There is hope despite the tragic situation and frustration

Written by: Hani Al-Masry

Seminars, conferences, and brainstorming sessions held by the Masarat Center and other centers and institutions recently, which dealt with the required strategy in confronting the Netanyahu government; There are many issues, ideas and thoughts, the most important of which is that it reflected the general Palestinian situation in terms of a state of dispersion, and the spread of types of disorientation, frustration, loss of confidence and lack of certainty in anything, despite the fascination with the steadfastness and resistance of the Jenin and Nablus camps, and the phenomenon of the Kataeb, including the Lions’ Den, which was confirmed once again. The Palestinian people are determined to carry the banner, wave after wave, generation after generation, but what causes anxiety, and even despair, is that it is a spontaneous and regional phenomenon that has not been generalized, and lacks the ideas and vision that guides it, the broad front that supports it, the strategy that guides it, and the unified leadership that guides it. led by. And because it faces an authority that it wants to eliminate or contain, it is therefore liable to be a new victim of division.

National project and options

We find disorientation in its clearest form when dealing with the national project, which is the most important issue. As we see a loss that appears when each person elaborates a national project according to his size, or according to the size of his faction, clan, city, or the place in which he resides, so many points of view spread; This adds a major obstacle to unity, and even coordination between the Palestinian factions. If the national project is unknown or disputed, how can it be achieved? Without an agreed upon national project, no unity can be established, and without unity no victory can be achieved.

In fact, the principle is that the national project is fixed, and it is not and should not be subject to change and alteration with changing conditions, circumstances and interests. What changes are the plans, tools and strategies adopted at each stage to reach it, and on the basis of striving to achieve the maximum that can be achieved in each stage, and then moving to The second stage, and so on, without abandoning the natural, legal and historical rights, and the major national goals.

Those with this point of view, which stems from the fact that the historical national project is fixed and unchanging, because it is based on the real and not the fake historical narrative, believe that the Palestinians are not required to present a new national project every year, or at every stage, but rather the original project remains the same until be achieved.

We need to revive the national project. As for what changes, it is the programs that are put in place to suit the different stages and circumstances, and are in harmony with the balance of power, variables, emerging data, and learned experiences. The national project with its basic pillars includes (complete liberation, the right of return, and self-determination for the entire Palestinian people). In the National Pact approved at the founding of the PLO, and then in the National Pact approved after the leadership of the revolutionary factions, especially the Fatah movement, for the PLO after the defeat of 1967 and the victory of dignity in 1968.

It is required to add a solution to the Israeli issue

The change/development that has occurred and could occur in how the Israeli question is resolved within this project; That is, the position of the Israeli Jews in the historical solution; It is no longer possible to ignore them, throw them into the sea, return them from whence they came, or deal with them as subjects and take tribute from them, especially after the majority of Israelis were born in the land of Palestine and are not responsible for what their fathers and grandfathers did, and for this reason the Palestinian revolution was proposed. The idea of establishing a democratic state after liberation and the defeat of the settler-colonial project, in which all citizens will live equally, regardless of whether they are Muslims, Christians, Jews, irreligious or atheists.

Likewise, the Charter must be reformulated in a manner that does not prejudice basic rights, by adding concepts that achieve freedom and social justice, equality between citizens, democracy with all its components, foremost of which is the separation and independence of powers, regular elections, respect for human rights and freedoms, respect for the rule of law, and a combination of tasks. Nationalism and democracy.

The imbalance in abandoning basic rights for the sake of incomplete rights, and the result is the loss of both

The imbalance began when basic rights and major goals were bypassed by violating the charter in order to obtain recognition of the organization as the sole legitimate representative, leading to an attempt to change it as one of the costs of searching for a settlement and achieving minimum rights, by sitting on the Palestinian seat at the negotiation and conference table. In light of the presence and increasing risks of eliminating the Palestinian factor in favor of Arab and non-Arab roles and alternatives.

Obtaining recognition of the role and representation has been given priority at the expense of rights, especially on the eve and in the aftermath of the signing of the Oslo Accords. There was a perception that since the government of Yitzhak Rabin recognized the PLO as its legitimate representative, the establishment of a self-governing authority on Palestinian land, and the return of the PLO’s leadership and cadres and factions to the homeland, this means an Israeli recognition of minimum rights, and this is not true at all. There is a difference between the two matters.

