An Empty Building with a Tattered Flag: Palestinians Have No Voice in Washington

October 11th, 2021

By Miko Peled

Source

Sad to say, the role of the head of the PLO office in Washington was in fact little more than that of a punching bag for the television networks.

WASHINGTON  In January of 2021 Reuters reported on “U.S. President Joe Biden’s plan to work to reopen the Palestinians’ diplomatic mission in Washington.” The office was closed down by then-President Donald Trump almost 25 years to the day after the signing of the Oslo Accords at the White House. The report mentions some of the legal and political hurdles that stand in the way of this plan, many of which were put in place during the Trump administration precisely for the purpose of preventing the mission’s reopening.

No diplomatic status

The Reuters piece referred to the office as a “diplomatic mission;” however, no one in that office enjoyed diplomatic status; it was the PLO office in Washington and not a diplomatic mission. The PLO did not enjoy diplomatic status and although some referred to the head of the mission as “Mr. Ambassador,” he was not an ambassador. Sad to say, the role of the head of the PLO office was in fact little more than that of a punching bag for the television networks.

Since placing the blame for the violence in Palestine squarely on Israel, where it belongs, is not done in the corporate media, every time CNN or one of the other networks needed a Palestinian to blame for Israel’s brutal attacks on Palestinian civilians the PLO representative would be called on. The role also included traveling and speaking at events as the representative of the Palestinian people.

No Palestinian representation

The problem is that the person filling the role of PLO representative in Washington does not represent the Palestinian people. He, or in some cases she, represents the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority does not represent the Palestinian people either.

The Palestinian Authority and its representatives do not represent the millions of Palestinian people who live in the Naqab or Lyd, the Galilee or Jerusalem. Nor does the PA represent the millions of Palestinian refugees in the Gaza Strip or those who live in the Palestinian refugee camps spread across the Arab World. The heads of the PLO missions are representatives of the PLO, which represents the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, which represents no one but themselves.

Financial and legal hurdles

According to the Reuters report, “under an anti-terror amendment passed by Congress and signed into law by Trump in 2019, the Palestinians would become liable for $655.5 million in financial penalties against them in U.S. courts if they open an office in the United States.”

This enormous sum of money comes from lawsuits by 11 American families who sought to hold the PA and PLO liable for armed resistance acts between 2002 and 2004 in which several Americans were also killed. It should be noted that in 2018 the U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider awarding those claims, upholding a lower court ruling that there was no jurisdiction for attacks outside the U.S.

But that is not all. Palestinian political prisoners are referred to by Israel and Zionists around the world as “terrorists.” They receive a stipend from the Palestinian authority so that their families can survive. As the Reuters report correctly states, the Taylor Force Act, passed by Congress in 2018, restricts aid to the Palestinian Authority until it agrees to stop payments to the families of people jailed by Israel. The Act specifically reads:

Congress makes the following findings:

(1) The Palestinian Authority’s practice of paying salaries to terrorists serving in Israeli prisons, as well as to the families of deceased terrorists, is an incentive to commit acts of terror.

This is flawed in several ways. First of all, it is ridiculous to assert that a Palestinian, or any individual for that matter, would be incentivized to risk dying or risk imprisonment and torture by Israel just so that their family could receive the miserly allowance from the Palestinian Authority. Furthermore, the issue of prisoners is one that is dear to the Palestinian people. Palestinians deeply appreciate the enormous sacrifice the prisoners pay. Ending the payments to the families, who often have no other source of income, is plain cruelty.

A flag

A photo of the building on Wisconsin Avenue in Washington, which used to house the PLO office, was also included in the Reuters piece.

What is a flag but a piece of colored cloth? The answer to that has to do with the circumstances surrounding the flag. The flag of Israel, for example, represents violence, racism, tyranny, oppression, and apartheid. The Palestinian flag represents resistance to all of that. In the photo in the Reuters piece the Palestinian flag is hanging on the building. However, that was three or four years ago.

Today, the building is empty, and the flag, which still hangs, is in tatters. Was it forgotten or maybe left there by design? Either way, it represents the state of the Palestinian reality. The piece of cloth that still hangs from the building used to have the Palestinian colors and is now a tattered piece of cloth no one cares about. It is symbolic of the situation in Palestine and of how Palestine is viewed in Washington.

The PLO Office in Washington has been closed since 2018.

