Palestine & Israel-Part Three: Two Main Misunderstandings. How the Rift Happened? Why the Peace Process Failed?
/
Clarifying Two Main Misunderstandings
1)
A
major misleading argument, in my opinion, is the issue of security. Israel
claims that the checkpoints and the wall are necessary measures for
self-defense. These checkpoints and the wall did not exist before the first and
second Intifada. As ‘violence’ increased from both sides, or
Palestinians view this as armed resistance in response to an imposed harsh
reality, these checkpoints and this wall were gradually built and fortified. However, these checkpoints and the wall never deterred resistance, nor did they bring security to Israel. Instead, they fragment Palestinian existence even further and increase Israel’s grip on the land, the
Palestinian population, the resources, and even on its diplomatic dogma, and
thus its power. As a result, the more desperate Palestinians get, the more the need to resist and fight since our survival and livelihood are threatened. It is important to remember, I believe in this context, the old
saying of "divide and conquer."
 |
| The wall separating the West Bank from Israel. |
Unfortunately,
Palestinians are faced with the fact that fighting or resisting to keep whatever
land is left to live on, the response is precisely the opposite: the land is taken
away under the pretext of security.
2)
The division
between Gaza, ruled by Hamas, and the West Bank, governed by the Palestinian Authority,
is a split that naturally occurs between political forces under immense
pressure. It is a division arising from the imbalance of power between Israelis
and Palestinians regarding going forward to free ourselves from a controlling
power that constantly undermines our future and livelihood. It happened because
there were two different programs for ending the occupation of military rule.
The question that naturally emanates under such pressure is regarding the type
of resistance, armed or popular[1]
resistance. So it is the enigma of change, and what does change look like or
mean for Palestinians? Clearly, there isn’t a unified vision of what the future
looks like or how to reach a better future.
Personally, I
see no possible resolution other than a one-state solution where Israelis and
Palestinians have equal rights, at least under law. It is still a widely
undesired idea on both sides, but few voices are beginning to contemplate such
a solution. In my opinion, this kind of resolution, if it ever sees the light is
better than the current situation, despite the complicated and unjust practices
that will continue, especially the racial complexes. But instead of blood and
war, it will become a fight to implement equality for Palestinians and even for black and
oriental Jews inside Israel, similar to many current aborigine communities and
racial struggles worldwide. It will become a different struggle. It will
witness an upgrade, ironically a more human one; we would at least join the
discussion in the international community for racial and ethnic equality and
religious tolerance.
How Did the Rift Happen?
The Origins of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority
Stemming from the Muslim Brotherhood Organization and its ideology,
Hamas is an Islamist group established in 1988 and has ties with and support
from countries like Turkey, Qatar, and Egypt. Israel allowed it to flourish[2] to
compete with the more liberal and open-minded national parties in the First
Intifada in 1987. Some Palestinians criticize it as not being wholly
independent or genuine in its decision-making regarding how to fight or when to
fight. In addition to this fact, many Palestinians do not adhere to Hamas's
social agenda or its political vision. However, many support Hamas because
they support its conviction in armed resistance and/or feel strongly unfavorable
towards the Palestinian Authority and its corrupt and unjust actions regardless of
the ramifications of Hamas’ social and political agenda.
The Division between the West Bank, ruled by Palestinian Authority,
and Gaza, ruled by Hamas, took place after the elections in 2006. Hamas won the
elections, which was like a referendum on the peace process as a tool for
independence. The voting reflects the fact that the Oslo peace agreement was
never honored, completed, or even accepted by many as a basis for the future.
The Palestinian Authority came into existence after the Oslo
agreement in 1993. The peace deal had three phases, and only the first phase
was implemented. The first phase divided the land in the West Bank and Gaza
into three areas; areas A, B, and C. Areas A are now the six cities of the West
Bank: Ramallah, Bethlehem, Nablus, Jenin, Jericho, and Tulkarem. These cities
were handed to Palestinians, and the Palestinian Authority, police, security
forces, and even army were established. Much of the money to sustain the
Palestinian Authority comes from Europe and the US. The security forces are
directly and mainly paid by the US to guarantee the results of these entities'
choices.
