“The reason non-violent resistance works, when it does, is that it shows the enemy they have nothing to fear from you.”
I apologize to you and the editors for my barely-veiled crudity, but really, no other response can possibly suffice here.
There may have once been a nonviolent decolonization strategy that worked without a parallel armed strategy, but it does not spring to my mind. Those (in some cases partially) successful cases that do – Ireland, India, Algeria, Vietnam, South Africa (and the rest of the sub-Saharan continent), the civil rights/Black Power movement(s) in the United States, etc., etc. – all combined the two. This was not equivalent to “cheating on their girlfriend,” because, as I say of the Palestinian national movement above, nobody in these struggles ever promised monogamy.
And when you “show … the enemy they have nothing to fear from you,” that’s usually been their cue to give you jack squat for another century.
I’m really sitting here scratching my head over your comment. Is there some favorable example you can propose, or expanded argument we can consider, that might color it more favorably? Because right now, it simply looks like standard Zionist rhetoric (for external consumption only, of course!), devoid of any historical substance.