No one currently represents Palestinian interests in the U.S. capital. There is no discussion on the rights of the millions of Palestinian refugees languishing in camps; there is no discussion on the rights of thousands of Palestinians shot and injured by Israel and left disabled; there is no discussion of the families whose loved ones are dead or injured and have no means of livelihood; there is no discussion on the rights of countless thousands of Palestinians who were tortured by Israel, spent years in Israeli prisons and were left permanently disabled. Finally, there is no serious demand that the United States end its support and impose harsh sanctions on Israel. Sadly, bringing back a representative of the Palestinian Authority will not change that.

The Untold Story of Why Palestinians Are Divided

September 29, 2021

Senior Fatah official Jibril Rajoub attends by video conference a meeting with deputy Hamas chief Saleh Arouri. (Photo: Video Grab)

By Ramzy Baroud

The political division in Palestinian society is deep-rooted, and must not be reduced to convenient claims about the ‘Hamas-Fatah split’, elections, the Oslo accords and subsequent disagreements. The division is linked to events that preceded all of these, and not even the death or incapacitation of the octogenarian, Mahmoud Abbas, will advance Palestinian unity by an iota.

Palestinian political disunity is tied to the fact that the issue of representation in Palestinian society has always been an outcome of one party trying to dominate all others. This dates back to Palestinian politics prior to the establishment of Israel on the ruins of historic Palestine in 1948, when various Palestinian clans fought for control over the entire Palestinian body politic. Disagreements led to conflict, often violent, though, at times, it also resulted in relative harmony – for example, the establishment of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) in 1936.

These early years of discord duplicated themselves in later phases of the Palestinian struggle. Soon after Egyptian leader, Jamal Abdel Nasser, relinquished his influential role over the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) following the humiliating Arab defeat in 1967, the relatively new Fatah Movement – established by Yasser Arafat and others in 1959 – took over. Since then, Fatah has mostly controlled the PLO, which was declared in Rabat, in 1974, to be the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people”.

The latter caveat was arguably added to ensure Arab rivals do not lay claim over the PLO, thus impose themselves as the benefactors of the Palestinian cause. However, long after the danger of that possibility had passed, Arafat and Fatah continued to control the PLO using the phrase as a moral justification for dominance and the elimination of political rivals.

While it is easy to jump to conclusions blaming Palestinians for their division, there is more to the story. Since much of the armed Palestinian struggle took place within various Arab political and territorial spaces, PLO groups needed to coordinate their actions, along with their political positions, with various Arab capitals – Cairo, Damascus, Amman and even, at times, Baghdad, Tripoli, Algiers and Sana’a. Naturally, this has deprived Palestinians of real, independent initiatives.

Arafat was particularly astute at managing one of the most difficult balancing acts in the history of liberation movements: keeping relative peace among Palestinian groups, appeasing Arab hosts and maintaining his control over Fatah and the PLO. Yet, even Arafat was often overwhelmed by circumstances well beyond his control, leading to major military showdowns, alienating him further and breaking down Palestinian groups to even smaller factions – each allied and supported by one or more Arab governments.

Even Palestinian division has rarely been a Palestinian decision, although the Palestinian leadership deserves much blame for failing to develop a pluralistic political system that is not dependent in its survival on a single group or individual.

The Oslo Accords of 1993 and the return of some of the Palestinian groups to Palestine in the following months and years was presented, at the time, as a critical step towards liberating Palestinian decision making from Arab and other influences. While that claim worked in theory, it failed in practice, as the newly established Palestinian National Authority (PNA) quickly became hostage to other, even greater influences: Israel, the United States and the so-called donor countries. This US-led apparatus linked its political and financial support to the Palestinians agreeing to a set of conditions, including the cracking down on anti-Israel ‘incitement’ and the dismantling of ‘terrorist infrastructures.’

While such a new political regime forced Palestinian groups to yet another conflict, only Hamas seemed powerful enough to withstand the pressure amassed by Fatah, the PA and Israel combined.

The Hamas-Fatah feud did not start as an outcome of Oslo and the establishment of the PA. The latter events merely exacerbated an existing conflict. Immediately after Hamas’ establishment in late 1987, PLO parties, especially Fatah, viewed the new Islamic movement with suspicion, for several reasons: Hamas began and expanded outside the well-controlled political system of the PLO; it was based in Palestine, thus avoiding the pitfalls of dependency on outside regimes; and, among other reasons, promoted itself as the alternative to the PLO’s past failures and political compromises.

Expectedly, Fatah dominated the PA as it did the PLO and, in both cases, rarely used truly democratic channels. As the PA grew richer and more corrupt, many Palestinians sought the answer in Hamas. Consequently, Hamas’ growth led to the movement’s victory in the Palestinian legislative elections in 2006. Conceding to a triumphant Hamas would have been the end of Fatah’s decades-long dominance over the Palestinian political discourse – let alone the loss of massive funding sources, prestige and many other perks. Thus, conflict seemed inevitable, leading to the tragic violence in the summer of 2007, and the eventual split between Palestinians- with Fatah dominating the PA in the occupied West Bank and Hamas ruling over besieged Gaza.

Matters are now increasingly complicated, as crises of political representation afflicting the PLO and the PA are likely to soon worsen with the power struggle under way within the Fatah movement. Though lacking Arafat’s popularity and respect among Palestinians, Abbas’ ultimate goal was the same: singlehandedly dominating the Palestinian body politic. However, unlike Arafat who, using manipulation and bribes kept the Fatah movement intact, Fatah under Abbas is ready to dismantle into smaller factions. Chances are the absence of Abbas will lead to a difficult transition within Fatah that, if accompanied with protests and violence, could result in the disintegration of the Fatah movement altogether.

To depict the current Palestinian political crisis in reductionist notions about a Hamas-Fatah ‘split’ – as if they were ever united – and other cliches, is to ignore a history of division that must not be solely blamed on Palestinians. In post-Abbas Palestine, Palestinians must reflect on this tragic history and, instead of aiming for easy fixes, concentrate on finding common ground beyond parties, factions, clans and privileges. Most importantly, the era of one party and a single individual dominating all others must be left behind and, this time, for good.

– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro-Middle East Center (AMEC). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

«سلطة أوسلو»: الخطيئة الأولى

الأخبار بتصرف

ثمانية وعشرون عاماً مرّت على توقيع «اتفاقية أوسلو». عقدان وسنوات ثمانٍ ثبت خلالها أن تلك الاتفاقية لم تكن أكثر من خديعة تعرّض لها الفلسطينيون، حتى يُربط مصيرهم أبداً بالاحتلال، من دون أن يقدروا على الفكاك منه. وبمعزل عن تفسير ما أقدم عليه الراحل ياسر عرفات من صفقة خاسرة أعطت إسرائيل كلّ شيء مقابل بعض الشيء وأشياء كثيرة متخيّلة، فإن ما آل إليه واقع السلطة التي أفرزها «أوسلو» يبدو من السوريالية بمستوى يصعب وصفه. إذ إنها تحوّلت إلى سيف مسلّط على رقبة المقاومة الفلسطينية، ليس من المبالغة القول إنه أمضى من السيف الإسرائيلي نفسه، فيما أضحى الهمّ الشاغل لقياداتها ووجوهها المحافظة على وجودهم ومكاسبهم، وإلى ذلك طريق واحد وحيد: “التنسيق الأمني”، الذي أضحت بموجبه السلطة حارساً وفيّاً لأمن إسرائيل ومصالحها، مع اطمئنان شبه كامل لدى الكيان العبري إلى أن هذا الواقع لن يتغيّر حتى ولو مات محمود عباس وشبع موتاً

يحيى دبوق

«سلطة أوسلو» في عيدها الثامن والعشرين: نقبل الذلّ… نقبله طواعيةً

«سلطة أوسلو» في عيدها الثامن والعشرين: نقبل الذلّ... نقبله طواعيةً
See the source image

يمكن للسلطة الفلسطينية والقائمين عليها أن يطلقوا على أنفسهم ما يريدون من أسماء وتوصيفات ترفع كيانهم السياسي إلى مراتب الدول ذات القرار والسيادة، إلّا أن ذلك لا يغيّر من واقع النظرة الإسرائيلية إليهم:…

يوسف فارس

إكسير «التنسيق الأمني»: كيف نحيا من دونه؟

إكسير «التنسيق الأمني»: كيف نحيا من  دونه؟

بعد مقتل الناشط السياسي، نزار بنات، مطلع الشهر الجاري، وما سبق ذلك من فضيحة اللّقاحات منتهية الصلاحية، وأزمات الفساد و الحضور الهامشي لـ«المقاطعة» خلال حرب غزّة، زاد الحديث في الأوساط السياسية…

رجب المدهون

الدولة السراب

الدولة السراب

على مدار سنوات سبقت توقيع «اتفاق أوسلو»، سعت شخصيات فلسطينية وأخرى عربية في إقناع قيادة «منظّمة التحرير»، ورئيسها الراحل ياسر عرفات، بالذهاب نحو حلّ مرحلي، وإنهاء الكفاح المسلّح ضدّ دولة الاحتلال،…

يوسف فارس

«أبو عمار» لو حكى: سلطة «أبو مازن» خطيئة كبرى

«أبو عمار» لو حكى: سلطة «أبو مازن» خطيئة كبرى

على مدار الأعوام الماضية، واجهت المقاومة الفلسطينية عدواً داخلياً تمثّل في السلطة الفلسطينية وأدواتها الأمنية والسياسية، التي عملت على وأد المقاومة بالاعتقال والاغتيال والتنسيق الأمني مع الاحتلال….

يوسف فارس

من «جمهورية الفاكهاني» إلى زبانية الاحتلال

من «جمهورية الفاكهاني» إلى زبانية الاحتلال
See the source image

يصحّ القول إن طموح الدولة، أو تحصيل أيّ مظهر من مظاهر السيادة، مثّل عقدة نقص لدى القيادة الفلسطينية، ليس منذ تأسيس «منظّمة التحرير» في مطلع الستينيات فحسب، إنّما للأمر جذورٌ فطرية تتّصل بواقع الشخصية…

رجب المدهون

عدوٌّ للمقاومة من أهلها

عدوٌّ للمقاومة من أهلها

على مدار 27 عاماً، واجهت المقاومة الفلسطينية عدواً داخلياً تمثّل في السلطة الفلسطينية وأدواتها الأمنية والسياسية، التي عملت على وأد المقاومة بالاعتقال والاغتيال والتنسيق الأمني مع الاحتلال. وخلال…

رجب المدهون

«فتح» تحت قيادة عباس: الراتب أوّلاً… والراتب أخيراً

Visual search query image

لم تَعُد حركة «فتح»، بعد قيادتها السلطة الفلسطينية، كما كانت قبلها؛ إذ باتت أطرها جميعاً مرتبطة بوجود السلطة التي تربط التنظيم بالرواتب والمناصب التي توزّعها على قياداتها. ومنذ بداية تأسيس السلطة،…

Sayyed Nasrallah: Diesel to Arrive in Lebanon Thursday… The American Conspiracies Will Fail as They Always Did

September 13, 2021

Sayyed Nasrallah: Diesel to Arrive in Lebanon Thursday… The American Conspiracies Will Fail as They Always Did

By Al-Ahed News

Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivered a televised speech on Monday evening in which he tackled the latest political developments in Lebanon and the region.

At the beginning of his speech, Sayyed Nasrallah mourned the demise of prominent cleric Sayyed Mohammad Said al-Hakim in Iraq and the Head of the Supreme Shia Council in Lebanon Sheikh Abdul Amir Qabalan.

Moving to politics, Sayyed Nasrallah welcomed the formation of the Lebanese government that was announced on Friday and thanked all those who contributed to this achievement. His eminence didn’t forget to thank the caretaker prime minister Hassan Diab for his patience and patriotism and shouldering the responsibility over the period of caretaking the responsibilities of the already resigned government.

Highlighting that the current government’s priorities must be to save the nation from the heart of the downfall, carry out reforms, and take care of people’s livelihood, the resistance leader also voiced support for getting prepared to hold the municipal elections in the due time, and insisted on this issue.

Also on the governmental level, Sayyed Nasrallah called for finishing the ministerial statement as soon as possible for the government to gain confidence and drive the country out of the crises, urging everybody to stand in solidarity to grant the government the sufficient time before judging it.

Fuel bound to Lebanon

In key notes that were the reason for delivering Monday’s speech, Sayyed Nasrallah commented on the fuel shipments heading for Lebanon, explaining that Hezbollah had two choices regarding the destination where the ship docks, one was Lebanon and the other was Syria.

“Not to embarrass certain parties inside Lebanon, we decided to send the ship to Syria, which agreed on the matter of receiving the ship at one of its ports,” His Eminence stated, adding that Syria facilitated the movement in Baniyas Port for the storage and transferring the oil via the borders, and it also provided the cisterns in which the oil will be transferred.

Sayyed Nasrallah announced that the first ship carrying oil derivatives docked at the Syrian Port of Baniyas on Sunday evening, and today [Monday] unloading its cargo will be finished.

His Eminence further declared that transferring the oil derivatives to Beqaa area will start on Thursday and will be stored in certain reservoirs in Baalbek.

Lashing out at some bets that considered the promise to send the ships is just for media consumption, the resistance leader said the matter is left behind as the ship already arrived.