The perception also spread that there is a possibility of reaching a trade-off between the full goals and historical rights in all of Palestine, the right to self-determination for the entire Palestinian people, and the right of return for refugees, in exchange for the establishment of a state on the 1967 borders.

It turned out, and it was clear at the beginning to many, that this is a big illusion, as there is a big difference between this and that, so the organization was recognized until it was tamed, its claws and power cards removed, and disposed of as the embodiment of the national entity and the collective rights of the Palestinians, and pushed it to give up rights. As it is well known, this attempt ended in the disastrous situation we are in, which explains the widespread state of frustration, as full rights were waived without realizing the incomplete rights, even at a minimum, and the state did not embody, and the authority became eternally limited self-rule, and it is weakened Its role and its threat of collapse and dissolution if it is not integrated more and more fully into the Israeli security system, and the organization, which has become a structure devoid of content and role, is not preserved. The state was not practically embodied on the ground despite its declaration and the fact that it is a right that should not be subject to negotiations. Independence was not achieved. Rather, Israel is advancing on the path of imposing its sovereignty over all of Palestine. Where it accelerates the steps to annex the West Bank, especially areas classified (C).

A deep and bold revision and course change is required

In front of this miserable fate of the negotiation process and the Oslo Accord, and the division into two conflicting powers, the conflict between them has become overshadowed by everything else, and instead of criticism and self-criticism, a deep and bold review of the experience, drawing lessons and lessons, and acknowledging mistakes and sins and the danger of free concessions, harmful illusions, lost bets, recklessness and adventure And the need to radically change the path by returning to the original national project that embodied and stems from the unity of the cause, the land, the people, and the historical narrative... We find submission to individual, factional, regional, and factional interests, and ignorance, intellectual and cultural backwardness, and lack of vision of the changes that are taking place and that can happen.

The two-state solution and one state without defeating Zionism are two sides of the same coin

There are those who want to remain in the same vortex, or enter the issue into another vortex that is another aspect of Oslo, and this expresses itself by recognizing reality and adapting to it instead of working to change it, to the extent that some Oslo theorists and supporters have begun to say that the "two-state solution" is dead. And the alternative is:

Either accepting what the occupation offers, and taking something better than nothing, and better than the complete erasure of the Palestinian identity, role and rights, which is the survival of the current restricted authority that plays a functional role in favor of the occupation as a final solution under Israeli sovereignty, for fear of the collapse of the authority and the dissolution of local authorities or administrations instead Among them, under the pretext that the presence of a million settlers in the West Bank, completely eliminated the possibility of establishing a sovereign Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital.

or accepting the other side of the Oslo coin, by proposing a one-state solution and accepting imperfect citizenship within the Jewish state; That is, not by striving to defeat the subjugating occupation colonial project and dismantling the racist system of privileges, but rather by promoting the benefits of Palestinians being citizens of the State of Israel; Because this over time can change the nature of the State of Israel, and make it a democratic state for all its citizens, or bi-nationalism, or what is a tactic to pressure for the revival of the two-state solution, despite the fact that 99% of Israelis refuse to grant citizenship and full rights to the Palestinians, and this means that The only issue for them is acceptance of the fait accompli and an authority subject to Israeli sovereignty.

The defect of those with these points of view lies in the fact that they consider what Israel is doing, and the facts that it plants on the Palestinian land, as giving the occupation a right and entailing obligations, as if they are final facts that are not subject to change or change, and they are facts that do not give the truth if they continue and are adapted to them. There is no possibility for a Palestinian state on the 67 borders, nor a Jewish state between the river and the sea without rights for the Palestinians, nor a single democratic state that is far from Zionism and its racist settler-colonial project. The citizen is of the second class, by imposing different regulations, until there is a suitable opportunity to displace the Palestinians, and whoever says that displacement is impossible, let him reflect on the significance of the Hawara Holocaust, and the settlers’ chant to displace the original owners of the country, as well as what came in the Trump deal of displacing the people of the Triangle to the West Bank, and let millions remember Syrians who migrated or were displaced inside and outside their country.

The wall that prevents displacement is a unified and effective Palestinian position, within a realistic, national, democratic vision and strategy, and a unified leadership with will, supported by a unified Arab position and unified global support, which are conditions none of which are available yet.

