Struggle for equality
By Nadia Hijab and Victoria Brittain
Comment is Free
17 December 2007
In recent months a small group of Palestinian and Israeli academics, mainly in the diaspora, have prepared an intellectual bombshell to challenge the Palestinian leadership on the almost 40-year basic premise of an independent Palestinian state alongside the state of Israel. The division over the question of one state or two states is now as dramatic as the Hamas-Fatah fighting of the last year, which split the armed resistance.
On November 29, 2007 - the 60th anniversary of the UN plan to partition Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state - the group issued a one state declaration and are seeking co-signatories. It was a direct challenge to the Annapolis meeting three days earlier when almost the entire international community, including the Arab world, lined up - again - with the US, Israel and the Palestinian national authority behind the goal of two states (and excluding the elected political movement, Hamas).
But is that goal now an anachronism? How many of the officials from the many nations herded to Annapolis by the US have actually visited the West Bank recently - let alone penetrated the terrible siege around Gaza? Annapolis should have begun with a presentation on the fragmentation of the West Bank, a PowerPoint produced by the UN. This short, stark visual superimposes each piece of Israel's illegal occupation infrastructure over a map of the West Bank - its 149 settlements, 460,000 settlers, 96 outposts, closed military areas, 27 military bases, nature reserves, the separation wall, settler-only roads, checkpoints, and tunnels. By the final overlay, the Palestinian areas look like slivers of flesh hanging off a skeleton.
It is these facts on the ground that have led an increasing number of Palestinians to argue that the two state solution is dead, and that Palestinians should push for one secular democratic state in all of Israel and Palestine. It is a goal that the Israeli leaders fear more than anything.
One state is a compelling aspiration for the long term, but putting it forward now as the end goal of the Palestinian struggle is causing new problems - for Palestinians. The one state two state debate is beginning to split both Palestinians and their supporters abroad. This is weakening one of the Palestinians' major sources of power, as the international solidarity movement - which now takes the anti-apartheid movement with its roots in churches and trade unions as its model - is at its broadest behind a two state solution. In addition, the call for one state lets the Israelis off the hook in an area where they are the weakest - the illegality of the occupation under international law. The Palestinians are in dire straits, but the Israelis are stuck. They need a Palestinian leadership to sign off on their conquest, but have proved unwilling to give up enough for even the most pragmatic Palestinian to do so.
Also, while the language of the one state declaration is inclusive of the Palestinian citizens of Israel, they could be accused of treason if they support this goal. Prominent Israeli Arabs, like the Knesset member Azmi Bishara, now in exile, have experienced how easily a treason charge can uproot a life. This means a major part of the Palestinian people cannot throw their weight behind the struggle, although they, like Palestinian exiles, are best placed to do so. Finally, Israel holds all the power on the ground, a reality brought home by the government's announcement days after Annapolis that it intends to build 300 new housing units in Arab East Jerusalem. Palestinians are light years away from achieving any of their human rights if they can't find effective sources of power. What that power consists of, and how to get it, is the most pressing topic for Palestinian strategists.
Of course a clear goal is needed so that Palestinians and their supporters know what they are fighting for and how long to keep it up. How can clear goals be set without getting stuck in the one-state two-state debate? Palestinians can frame their goals in terms of fundamental human rights, without specifying a final outcome.'
By Nadia Hijab and Victoria Brittain
Comment is Free
17 December 2007
In recent months a small group of Palestinian and Israeli academics, mainly in the diaspora, have prepared an intellectual bombshell to challenge the Palestinian leadership on the almost 40-year basic premise of an independent Palestinian state alongside the state of Israel. The division over the question of one state or two states is now as dramatic as the Hamas-Fatah fighting of the last year, which split the armed resistance.
On November 29, 2007 - the 60th anniversary of the UN plan to partition Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state - the group issued a one state declaration and are seeking co-signatories. It was a direct challenge to the Annapolis meeting three days earlier when almost the entire international community, including the Arab world, lined up - again - with the US, Israel and the Palestinian national authority behind the goal of two states (and excluding the elected political movement, Hamas).
But is that goal now an anachronism? How many of the officials from the many nations herded to Annapolis by the US have actually visited the West Bank recently - let alone penetrated the terrible siege around Gaza? Annapolis should have begun with a presentation on the fragmentation of the West Bank, a PowerPoint produced by the UN. This short, stark visual superimposes each piece of Israel's illegal occupation infrastructure over a map of the West Bank - its 149 settlements, 460,000 settlers, 96 outposts, closed military areas, 27 military bases, nature reserves, the separation wall, settler-only roads, checkpoints, and tunnels. By the final overlay, the Palestinian areas look like slivers of flesh hanging off a skeleton.
It is these facts on the ground that have led an increasing number of Palestinians to argue that the two state solution is dead, and that Palestinians should push for one secular democratic state in all of Israel and Palestine. It is a goal that the Israeli leaders fear more than anything.
One state is a compelling aspiration for the long term, but putting it forward now as the end goal of the Palestinian struggle is causing new problems - for Palestinians. The one state two state debate is beginning to split both Palestinians and their supporters abroad. This is weakening one of the Palestinians' major sources of power, as the international solidarity movement - which now takes the anti-apartheid movement with its roots in churches and trade unions as its model - is at its broadest behind a two state solution. In addition, the call for one state lets the Israelis off the hook in an area where they are the weakest - the illegality of the occupation under international law. The Palestinians are in dire straits, but the Israelis are stuck. They need a Palestinian leadership to sign off on their conquest, but have proved unwilling to give up enough for even the most pragmatic Palestinian to do so.
Also, while the language of the one state declaration is inclusive of the Palestinian citizens of Israel, they could be accused of treason if they support this goal. Prominent Israeli Arabs, like the Knesset member Azmi Bishara, now in exile, have experienced how easily a treason charge can uproot a life. This means a major part of the Palestinian people cannot throw their weight behind the struggle, although they, like Palestinian exiles, are best placed to do so. Finally, Israel holds all the power on the ground, a reality brought home by the government's announcement days after Annapolis that it intends to build 300 new housing units in Arab East Jerusalem. Palestinians are light years away from achieving any of their human rights if they can't find effective sources of power. What that power consists of, and how to get it, is the most pressing topic for Palestinian strategists.
Of course a clear goal is needed so that Palestinians and their supporters know what they are fighting for and how long to keep it up. How can clear goals be set without getting stuck in the one-state two-state debate? Palestinians can frame their goals in terms of fundamental human rights, without specifying a final outcome.'
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten