If Ghandi had attacked the Brits he would have provided them with an easy excuse to club him and his followers down. Ghandi did something far more "violent" than people with guns, he refused the authority of the Brits and thus changed the social order. Armed resistance seems revolutionary on the surface yet would have achieved nothing.
Back to Trek, the violence of the Maquis made it possible for the Cardassians to rationalize their military presence in the DMZ and supply their settlers even more easily with weapons ... which again made it harder for the UFP to finally solve this issue. And it should be obvious to each and every Maquis that only the UFP can solve it.
We are of course familiar with the Intifada argument from Palestine, i.e. the Maquis had to do something in order to create spotlight, otherwise the Federation would have never addressed the problem. I think that this is correct but only as long as the fighters realize that the only goal of violence is to create attention. Just like many people in Palestine haven't understood this most of the Maquis didn't understand it either which is why I am ultimately against their violence.