You can't take negotiations unless you can do without them

Based on the foregoing, one of the most important lessons learned from the history of the conflict, especially after the start of the settlement train after the October War in 1973, is that you cannot accept negotiations unless you were able to achieve them without them. Its forms, particularly the two-state solution, the one-state solution, and others, failed from the beginning, and were based on illusions. There was no Israeli partner for these solutions. Even during the golden age of Oslo, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin, the leaders of the “peace camp,” did not accept the establishment of A Palestinian state. Indeed, when the latter was asked before his assassination: What will you give the Palestinians in the final agreement? He replied: What does half of the West Bank mean? That is, the occupation remains, and Israeli sovereignty remains.

Despite the foregoing, it was not without merit to adopt a program to establish a national authority over any liberated area. Because there is a political and legal status for the lands occupied in 1967, different from the status of the rest of Palestine on which Israel was established, although it is part of the one Palestinian land, and this status was embodied in international resolutions rejecting the occupation and calling for its end, which differs from the status of Palestine as a whole. Where the world, even brothers and friends, recognized Israel, and did not recognize its occupation, and against the backdrop that there is a large majority of citizens (their original owners) in the West Bank and Gaza Strip compared to the minority of colonial settlers, in light of a global movement with the participation and support of the two international poles at the time, the United States and the Soviet Union And Arab support for negotiations and settlement is still casting its dark shadows until now.

The beginning of the decline was evident in the transition from the program of the National Authority to the Palestinian state without giving up full rights in the beginning, to the approval of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which do not deal with the roots of the Palestinian cause, but rather with the effects of the June 1967 war, and then to the Oslo signing in which it was submitted. The Palestinian negotiator made major concessions in return for recognizing the organization and establishing a self-governing authority, and promised to negotiate for a period of five years to reach a final solution without agreeing on the content of this solution, including not releasing prisoners, nor referring to the Palestinian state, and therefore it is natural for him to reach the current outcome. Self-rule authority as a final solution, with a political and geographical division without any political horizon.

It is not possible without a comprehensive national advancement, and an appropriate change in the Arab, regional and international environment. The transition from the national independence approach to the one-state approach on the ruins of the colonial project; As this only leads to enabling the occupation to devour the West Bank more quickly and at lower costs, the main battle currently taking place is on the West Bank, and leaving the battle directly or being preoccupied with other battles does not strengthen the one-state option, but rather covers the one racist colonial state that Israel is establishing, from Through different legal and political regimes, between those that govern our people at home, those that govern Jerusalem, those that govern the West Bank, and those that govern the Gaza Strip through siege and aggression.

There are international political and legal achievements that are included in the international resolutions issued by the Security Council, the General Assembly, and the various agencies of the United Nations, including the World Organization for Human Rights, the Supreme Court of Justice, and the International Criminal Court. There is the international recognition of the State of Palestine as an “observer state” and the recognition of the Palestinian state by 140 countries. ; All this cannot be thrown behind us for nothing. Options are built and cannot be realized once they are presented. Until they are built, they need a great local, regional and international effort. This requires starting from dealing with reality to change it. Because jumping from it or submitting to it leads to dedicating it, not changing it.

University goals

Is there anyone who opposes setting goals such as: ending the occupation of the entire West Bank and Gaza Strip, the right of return and compensation, the right to self-determination, individual and national equality, the overthrow of apartheid, and the empowerment of Palestinians in the diaspora and places of refuge to preserve their national identity and defend their civil rights?

I do not believe, and these goals complement each other, and are consistent with the special tasks and the balance of power, and do not concede, but adhere to what unites all Palestinians.

Walking to achieve these goals in a parallel and simultaneous manner, and achieving one of them or making progress on this path, can serve the other goals, and whoever wants to place the achievement of independence for the State of Palestine as a stage on the path to a radical democratic solution, then he does not contradict those who oppose this goal in favor of adhering to the state The one that will be built on the ruins of the colonial, settler, occupation, substitutionary, racist project.

There is hope... be optimistic that you will find it

The crisis that Israel suffers from shows that its fate is inevitable as a result of it being a hostile entity implanted in the Arab region, which rejects it and will continue to reject it until it defeats it. It is not an ordinary, normal country, but embodies the colonial project that bears the seeds of its annihilation, but this will not be achieved in response to expectations or prophecies. Or myths about the demise of Israel in the past year or in the year 2027 or others, but rather as a result of the interaction of internal and external factors, and this could take ten years, twenty or fifty years, but what is certain is that the world is changing, the region is changing and Israel is changing, and the changes are not all in favor of the Palestinians And it is not in their favor alone, so they must change in a capable manner so that they can employ the Israeli, regional and international changes in their favour.