Eyad Serraj is one of the most respected personalities in Gaza. As a psychiatrist, he helps children traumatised by violence, victims of domestic violence and men driven to insanity by war. He has always defended the rights of the individual, as a consequence of which he had seen the inside of Palestinian Authority prisons.

On March 22, in the aftermath of the assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, spiritual leader of the Islamist organisation Hamas whom he knew well, he released a message: "He has accepted an end to the conflict by having a Palestinian state alongside that of Israel, abandoning the dream of an Islamic state in all of Palestine. His principal aim is ending the occupation.

"Last summer, he played a central role in signing a unilateral cease fire which lasted two months. The assassination is the last nail in the Palestinian Authority coffin which (Israeli premier Ariel) Sharon has destroyed meticulously ... only the party of death has triumphed." (Proche-Orient, le choix du chaos by Alain Gresh, Le Monde Diplomatique , April 2004).

In just over six months, Palestine has lost two very prominent personalities. They are worlds apart in terms of cultural and educational background, and in the objective and methods of their struggle, but they both fought for the same Palestinian home land, for the dignity and freedom of their people.

Edward Said came from a wealthy West Jerusalem Christian family. He was professor of English and comparative literature, a celebrated cultural critique and a sought after speaker, opera and music reviewer for a New York magazine, an accomplished classical pianist and many things else.

Sheikh Ahmed was everything that a cultured cosmopolitan was not - a refugee from his former village in what is now Israel to live in his modest Gaza dwelling, hardly venturing beyond his mosque, almost blind and paralysed.

Always dressed in traditional Arab garb, his simple messages found resonance in the hearts of his people with whom he shared the misfortune of being driven from their homeland and to live under an oppressive Israeli occupation. Both were charismatic and determined but they each addressed a different audience.

Unbalanced conflict

The conflict between Israelis and Palestinians over historical Palestine is hugely unbalanced. Israel is heavily supported militarily, economically and politically by the US, without which it could hardly be a viable state, whilst the Palestinians are poor and defenceless, their leadership disorganised and the support of their Arab brethren mere lip service.

This huge imbalance extends to the media which can sometimes be manipulated into a weapon of mass deception, its effects far more devastating and durable than a massive military operation. The Zionist lobby in the West, especially in the US has long realised the importance of having a foothold of influence in the major newspapers, television, the academia, political think tanks and the entertainment industry, for this is where the greatest battle lies - the battle for legitimacy and acceptance in the eyes of the world, of projecting oneself as the side of the righteous.

Through books and movies, they make sure the world never forgets the suffering of the Jewish people in Europe that culminated with the Holocaust, that the Zionist project is an acceptable solution to this problem because Palestine was an empty land anyway and the few Palestinians who left in 1948 did so not because of Zionist terrorism, but at the urging of their leaders.

Being Arabs, most of whom cling to a violent and anti-modern religion, they calculated that the world will accept a higher threshold towards their oppression and suffering. That Israel today is an island of democracy (which in certain ways in true) in a sea of hostile uncivilised Arabs bent on its destruction is proof of the rightness of Zionism and that the Israelis are indeed righteous victims.

Said had always lamented that Palestinians and Muslims have paid scant attention towards presenting their side of the story - that they are 'victims of the victims', terrorised and driven off their villages and towns, as a bizarrely perverse solution to a problem that had been gnawing at Europe's conscience. For two or three generations now they have become much-despised stateless refugees scattered all over the Arab world and the West, or living in unimaginable oppressive conditions under the longest military occupation ever.

It was unfortunate that the Palestinian liberation movement in the1970s and 1980s made the grave tactical error of resorting to terror attacks on civilians, that their legitimate quest for a redress of that historical injustice, their national aspirations and search for dignity as a people has become forever tangled with terrorism.

Who could forget the slaying of Israel athletes at the Munich Olympics, the exotic Arab hijacker Leila Khaled or Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat ( photo ) strutting into the UN Assembly with a pistol on his belt? The headlines about suicide bombers who target civilian buses and public places have irremediably tainted the Palestinian struggle even if these pale in comparison to Israeli reprisals that surely followed, of which the sack of Jenin was an extreme lesson.

