think it is a reaction to the Goldstone Report. The Knesset has a lot of communication with settlements and they tell them not to make trouble."
The fact of the security zones is reason enough for Palestinian outrage. In Al Sawya 40% of farmland falls under military control. The size and location of these zones, permanently off limits to villagers, is solely determined by the IDF (Israel Defense Forces). They often dwarf the actual settlement, giving vast tracts of resource-rich land to the settlers. Their borders fluctuate, so that private land can be swallowed up at any time. The lack of laws to govern security zones is costing farmers far more than burned trees. In the last two weeks Burin has also seen people arrested without charge and cars torched by settlers, but neither has received the publicity which surrounds the harvest.
In the fourth consecutive year of drought, the harvest can ill afford the effects of scare tactics, Demand has outstripped supply to the point that a litre of olive oil now sells for around 40 shekels a litre, double what it cost two years ago. In many cases impoverished farmers have been forced to abandon their land, no longer able to extract a living from their produce. International involvement has provided some relief, in manpower and technology, but this too has been jeopardised.
Last week Palestinian radio announced the Israeli Government was in the act of passing a law, banning international volunteers from Area C farms. It was reported that any international found there faced arrest and deportation, while the host family would be fined 6,000 shekels ($1,500). There has been not a single instance of this 'law' being exercised, but significantly less volunteers are participating in the harvest. Bridget, campaign co-ordinator for ISM (International Solidarity Movement), leads groups around the Nablus area farms. "Nobody's been arrested and I think they're basically scare stories. These stories are always exaggerated and they prevent farmers from getting the help they need. " Publicising the myth of deportation has served only Israeli interests, reducing the scrutiny and pressure on their policies by scaring off the witnesses. An anonymous source within the PA acknowledged that the consequences could be severe; "many farmers will not harvest without an international presence."
The wide circulation of these stories seems at best irresponsible. At worst they are a cynical attempt to manipulate a crisis, a tactic best left to Israeli propaganda. For their part, Israel have publicly acknowledged their responsibility to control settlers by installing IDF troops around harvest sites. This allows them to closely monitor farmers and volunteers, while outwardly appearing to be there as protection. Bridget of ISM does not appreciate their presence; "We have a lot of problems with the military throwing their weight around. They just like to move and harass us. I can't think of a time when they were helpful." In fact they have used their proximity to conduct mass arrests in the nearby villages, with six seized in Burin without charge. Restraining settlers has never been an Israeli priority and there have been many instances of farmers being attacked despite the presence of IDF forces. Empowering soldiers to genuinely protect Palestinians would mark a dramatic change in policy and loyalty, too dramatic to be anything more than lip service. But if, as seems likely, central government is playing a role in discouraging settlers from violence, we may be seeing signs of a less hawkish approach from a Knesset still squirming under the Goldstone microscope.
Palestinian spin doctors must avoid a PR war with Israel. Despite the lack of violence, security and movement restrictions are strangling Palestinian farmers and the olive oil industry as a whole. The facts are all in their favour, without needing to risk international sympathies by mimicking Israeli tactics of misinformation. Reduced violence this harvest-time is to be celebrated as a triumph of legitimate pressure on Israel, rather than used as an invitation to dangerous hyperbole.