“The ‘Israeli’ was in trouble as the equation of deterrence was set, and it is the one that protected and allowed the arrival of the first ship,” Sayyed Nasrallah underlined, slamming those who betted on the Americans who failed to prevent the arrival of the ships despite the pressures and threats.

Additionally, His Eminence noted that betting on causing a trouble between Hezbollah and the Lebanese state has also collapsed thanks to the cooperation of the Syrian state: “All bets have collapsed and serious work has started although we expected setting new gamblings.”

The Hezbollah leader elaborated that the ship that has already arrived was carrying diesel oil, and the second ship will arrive at the Baniyas Port within a few days. Meanwhile, all administrative measures to send the third ship have been finished, and it will carry gas oil from Iran.

The fourth ship will later be carrying diesel oil to be used for heating as winter approaches, Sayyed Nasrallah made clear.

Elsewhere in comments on the same issue, the Hezbollah leader mentioned that based on the new government’s track and the given data, the destination of other ships would be decided.

Ruling out any intention of making profits, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that Hezbollah doesn’t seek trade or benefits from such ships, and it only aims at easing the suffering of the people. “The cargo that will arrive will be handed to all classes in Lebanon and is not limited to certain people,” His Eminence assured.

“We prepared a specific mechanism to deliver the oil derivatives, and we don’t aim at competing with others,” Sayyed Nasrallah said. “As per distribution, we adopted several divisions; the first of which is a donation that will be sent for a one-month supply for several sides.”

Those sides are public hospitals, nursing homes, orphanages, and centers that take care of people with special needs, Sayyed Nasrallah said. Additionally, water facilities and poor municipalities that has water wells, the civil firefighting centers, and the Lebanese Red Cross will be considered in this donation.

According to Sayyed Nasrallah, the second section that will receive those derivatives with appropriate prices – and there are priorities in this regard – are the private hospitals, serology laboratories, bakeries, and supermarkets, the food industry, and the agricultural equipment.

“We will sell the oil derivatives to the second section with prices that are lower than the costs at the market and there will be no oil that will be sold to individuals,” the resistance leader underscored.

In the phase of distribution, Hezbollah will depend in the first place on the Al-Amana company that is already blacklisted by the US and will deal with other companies later. The quantities will be distributed gradually to increase the amount of the beneficiaries and Hezbollah will focus mainly on the municipal unions, according to Sayyed Nasrallah.

His Eminence underscored that the important point for Hezbollah is that the material reaches the due recipients and not the black market. “We will shoulder a big amount of the costs against the greed and monopoly found in Lebanon.”

The resistance group will sell the material in prices that are less than their expenses as it doesn’t seek profits and will consider the losses as an aid from Hezbollah and Iran, its leader added.

The official price for selling the diesel oil will be either announced on Wednesday or on Thursday, and it will be less than the expenses. The material will be sold in exchange for the Lebanese pound and Hezbollah will not cost the country’s treasury anything, Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized.

“We aim at breaking the black market and the greed of the monopolists,” His Eminence reiterated.

Sayyed Nasrallah called on the new government to have the Lebanese Army as the guarantor in the process of delivering subsidies to the people.

In clear remarks highlighting Hezbollah’s capabilities, Sayyed Nasrallah said the party was able to get a convoy of ships at once with a media coverage, but it didn’t do so because it didn’t want to incite anybody and it is why Hezbollah achieved the matter with the minimum of media coverage.

“We don’t aim at any political employment of what happened,” His Eminence noted, affirming that among the blessings of what happened is that it opened new doors to Lebanon, especially after the direct US move to bring Egyptian gas through Jordan and Syria.

On the same level, Sayyed Nasrallah welcomed the official visit of the Lebanese delegation to Syria that was open and loving despite the critical situation.

Regarding the agreement of exchanging Iraqi fuel, Sayyed Nasrallah said it is supposed to arrive in Lebanon and thanked the Iraqi government for its efforts in this respect.

Also on the local level, Sayyed Nasrallah warned that the ration card might open another door to stealing, corruption, and politicization and called on the Lebanese to adhere to the law related to the ration card without any fraud: “Those who don’t meet the restrictions should leave the money offered by this card to other people in need.”

Gilboa Heroic Op

Hailing the operation of Gilboa Prison break, Sayyed Nasrallah described the “Tunnel of Freedom” Operation that was carried out by Palestinian heroes and resistance men as an event with major and very important significances.

“The “Tunnel of Freedom” Operation expresses the creativity of those heroes and it is a source of pride for every honorable man, it also expresses the Palestinian insistence on freedom,” Sayyed Nasrallah said.