If Said, who had advocated a peaceful, political resolution to the Israel-Palestine conflict radically beyond the two-state solution and his expressed objection to Palestinian suicide bombings has been labeled as 'terrorist prof', as 'spokesperson of terrorism with a place at the table', received numerous death threats and other forms of intimidations including the fire bombing of his office, Sheik Ahmed stood very little chance.

There were not few commentators and letter writers who actually lauded his assassination - as a one up for the war on terrorism - while perfunctorily castigating Sharon just to make sure that people do not think that we are beasts.

Post-modern scourge

The Sept 11, 2001 attacks on the US have made 'Islamic terrorism' a post-modern scourge which is global in reach and devastating in effect. 'Islamic terrorism' feeds into entrenched, centuries-old prejudice towards and ignorance of Islam, that for the average person it is a manifestation of Islam's incompatibility with modernity, whose followers are intolerant, irrational and violently resentful of other people's prosperity and happiness.

But this depraved nihilism dubbed 'Islamic terrorism' is only the other side of the greed-driven corporate globalisation coin, as a perverse response to the latter's disregard of values, cultural diversity and spirituality in its single-minded pursuit of the docile, indifferent global market.

While both are anti-democratic, it is the players of 'Islamic terrorism' that have been vilified as the enemies of civilisation and liberty, simply because the power and influence of the corporate media lies at the service of corporate globalisation.

It is unfortunate that the world's fixation with 'Islamic terrorism' as the new scourge of the civilised world has subsumed legitimate Muslims struggles for freedom and dignity in Palestine, Chechnya, Kashmir and Mindanao, among others.

The barely concealed glee with which the assassination of Sheikh Ahmed was greeted is a sad testimony to this conflation of legitimate struggle against oppression and nihilistic, random violence of 'Islamic terrorism' in the popular imagination. The death of Sheikh Ahmad is equated to that of an al-Qaeda senior commander and therefore a reason for the free world to rejoice.

From the moral stand point, suicide bombings that target Israeli civilians are impossible to justify however one wishes to rationalise it, but at another level, they are also terribly counter productive. Almost always, Israeli reprisals lead to larger death tolls and destruction for Palestinians.

With prejudice and ignorance towards Arabs and Muslims seeming a recalcitrant characteristic of the corporate media, and the post Sept-11 phenomenon of global 'Islamic terrorism' being equated with every act of turmoil in Muslims flash points, such acts can only undermine and isolate the Palestinian cause.

But the world needs to spare some moments of thought. Deplorable as these suicide bombings are, they are a final desperate plea to an uncomprehending, indifferent world to at least understand their sad plight. Young men and women are driven to such acts because life for Palestinians under Israeli occupation has become unbearable.

There is massive unemployment, the young see their fathers humiliated by young Israeli soldiers, family members picked up and tortured upon the slightest suspicion, their houses are randomly demolished without warnings... these are facts of everyday life in Gaza, which is really one gigantic prison.

Palestinians can't even visit a sick relative in Jerusalem and patients needing emergency treatment have died at military checkpoints. It takes very little to push them to commit the ultimate. In the face of this bleak prospect, it may be difficult to suggest to our Palestinian brethren that non-violent resistance may be more effective with much less tragic loss of life, especially when all these years the Israel-Palestine conflict has been suffused with religious meaning and articulated with the rhetoric and idiom of a religious war between Muslims and Jews.

But clearly paying attention to the long-neglected dimension of the struggle of appealing and informing to the world's conscience has had its positive effects - by the way Israeli policies have been questioned by Western nations today and the direct active participation of conscientious and courageous individuals, sometimes with tragic consequences - like the young American college student Rachel Corrie who was crushed to death trying to stop the demolition of a Palestinian house in Gaza.

Could this have had some influence on the softening of stand among some leaders of Hamas towards accepting some form of political settlement to the conflict instead of a war to the bitter end?

Media battle

For its avowed promise of standing up for Islam, all that globalised 'Islamic terrorism' has achieved is to blur the line between random, blind nihilism and legitimate struggle for dignity and freedom. This only helps Israel in its media battle to snuff out the legitimacy of Palestinian resistance such that the response to the assassination of Sheikh Ahmad was muted and brief, even from Muslims nations, and the US could easily brush off protests against Israel at the UN.

The blurring of the line has reduced Sheikh Ahmad, the religious leader of Gaza to a common terrorist, and Sharon, for all his past indictments in Lebanon and the refugee camps massacre in Beirut, was grudgingly given justification in ordering this murder - in the name of war on terrorism. Now that we have reduced him to that status, the world need not know that he too was driven off his village in 1948, to live as a refugee in Gaza, home today to hundreds of thousands of dispossessed Palestinians like him.

When someone does not share our modern ways, language and idiom, and if his behaviour, dress, and outlook of the world belong to an alien culture which happens to have a long historical conflict with our civilisation, he is much less able to defend himself against all kind of labels that we stick on him.

Even if we do not stick these labels, our silent disinterest of the man and the historical background to the conflict has already condemned him. One is in fact surprised that for the role that he has played in the Israel-Palestine conflict, regardless wether one agrees with him or not, and the influence that he had on his people, very little was actually written on Sheikh Ahmad.

It may come as a surprise even for many Muslims that Sheikh Ahmed was among the more moderate leaders of Hamas. He was rational enough not to pursue the rejectionist line that calls for the destruction of Israel, but to have the pragmatism of accepting its right to exist alongside the Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders.

This is a position that many Muslims around the world may have problems coming to grips with because of the rhetoric we are accustomed to hearing since 1967 that have elevated the rejectionist idea to an article of faith.

But when it comes to real fighting, the Palestinians have to face the military might of the Israelis, armed with only rocks and stones. It is irresponsible of us to be cheerleading them from the sidelines, promising ourselves with grandiose dreams of glory with God on our side.

Today, more than 50 years on, such a compromise is beginning to appear as the more realistic option against total defeat and annihilation. But it is perhaps in Israeli hardliners' interests that moderate figures like Sheikh Ahmed be eliminated to provoke the Palestinian resistance into becoming more radically militant, and therefore justify Israeli's oppressive policies and distract them from pursuing a more rational and workable solution.

Social services

Just like its spiritual leader, Hamas too has become a victim of media distortion which only amplifies its violent character. Because of its tactical methods in resorting to suicide bombings by its more radical elements, Hamas has been designated as a terrorist organisation by the US and the EU.

For the average newspaper reader, Hamas conjures up images of hooded Islamic militants brandishing guns at Palestinian funeral precessions. But the strength of its support within Palestinian society rests on its provision of social services and charitable projects where the Palestinian Authority has utterly failed, such as education, health and the distribution of food and water - maintaining a semblance of social organisation and coherence where no system otherwise exists. Many of its members are professionals and technocrats.

A large section of Palestinians may not support suicide bombings but amid the poverty and camps of the occupied territories, the network of services has earned them respect and admiration.

"Structured and well organised, Hamas is trusted by the poor ... and is perceived to be far less corrupt and subject to patronage than its secular nationalist counterparts ... some senior officials in UN Relief Works and Agency (UNRWA) in Gaza acknowledged that Hamas is the only faction they trust to distribute UNRWA food donations to the people" (Sara Roy, Gaza: New Dynamics of Civic Disintegration, quoted in The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality? by John Esposito 1999, Oxford University Press).

In the present climate where the corporate media has sensitised the world's public opinion with the notion of globalised 'Islamic terrorism', and this in turn subsumes legitimate liberation movements in the Islamic world as part of this depraved nihilism, whilst on the other hand it refuses to recognise 'state terrorism' even if policies like those of Israel's can only be described as 'terrorist' in intent, method and impact, it should finally dawn on Muslims to realise that the bigger battle is to appeal to the conscience of the world by extricating ourselves from any moral ambiguities.

The unintended consequences of al-Qaeda is that we are left with very little choice but to seek a reasoned, political solution and win friends among the reasonable and the fair-minded. The exclusively military option has perhaps nearly run its course and is becoming increasingly counterproductive, thanks to 'Islamic terrorism'.

Sari Nusseibeh, a Palestinian scholar, independent activist and head of Al Quds University in Jerusalem summed it aptly, "In the past three years of the second intifada (uprising) many Palestinians have opted for violence to fight the Israelis. They have employed guns, rocks and suicide bombers. But by doing so, they immediately lost their real strength : the support and participation of the Palestinian masses.

"Because as soon as one limits one's protest to military means alone, one automatically excludes everyone who has neither the ability nor willingness to engage in military resistance. You actually lose your source of power." ( Faith, Not Optimism : An interview with Sari Nusseibeh, by Linda Benedict, April 7, 2004)