Official Fatah Editorial reiterates hard line on Jerusalem and refugees — Intifada should accompany any future negotiations to enhance the position of the Palestinian negotiators

Towards a Comprehensive National Dialogue

It was natural for the PNA and its security apparatus, all the non-government organizations, and the national and Islamic forces to confront the 100-day security program that Sharon announced after he came to power. The Israeli prime minister received the necessary green light from US president George Bush who preferred not to deal with the Middle East most important issue. Sharon’s destructive program, however, failed due to the Palestinian resistance.

Sharon’s failure to acknowledge the need for a political program that puts an end to the conflict made him act upon one of his old doctrines: if power fails to solve an issue, further power can be applied. His troops carried out more assassinations and tightened the siege around our cities and villages. The international community supported the Palestinian position and condemned Sharon’s acts of aggression.

The dolphinarium retaliatory operation that came after Israel assassinated some Hamas leaders changed the situation. The US Administration feared that Sharon would destroy the PNA, and more than forty world leaders suggested that President Arafat declare a ceasefire. President Arafat agreed and, consequently, approved Tenet’s paper.

Sharon thought that the September 11th events in New York and Washington backed his position. He likened President Arafat to bin Ladin and the PNA to Taliban. His attempt to use the new developments for his own sake failed when President Bush rejected his comparison. Sharon who grew more impatient made his second comparison; he compared Israel to Czechoslovakia and President Bush to Chamberlain. And he apologized more than once.

The quick victory of the US against Taliban made the US Administration feel that it can dispense with the Arab and Muslim support it initially sought before its war in Afghanistan. It no longer hides its future agenda. US officials talk in public of their plans to attack certain Arab targets. However, the US position concerning the Arab Israeli conflict drastically changed in the aftermath of the repeated explosions in Jerusalem and Haifa.

As a result, relentless pressure was exerted on the Palestinian leadership to take action against those who carried out the suicide attacks. Even the European position could not stand against Sharon’s dictates. These dictates go against the supreme interests of the Palestinian people and are not in line with the principles of democracy and political pluralism that the Independence Declaration guaranteed.

It seems that this critical stage requires all Palestinian forces – the PNA, national and Islamic forces, and institutions that make up the civil society- should start a national dialogue to determine a well-defined strategy to help us restore the full support of the international community for our rights. At the top of these is our right to establish a sovereign state with Jerusalem as its capital.

The strategy required should be based on the following:

1. A Unified Goal

It is necessary to determine the current goal, the interim goal and the strategic one. On the basis of these goals, one can decide the right steps in our struggle to achieve them. A time schedule is also necessary to achieve the specified goal within a specified period of time.

In all cases, reference should be made to the following principles that cannot be violated since they are based on national consensus:

1. Ending the Israeli occupation in the 1967-occupied areas including Jerusalem.

2. Removing Israeli settlements since they are illegal and constitute an obstacle to peace.

3. Maintaining the right of return to the refugees who were driven out of their lands, in accordance with UN Resolution 194.

4. Preserving our right to self-determination and the establishment of a sovereign state with Jerusalem as its capital.

Also, it is not allowed to stop the Intifada in return for an Israeli withdrawal from the land it occupied in Area (A) or in return for maintaining the pre-September 28th status. The Intifada is not a tool for returning to the negotiating table; it should accompany any future negotiations to enhance the position of the Palestinian negotiators and to guarantee a better performance on their part.

2. Unified Ranks

Democracy, political pluralism, and the sovereignty of law characterize the Palestinian society. The supreme national interest as decided by the immediate and strategic goals remains the basic indicator of the nature of any constructive and creative national dialogue. Such a dialogue should be based on the principle of enhancing collective work away from individual or factional interests and tendencies taking into account the right of every faction or organization to maintain its own strategic program.

Adhering to the struggle strategy as specified by the political program of the national and Islamic forces governs the performance of any individual faction and makes it give priority to the collective goal at the expense of any individual goals that it may have.

Adherence to the collective goal will also enhance the role of the PNA in its confrontation and brings its political discourse much closer to the political program of the national and Islamic forces.

3. Unified Performance

Unified goals behind unified ranks will lessen the differences and theoretical contradictions that exist among the different factions. The clarity provided in specifying an immediate goal will help an individual faction to achieve that goal even when it is not directly related to its own strategy.

We are in the habit of closing our ranks when we sense a possible danger at least in the short run, but we are likely to differ when political results are to be reaped.

The current critical stage we are passing through necessitates the opening of a comprehensive national dialogue to find a way out of the various current and interim goals. The resulting disunity serves only the interests of the murderer Sharon who is using some of our controversial practices. Not only do these practices contravene with international standards, but also they are not in line with our own religious heritage. This is despite the fact that Sharon has committed very outrageous acts in order to elicit similar revenge acts that the international community considers unlawful. And, in this regard, he succeeded.

Not only do the national and Islamic forces have to act in accordance with the principles of national unity, but also the PNA has to act similarly. It has to provide security, maintain the sovereignty of law, and fortify our home front. In addition, the PNA has to adopt a dialogue policy to keep a better political understanding with the national and Islamic forces whose members comprise the PNA itself.

Political detention should not be allowed on the basis of political opinions or the implementation of a legitimate struggle activity. The distinction between the general freedoms and the sovereignty of law ought to be made clear. Punishment becomes necessary only when a law is violated.

We are at a crossroads, and we need to be cautious and wise. Sharon’s dictates aim to undermine our cause and turn our legitimate struggle into an internal fight that disqualifies us as a people that seeks self-determination and an independent state. We should not give the Zionist movement the opportunity to prove one of its fallacies that it occupied a land without a people. It is the fallacy that explains their daily practices when they uproot our trees, demolish our homes and humiliate us at their checkup points.

At the same time, we have to keep the Intifada and adhere to our inalienable rights: the establishment of an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital and preserve the right of the refugees to return to their homes.

Revolution until victory.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR