Non-violence is a danger for the culture of occupation
Ahmed Awwad, joint activist of Hamas in the protest of Budrus

The only criticism addressed to Juliet Bacha about the documentary is that she too often, although not always rightly, insists on the fact of the idealization of the politics of non-violent movement, on the one hand due to the incompleteness of the demilitarisation ideas and on the other, given that the director was not a direct participant of the protest she has no empirical review, and in accordance with these observations the film represents much less violence than there actually was.

Direct appeal to the director through the film Budrus is a demystification of the role of militaristic formation of the Israeli army and its role in the border region, called a closed military zone . Security, which is associated with the existence of military forces is a key issue of justification of action and the repressive apparatus of control based on: the production of an enemy character ( discourse about the constant dangers, threats, conspiracies ) and violent conflict resolution . However , one should bear in mind the complex situation caught in Budrus. Orders of the Israeli government that the soldiers obediently ( system of the military organization ) must respect, are unquestionable, yet essentially reviewed in the film synthesized through the demonstrators' outcry Disobey ! : Violent ouster of protesters by bulldozers and entry into/surrounding of the village of Budrus to prevent demonstrations and thereby forcibly occupy homes of Palestinians. On that occasion, a Palestinian young man was caught for whom the peacekeepers sought release, but he was abused as part of tactics in order to make the demonstrators to give up their rebellion against the wall.

Probably, the most interesting interviews of the other side refer to the strong personalities of the film, such as Yasemin Levy - Commander of the Israeli Border Police. Her oscillation between commands that she must unquestioningly obey as an officer of the regime and female solidarity, which is evident in her words, are a great indicator of how in the final instance either party cannot be held responsible and called guilty, as the sole culprit is the incorrectly designed system. A women's call for solidarity cannot leave Yasemin indifferent. Word of the protesters If you're a woman, leave the gun and come here. We're women. Come on, leave the gun. Yasemin! Come, on! she interprets them with a controlled emotion much later in the interview. The call for solidarity with the Palestinian women is layered with meanings all the more when in the screaming of her Jewish name, they add the Arabic meaning of the name Yasmina, burdened with a special meaning in the tradition.

Yasemine Levy remembers those moments and states : It was very hard for me as a woman because there were a lot of women. (...) Even in the women were beaten up or hit by rubber bullets or stun grenades, they had no problem with it. They went to all lengths to ensure their land would remain theirs. A sort of admiration for women is associated with her experienced female which is not universal, but it is identical to the patriarchalising clash with the given social circumstances. So, her ambivalent position doesn't result as strange: assertiveness of border police in which she can thrive as a woman and, in another dimension, an awareness of her own ethics according to which the values of others shall not be destroyed. Olive tree appears as a symbol of the source of life her statements too.

{niftybox background=#8FBC8F, width=360px} So, her ambivalent position doesn't result as strange: assertiveness of border police in which she can thrive as a woman and, in another dimension, an awareness of her own ethics according to which the values of others shall not be destroyed. Olive tree appears as a symbol of the source of life her statements too.{/niftybox}

Courage of women which join the demonstrations that were prompted by then fifteen year old Iltezam, now a student of Medical Faculty in Sarajevo culminated in her active role in the struggle for justice and violence prevention. She describes in an interview the situation in which she found herself: When you are face to face with bulldozer and you are seeing it destroying the olive trees, while you were the day before sitting under them. (...) I really wanted to cry, but it wasn't suitable time for craying. (...)

I dont know what happened, but sudderly I found myself behind the line of the soldiers and facing the bulldozer. I asked myself, what can one person do? (...) I jumped in the hole. I was completely terrified. The soldier could do nothing except thaking the bulldozer and going away. Standard methods of military violence against protesters (primarily women who stood in front of the soldiers and bulldozers) were used in the moments when they refused to open the path for bulldozers to bury the ground and to cut down the olive trees. After ten months of daily peaceful demonstrations, activists of the village of Budrus, joined by numerous activists from Israel and around the world, have won their right to have the border moved outside the village of Budrus by the Israel Government , thus saving 95% of the land which is home not only to olives but also to the values of the village, such as the centuries-old cemetery.

{niftybox background=#8FBC8F, width=360px} Such a strategy, itself designed and represented in the film of terrible comparison of fight and nonviolence, implies a defense model that results from a spiritual, rational, and experience choice. The dimension which is the question of the overall atmosphere of the film both at the level of emphasis and punchline is a vague and elusive idea of the demilitarization of security. The author succeeds in avoiding an all too easy manipulation of the idea of security, by sending a universal messages of humanization of security based on the power of justice, respect for human values and the values of solidarity. And in this context, Budrus remains a universal example and a symbol, and also a lesson of principled and human resistance.{/niftybox}

Julia Bacha, despite many accusations, succeeded in grouping all social engagé aspects of her film under the common denominator of feminist anti-militarist consciousness. Ultimately, the idea of the film was derived from two active dimensions. The first dimension is the promotion of alternative /non-violent resistance model, which has been promoted by Ayed and his community from the beginning of the film: We are using a strategy of popular resistance and nonviolence to protest the Occupation. Or perhaps a more important definition of the Israeli activists who joined protests: Nothing scares the army more then nonviolent opposition. Such a strategy, itself designed and represented in the film of terrible comparison of fight and nonviolence, implies a defense model that results from a spiritual, rational, and experience choice. The dimension which is the question of the overall atmosphere of the film both at the level of emphasis and punchline is a vague and elusive idea of the demilitarization of security. The author succeeds in avoiding an all too easy manipulation of the idea of security, by sending a universal messages of humanization of security based on the power of justice, respect for human values and the values of solidarity. And in this context, Budrus remains a universal example and a symbol, and also a lesson of principled and human resistance.

LITERATURE

1. Antimilitarism and women . 2009. Editor: Staša Zajović. Beograd: Women in Black
2. Said Edward. 1999. Orijentalism. Sarajevo. Svjetlost
3. Smelik Anneke. 1998. Feminst film theory. http://www.annekesmelik.nl/TheCinemaBook.pdf

Merima Omeragić
Translated by:
Jasmina Kaljić and Stevan Milivojević