75 years since the renewed Nakba

Commemorating the anniversary of the Nakba means that we tell (our story), formulate our narrative and continue to mobilize the Palestinian generations first and the world second. But it is more important than formulating our narrative, so that it does not remain a mere narrative that is repeated in every memory, is that we stand before the following fact: Despite the importance of formulating, generalizing and defending the novel, it is also more important that the discourse, program and tools not contradict what the novel should really be. .

There is a wide gap between the commemoration of the Nakba and the discourse, program and official political practice of the Palestinian leadership. In the events commemorating the Nakba, the details of the historical crime committed by the Zionist movement against our people are recalled, including the displacement of approximately 850 thousand, the destruction of about 450 population centers, and the flooding of Palestine with groups of settlers cut off from our homeland and our land. These events are not devoid of manifestations of nostalgia that are full of passionate and sincere affection for the seven million refugees, and are grafted with many symbols such as the key, the title deed, and the original name of the village or location. Despite some appearances that do not agree with the prudence required to commemorate the anniversary, and indicate that it is sometimes transformed into a shameful carnival, these events reproduce the Palestinian narrative about the historical crime, and about our historical right to our homeland. In this regard, it should be emphasized:

1- Being limited to commemorating the memory as it is happening will not serve the national struggle to put a historical end to the results/repercussions of the Nakba. The most important results of the Nakba first is the displacement of our people, and secondly the establishment of the Zionist colonial project state with its demographic material, the settlers, on the entire soil of historical Palestine. Here lies the inescapable contradiction in the official program and discourse. On the one hand, the focus is on the first result, as if it were only the narration, and this is naturally required as a national and educational/mobilization duty. On the other hand, all aspects of the discourse, program, and official practice stir the dirt on the second result. As a historical review, which the official leadership refuses to do, indicates the reality of this contradiction. The discourse rejects the Nakba, but it defends and adheres to the Oslo Accords and their appurtenances, in which the legitimacy of the State of Israel was recognized, which means a public recognition and acknowledgment of the legitimacy of the Zionist project in Palestine, to be followed, of course, by the distortion of the geography of Palestine in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in a flagrant distortion of the historical truth. What does this mean other than a historical acknowledgment, amounting to recognition, of the most tragic outcome of the Nakba and recognition of the legitimacy of that outcome? Without a historical review of all the discourse, program, and political practice of the official leadership 30 years ago, our narrative will remain incomplete at best, and distort consciousness at worst.

It is not possible to imagine an honest historical narrative about the Nakba without emphasizing historical Palestine as a geography that does not accept division, negotiation or tampering, without emphasizing the exclusive historical right to the homeland Palestine, without emphasizing the legitimacy of the struggle to liberate Palestine. These are major joints in the narrative of our people, and here that narrative differs from the narrative promoted by the official leadership.

2- The Nakba narrative requires a discourse of national liberation that reflects the true nature of the Palestinian national cause as a cause of liberation from settler Zionist colonialism and the return of all refugees to their homeland and villages from which they were expelled. A speech that reflects our position as a people in the conflict: It is true that we are victims of a historical racist crime and criminal fascist colonialism, and we suffer, sacrifice, and live in pain, but we are also a resistant and sacrificial people who adhere to their struggle and their rights. Zionism did not defeat us, and we will continue to resist until the liberation of our homeland. A speech confirming the reality of the existential struggle with the Zionist project in Palestine as a historical fact created by the Nakba. This discourse is required. As for the discourse that delusionally believes that it polarizes public opinion with its crying, showing (our weakness and incapacity) and begging international bodies, it will only spread illusion and waste the direction in the best case.

In this regard, it is natural for us to consider the commemoration of the Nakba by the United Nations, for the first time, (Badri on it) as a good position and an achievement as well. We should be realistic in assessing the importance of these international institutions: they produce balances of power that do not work in the interest of our people, as evidenced by the fact that dozens of decisions were issued by them 75 years ago and were not implemented, and do we need a longer period than this to be sure? Therefore, we should review the extent of the importance we attach to them, and at a minimum to admit Our discourse on it is nothing more than a discourse for consumption, nothing more, nothing less.

In order for the memory not to turn into mere memory and peace, the program, discourse and tools that do not address the essence of the results of the Nakba and its repercussions should be reviewed. Here, only here, the effectiveness of the Nakba turns into fuel for the continuation of the existential struggle.