Additionally, His Eminence ruled out that detaining four of the six escapees would undermine the success of the operation and underscored that the responsibility of protecting the two remaining escapees should be shouldered by all Palestinians.

July 13 Events: Gaza Liberation, Airport Massacre, Jabal al-Rafei Confrontation

As today marks the 16th anniversary of liberating the Gaza Strip, Sayyed Nasrallah commented on this “major victory the resistance has scored and it emphasized the benefit of the choice of resistance”, noting that liberating the Gaza Strip led to turning it into a main base for resistance and a source of hope for all the people of Palestine.

July 13 also marks the day when the Lebanese Army opened fire at the heads of people protesting against the Oslo Agreement, in comments on the tragic massacre, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that “We were very patient on this calamity to ward off sedition some sides wanted to create against the Lebanese Army.”

“Nobody in Dahiyeh has opened fire against the security forces although they were killing their sons and daughters. Our people blocked the road in front of the sedition that was desired and later, the blood of our martyrs blended with that of the army’s martyrs,” Sayyed Nasrallah underlined, in reference to the martyrdom of a group of resistance men, including his own son, martyr Hadi Hassan Nasrallah, and a group of Lebanese Army soldiers on July 13, 1997 while combatting an ‘Israeli’ commando unit in Jabal al-Rafei, south Lebanon.

“The blood of our resistance men blended with the blood of the Lebanese Army officers, which led to victory,” the Hezbollah leader.

US will always fail

Sayyed Nasrallah concluded his speech by assuring the Americans that they will fail in every conspiracy they hatch against Lebanon: “Just as your hopes and conspiracies failed, you will fail once again and the golden equation [of Army, People, and Resistance in Lebanon] will persist.

Related Videos

Related Articles

60 Days in Palestine: The Indigenous Ghettos Win Vs Israeli Apartheid Regime Cracks

August 12, 2021

Daniel Lobato

Source: Al Mayadeen

The events of those 60 days have shown a new scenario in the historical stage of Palestine under apartheid.

Between April 12 (beginning of Ramadan) and June 13 (the establishment of the Israeli Government) we have witnessed a small chapter in the story of 100 years of war on Palestine. The events of those 60 days have shown a new scenario in the historical stage of Palestine under apartheid.

There seems to be no way to differentiate these events of 2021 of those from 2014, 2012 or 2008 if you just list the facts: 250 Palestinians in Gaza were killed, including 67 children and 2000 injured; 11 Israelis were killed and 1000 Palestinians arrested.

And again this scenario was coinciding with a political crisis in Tel Aviv after 4 elections in two years, and the coming threats of a fifth election; another election campaign of repression and massacres, as an Israeli MP denounced on CNN

However, many changes have been in sight even if the beginning was similar to other conflict escalations.

On April 12, “Israel” permitted several ‘goodwill gestures’ at the start of Ramadan with a brightly lit Tel Aviv: “Happy Ramadan to our residents and friends”. 21% of “Israel’s” citizens are native Palestinians, most of them Muslim, and in that message their state was alienating them: for almost 2 million of its indigenous citizens, their “state” called them “residents”. “Israel” applies 65 segregation laws to them and furthermore sent them this poisoned greeting by downgrading their citizenship to a “residency” of outsiders in their own land. Alongside this, Tel Aviv deployed its armed forces to intensify repression in Jerusalem as soon as Ramadan arrived.

The Battle of Damascus Gate

In the first days of Ramadan, Israeli forces charged to clear the steps of Damascus Gate and cut off electricity to the Al Aqsa Mosque. It prevented the popular evening food distribution that celebrates the end of the daily fast. In addition, in Al-Quds without tourists, “Israel” sought further militarization of the Damascus Gate and Al-Aqsa Mosque by besieging the place with barriers and metal detectors. This battle was already lost by “Israel” in 2017 when it tried to cage Al Aqsa mosque and went so far to close it as a sign of pressure. “Israel” tried again in April 2021, the police crackdown was joined by groups of Israelis going around “Jerusalem” shouting “death to Arabs” and lynching with impunity any Palestinian they encounter. As the days passed, such Israeli mobs were repeated in Al-Quds and other cities beating and murdering Palestinians. “Israel” funds racist marches of this kind with more money every year.

As in 2017, the battle of Damascus Gate resulted in a small Palestinian victory, however, the battle of Al-Aqsa evolved into another dimension.

