Ireland, Palestine and "Good Friday"

This month, the Irish marked the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement, which ended more than three decades of violence and conflict in Northern Ireland, stemming from British colonial colonialism. It is a conflict that stretches back five centuries of British settler colonization of the island. The former presidents of the two imperialist states, American and British, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, who sponsored the agreement at the time after Britain failed to defeat the Irish revolution, attended the anniversary celebration.

And since the heroic Irish liberation revolutionary experience against brutal British colonialism occupies a special place in our hearts and minds as Palestinians, and in the hearts and minds of the free people of the world of course, which forced Britain to withdraw from most Irish lands in 1922, and prompted it to agree to sign the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 , and the disintegration of the colonial racist regime in the northern region; I have tried to follow the heated debate taking place in Irish society and among political forces, through newspapers and social media, about this agreement and its future prospects. My follow-up comes as part of the general Palestinian interest in the struggle of the Irish people, especially since this people, and specifically its progressive political forces, is still morally committed to the principle of joint solidarity. Indeed, this liberation experience, which is still ongoing, is a source of inspiration for all the free people of the world.

This experience, like the South African experience, was linked to the Palestinian experience, given that they all constitute liberation experiences from colonial colonialism and an apartheid regime led by the British colonial empire across the globe. We, the Palestinians, followed the movements of the peoples and their revolutionary forces in these two countries in particular. Since the sixties of the last century, the Palestine Liberation Organization has been associated with political, ideological, and struggle relations with the revolutionary movement in each of the two countries.

It was remarkable that the last decade of the last century witnessed the signing of three agreements that sought to end colonialism and apartheid, in Palestine, South Africa and Ireland, with a difference of a few years. South Africa was politically liberated in 1994 from the apartheid regime, although it is still suffering under an economic apartheid regime, and the profound economic and social problems it generated. In Northern Ireland, the Good Friday Agreement was signed in 1998, which led to the establishment of a democratic, participatory political system, that is, the citizens' state, as an alternative to the closed Protestant system, which was persecuting the Catholic national minority under British domination. As for Palestine, it preceded the other two countries, as the Oslo Accords were signed in September 1993, which enshrined the Zionist colonial project.

It can be seen that the period of negotiations that took place between the influential leadership of the PLO and Israel in the early 1990s was short compared to the long years that negotiations took between the Irish and South African leaderships with their enemies. While the two agreements won through a general referendum, in Ireland and South Africa, the support of the majority of the two peoples due to the achievements they have made, and opened the way for the continuation of work and struggle in order to achieve the full goals; The Oslo Accords constituted, and still are, a real catastrophe for the Palestinian people, as it officially closed the door to resistance. The Palestinian leadership was hasty and lacking in insight, and it thought of self-salvation more than it thought of the survival of its people, in return for giving up most of the homeland, and retreating from the most important Palestinian constants, especially the issue of refugees and their right to return. From a colonial colonial regime, and that the struggle against it, which the people of Palestine waged for a hundred years, is a moral and legitimate struggle, not terrorism.

This is in contrast to the behavior of the leadership of the Irish revolutionary movement, with its political and military wings, "Sinn Féin" and the "Republican Army", which did not condemn the military struggle, but rather imposed in the agreement a clause stipulating the right of the Irish people, whether in the Free Republic of Ireland or Northern Ireland, to Continue the political struggle to restore the unity of the island and liberate the northern part of the British Crown, by holding a referendum in appropriate circumstances.

Of course, like any experience of any people, any final or interim agreement with the enemy does not gain consensus, and there remains opposition from small radical groups, whether from the camp of the enemy or the camp of the revolution. There were those who opposed the agreement from day one, as hard-line Marxist and leftist groups. And because of the recent intensification of the government crisis in Northern Ireland against the backdrop of Britain's exit from the European Union, and for internal reasons such as the lack of a referendum yet, the debate and debate is intensifying between those who want to rush it and those who prefer it to take place through the widest special approval of the federalists, who advocate staying in framework of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, in order to avoid sectarian and national tensions from escalating again.

However, the prevailing opinion says that the agreement, despite the crisis afflicting the Irish government, constituted and still is a historic achievement that moved Ireland from one stage to another, contained sectarian violence, and replaced violence with political struggle. Many observers believe that demographic change, i.e. the emergence of a new generation that tends to vote on a political rather than a sectarian basis, as well as an increase in the political power of political forces with unionist orientations, will bring about the promised change, especially since the "Sinn Féin" party has achieved impressive electoral achievements. In the elections that took place in 2020 and in 2022, Sinn Féin in the Republic of Southern Ireland ranked first, and in Northern Ireland it became the second force.

Returning to the performance of the Palestinian leadership in the negotiations that ended with the Oslo Accords, we can witness the huge difference, and how this leadership gave up everything, contented with a shackled dependent authority, in a small part of the land occupied in 1967, so that its leadership no longer possesses the will nor the courage. in freedom from his chains.

Not only that, the Oslo Authority accepted an entity in a small part of Palestine, but it continues to exclude Palestine from the sea to the river in its official and media discourse, while the Irish revolutionary leadership continues to adhere to the liberation of the whole country, through its media, cultural and educational platforms, in parliament, and in negotiations. This was entrenched in people's awareness, as a prelude to the decisive battle that has been taking place for a quarter of a century, with soft, influential and powerful means, and in anticipation of the referendum that will reap the results, perhaps after years or a decade. Even today, Ireland is considered the most supportive European country for the Palestinian right and for the national struggle waged by the people of Palestine. Indeed, the rhetoric of the leaders of the Irish revolutionary forces is more solid and principled towards Israel than the rhetoric of the Oslo leadership.

However, in the face of the Oslo catastrophe, over which three decades have passed, during which the settler-colonial project and the apartheid regime have become entrenched, Palestine is witnessing at the popular level, especially in the last decade, a national revival, which is manifested in actual resistance in its various forms, and a national awareness that restores awareness of a single Palestine, transcending fragmentation and obliteration. Thus, this Palestinian popular revival meets the path of the Irish revolutionary experience, which is proceeding despite the great difficulties and challenges towards the final goal.

About "Arab 48"