For many reasons, areas B and C were never delivered to the Palestinian
Authority, thus remaining under Israeli control. These areas constitute most of
the West Bank villages. The land in these areas is primarily uninhabited but is agriculturally
essential and belongs to the villages and the families living there. These
areas were never handed to Palestinians, adding to the fragmented reality. For
example, Palestinian police do not have jurisdiction to enter these areas. Some
Palestinian villagers need permits from Israel to farm their land, build a
home, or even dig a well. Some homes are forcibly being evicted and are facing demolition
orders to allow for the expansion of settlements.
Why the peace process Failed?
Rhetoric and Reality
One main reason the peace process wasn't successful or was never
completed is the division concerning the way forward in both societies, the
Israeli and the Palestinian.
Unfortunately, there is no consensus over what constitutes
Palestine nor how to get it back, peacefully or not. In its rhetoric, Hamas and some other
factions still believe the land we are fighting for is historical Palestine.
Their motto is from ‘sea to the river’ (min al-Bahar la Nahar), the sea meaning
the Mediterranean, and the river is the Jordan River, which is practically
Israel. They want to return to their villages and cities of Haifa, Jaffa, Al-Lod,
etc., and they believe in the right to return refugees to their homes. Whether
this is realistic or not, it is their belief and their rhetoric.
Nonetheless, they also accept a true and total control over all of
the West Bank and Gaza –which also means dismantling Jewish settlements- as a
basis for a long-term truce between Israel and the Palestinians. That is their
contention in the public rhetoric. At the same time, they are very practical in
dealing with Israel and the imposed restrictions in everyday life. In my
opinion, they seem in a state of schizophrenia when addressing the theory and
the practice, the rhetoric, and reality.
In contrast, the Oslo Agreement only addresses establishing a Palestinian
state on the land occupied in 1967, the West Bank, and Gaza. So it was
difficult for Hamas and other factions to accept the basis for the peace
process since it gave away a large part of historical Palestine. However,
Hamas and other factions agreed to give the peace process a chance, but it was
challenging to convince their constituents.
The same division exists among different Israeli constituents: many
Israeli groups, for example, most settlers, want the whole of Israel, which
includes the West Bank and Gaza, while other groups or parties like the Labor
party accepted to give the peace process a chance. In 1995, President Isaac
Rabin was assassinated by a Jewish extremist who didn’t adhere to the idea of
giving away 'Jewish land'. So the peace process suffered because of such
divisions on both sides.
As a result of such division, areas B and C were never delivered to the Palestinian side. Hamas
claims the peace process a failure, and in 1996, the first suicide bombing
happened in Tel Aviv. Now Israelis claim the peace process is a failure. In a
drastic attempt to save the peace process, the Palestinian Authority starts
arresting members of Hamas and imprisoning them. This reality went on until the
year 2002. After numerous suicide bombings, the Israeli army invaded all
Palestinian cities. It practically ended the peace process, meaning ending
sovereignty over areas A, and since then, the Israeli military still enters any
city and arrests anyone it wants, at any time.
So, as a result, Hamas won the elections in 2006. The US and Europe
cut off all financial support for the Palestinian Authority. Israel arrested all
elected members of the Palestinian Legislative Council. Hence Hamas took over
Gaza by force, where its Islamist social and political ideology has strong
support and remains under siege until today. The Palestinian Authority strengthened
its grip on the West Bank, and elections were never held again. All the
democratic institutions were closed down until the present day. And what is
deepening the internal division between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority- or
between Gaza and the West Bank- is the continued security coordination between Palestinian
Authority and its Intelligent Forces and the Israeli army.
So the challenge the Palestinian
people have is accepting such a fragmented existence and surrendering to a life
where the land is being eroded from under our feet and a life full of permits,
military arrests, imprisonment, and bombing, like in Gaza. A reality that is
lacking in
It is a tragedy, a projection done in the name of religion. Its driving force is greed, 'snatching up land for free' or 'acquiring land by force'; its biggest lie is security woven to cripple people from intervening. It can be understood as a replica of the aborigine stories in America, Latin America, Australia, and South Africa.
Comments
Post a Comment