The Battle of Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan

Israeli courts have no legal competence to determine private property in a militarily occupied territory. Despite this, in a decades-old farce of a judicial process, its judges ruled that the Palestinian neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah in “Jerusalem” must be vacated by May 2, 2021, and handed over to a settler organization. This organization promised to take over the entire neighborhood and expel all Palestinians. This act of dispossession has been the Israeli DNA: in 1948, European settlers owned only 6% of the land in Palestine while 94% belonged to the natives. Today the natives own only 3% of the land inside “Israel”. Dispossession continues in the West Bank and Al-Quds with the natives confined in disconnected ghettos. As one US settler said to the Palestinian Mona el Kurd:  “if I don’t steal it, someone else is going to steal it”. This settler was fleeing his crimes in the US by adopting a fraudulent Jewish identity in order to obtain the prize of a free Palestinian house. In Sheikh Jarrah, harsh police repression included spraying toxic water and tear gas inside homes and Palestinians were threatened by the Israeli deputy mayor of Jerusalem.

Emptying Sheikh Jarrah of Palestinians is important for “Israel” because it allows it to connect illegal settlements. Just as the Spanish railway company CAF does in “Jerusalem”: connecting with its tramway the colonies in occupied territory and extending apartheid Made in Spain in Palestine.

Another Palestinian neighborhood in Al-Quds, Al Bustan, has a demolition order from the Israeli municipality, knowing that “Israel” has no legitimacy and destroys the IV Geneva Convention. In Al Bustan 1500 natives, 60% children, will be dispossessed under disguises of legalism. Ethnic cleansing against the natives (“temporary residents”) is camouflaged by sophisticated judicial, electoral, administrative, town planning, archaeological, religious and economic strategies. The aim is to eliminate all Palestinians, as in “West Jerusalem”, where the houses of the natives are still standing but occupied by Israeli settlers. The owners were thrown into refugee camps. This gives material reality to their mythology and their strategy of fraudulently Judaizing the city. Tourists strolling through the Old City of “Jerusalem” do not know that the Jewish Quarter is a fake. “Israel” erected it in 1968 after razing to the ground the historic Maghreb quarter built in the time of Saladin almost a thousand years ago.

The Israeli army, courts, settlers and bulldozers are always ready to act anywhere in the Palestinian territory. As in Beita, Nablus, where in just a few weeks the invaders have erected a city in the olive groves of the Palestinian people. Sometimes “Israel” gives up a colony in order to put the media spotlight there, and try to hide 73 years of dispossession of the natives.

The Battle of Al-Aqsa

In the midst of Ramadan when mosques are usually crowded, Israeli forces turned the esplanade into a theatre of war with repeated assaults day and nightinside the mosques. It is strategic for “Israel” to harass the mosques in order to provoke Muslim anger around the world. In this way, colonization would be disguised in the media as an unresolvable religious battle. In addition, Israeli groups demand the demolition of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock in order to build a Jewish “Third Temple” in their place. 

This continued Israeli oppression of Al-Quds made Palestinian demonstrations explode throughout the territory. In cities within the Israeli state (Jaffa, Nazareth, Haifa, Lod, Acre or Uhm al Fahem), natives with Israeli citizenship lowered Tel Aviv flags and raised Palestinian banners. The Israeli mayor of Lod acknowledged that he had lost control of the situation and Netanyahu declared a state of emergency.

This united Palestinian revolt terrorized Israeli settler society and mobs lynched Palestinians with impunity.

The demonstrations showed the victory of the united native identity over the fragmentation sought by the Israeli government. The Western media also used submissive categories for Palestinians in “Israel”, such as desert Bedouin, Druze, Galilean Christians, Israeli Arabs, etc.

The Unity Intifada

This unitary revolt finally exploded with the  call for an indigenous general strike on May 18 for the three pieces into which historic Palestine is temporarily divided: “the state of Israel”, the West Bank ghettos and the Gaza ghetto. The call did not come from any political faction. It was youth and grassroots organizations from “Jerusalem” and “the state of Israel”. From Haifa to Galilee, Nablus or Gaza, there was a massive turnout. The whole of Palestinian society connected with its 1936 uprising against British and Zionist oppression, when native dispossession began with the arrival of European settlers. The Manifesto for Dignity and Hope swept across Palestine in those days expressing the significance of the reunification of Palestinian national consciousness. The physical separations and categorical prisons imposed by the colonial regime were destroyed: the prison of the West Bank ghettos, the prison of apartheid citizenship in the “Israeli state”, the prison of Gaza, and the prison of “Jerusalem”. It was set as a unitary goal to end all Zionist colonial structures.

