The road to a Palestinian state

Written by: Dr. Nagy Sadeq Sharab
One of the historical and political paradoxes is the non-establishment of the Palestinian state or the prevention of its establishment, especially by Britain, the mandated state for Palestine, according to the mandate system approved by the League of Nations, whose objectives were to classify states according to their progress and to work for their independence in the end. Although Palestine was classified in the “A” system, i.e. capable of independence, Britain used its mandate to pave the way for the establishment of the Jewish state in implementation and application of the Balfour Declaration, by preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state, which could have been a model for a single state for all its citizens, so it worked on the one hand to facilitate the transfer of lands Palestinian Jewish institutions, encouraging immigration, arming Jewish groups, and when the Zionist movement realized the ability to establish the Jewish state; The case was presented to the United Nations so that the first international resolution would be issued establishing Israel and granting it international legitimacy. The paradox here is that this state was granted approximately 55 percent of the area of Palestine, even though the Jews were a minority of no more than 6 percent. The second paradox is the announcement of the establishment of The Palestinian Arab state covers an area of approximately 44 percent, and Jerusalem is under international status.

The third paradox is that the announcement of the Arab state was nominal and verbal due to Britain realizing that the Palestinians, who are the majority of the population and own the majority of the land (more than ninety percent), will not accept the decision because it contradicts the goal of the mandate policy and the right of the people to self-determination, but the goal here was clear, which is No to the Palestinian state until Israel is established as a state. The establishment of a Palestinian state according to colonial and Zionist thought means a denial of the establishment of Israel as a state, and this thought still exists and dominates, and if it were the opposite, the Palestinian state would have been established. The question is: What is to be done for the non-establishment of the Palestinian state and its transformation into a mere verbal promise, which is not viable? Israel, with international support, launched the 1948 war, which ended UN Resolution 181 by occupying lands designated for the Palestinian state, and completed its occupation of all lands with the 1967 war.

And it did not stop at that; Rather, it worked to implement its settlement and Judaization projects for all Palestinian lands and to deal with the Palestinian people as a population that has some demands and economic needs, and it exercises all forms of siege on it. Despite the Oslo agreement signed with it by the PLO, whose long-term goal was the establishment of a Palestinian state, it turned it into a security agreement, and here the responsibility of the Palestinian Authority should not be underestimated. The matter did not stop at the limits of what Israel did at the time, as it left only about ten percent of the more than five million Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza.

The other political paradox is that despite the many international resolutions issued by the United Nations and its various organizations that recognize the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, these resolutions remained just a cover that saves the face of the United Nations, and they remained without force for implementation due to the American veto in the Security Council, which provided protection for Israel and prevented the application of Chapters VI and VII of the Charter of the United Nations. Despite the peace treaties that were signed with Israel, it rejects the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the maximum that it accepts is a self-governing authority that is less than a state. The constant question is what is the path to the Palestinian state, and is there any hope left for the establishment of the state? The answer simply lies in the three elements of the state: land, people and sovereignty.

Of these elements, there is only the people. The land is completely controlled by Israel and controls all its resources and outlets. The strange thing is that it is the one that grants or agrees to grant licenses for Palestinian construction and canceled Area C, and controls who enters and exits. As for sovereignty, the authority does not exercise it. Even family reunification permits, which are the right of the Palestinian citizen, are approved by the authorities. In the context of all these facts, nothing remained of the Palestinian state except its name. The alternative is the long road to one state for all its citizens. The question remains, is there a Palestinian vision to extract the right to the state? In order to jump on the two-state solution, those who go to the political surface float to say the state of Gaza, the tripartite confederation solution, and the old scenario renewed in Zionist thought, Jordan and the alternative homeland. Despite all this, the Palestinian state remains the national dream and the political vessel of the Palestinian national identity, and the state is an inalienable historical right of the Palestinian people.