The battle across Palestine

In the face of intense repression in “Jerusalem”, a warning was issued from Gaza on June 10 that rocket fire would begin. “Israel” ignored the warning and launched a large-scale operation against Gaza.

To describe these clashes as a war between “Israel” and “Hamas” is a manipulation. It is “Israel” against Gaza, or against Palestine. Why is a political party cited on only one side?

The Israeli operation “The Guardian of the Walls” announced the death of hundreds or thousands of people in the caged strip. It’s worthy of note that the two million people surviving in Gaza were stripped, crowded and locked up in that Israeli coastal prison.

Handcrafted rockets were pitted against a 21st century military technology for 10 days. The entire world’s media daily quantified the hundreds of rockets launched by the natives but never gave us the number of missiles and bombs dropped by “Israel”. 

“Israel” announced that it was going to step on the gas with its inhumane Dahiya doctrine of maximum devastation and disproportionate force on civilians. It consists of setting the attacked territory “back 20 years”, or even “to the stone age“. This military doctrine is part of the curriculum of Tel Aviv University, with which universities around the world partner rather than boycott. Following this strategy, “Israel” has sought to destroy as much of the infrastructure and economy of the Gaza ghetto as possible. When international donors once again funded the reconstruction of Gaza, the Israeli economy took a cut. Israeli destruction in Gaza included the only COVID laboratory, banks, shops, factories, bookstores, news agency buildings and hospital entrances.

Furthermore, “Israel” has repeated another doctrine started in 2014: intentionally eliminating entire families by bombing the house when the largest number of members are inside. Thus, four generations of the Al Qawlaq family with 21 members, from 90 years old to 6 months old, were exterminated. The survivor Shoukry Al Qawlaq listed his murdered family members for 33 seconds. The families Abu al Auf, Ashkontana, and up to 19 families were exterminated too. 

But unexpectedly within 10 days, Palestinians took over the situation. The Israeli regime thought that the Palestinian “residents” will be “leaving Gaza in complete silence“, to suddenly stopping with a ceasefire. “Israel” could have killed thousands of Palestinians as in 2008 or 2014 without accountability.

The Israeli military gives us the answer by frustratingly acknowledging that the quantity and technology of rockets from Gaza increases inexorably year after year despite the blockade on the strip. The myth of Israeli defenses (Iron Dome) collapsed when the number of rockets launched daily from Gaza quadrupled compared to 2014. Washington’s metropolis came to the rescue of its protectorate with two extra aid packages: one during the battle of $735 million in missiles, and another after the ceasefire of $1 billion to replenish “Israel’s” depleted defense system in just 10 days. Israeli estimates the rocket stockpile in Gaza for several months of continued fighting, with superior models not yet in use. 

Tel Aviv airport was closed for a week, compared to only a few hours in 2014. Eilat airport at more than 200km from Gaza also had to be closed. Israeli industrial facilities and ports were attacked and also closed. Attacks on Israeli cities and the death of 11 civilians instilled terror.

On the other hand, Israeli tanks and soldiers not only did not dare to enter the coastal prison, but did not even dare to approach the wall. A single Israeli soldier was killed by an anti-tank rocket fired from the Gaza ghetto. It was enough of a message for a specialized army in the repression and execution of civilians than in warfare.

Despite this evidence, the Israeli army issued its victory proclamation calling the 67 Palestinian children killed “neutralized terrorists”. But even the extremist Israeli media, which also called the Palestinian babies terrorists, were fearful for the future. Others assumed that the balance of power was shifting. Some media wondered what would happen if Lebanon were to join a joint action with Palestine in the future. The answer came from this Israeli analyst revealing the fear in the military leadership.

The meaning of the Palestinian victory by combining forms of resistance

“Israel” would have liked to be a liberal democracy like Australia or the US after having wiped out the indigenous people. Failing that, its fate will be the same as South Africa’s apartheid regime.

The indigenous demographic superiority (51%) over the settler society (49%) between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean has already been exceeded years ago and is increasing, not counting refugees from abroad, despite the ongoing ethnic cleansing. Furthermore, “Israel’s” 73-year effort to fragment Palestinian identity and territory has failed as the entire native society has been reunified in these two months of resistance.

Around the world there were massive demonstrations of solidarity that reveal the failure of Zionist lobbies and Western governments trying to suppress that support. In Madrid, thousands of people surpassed all expectations

The Palestinian victory on different fronts has generated multiple repercussions.

The price for the apartheid regime

The Israeli army dreams of an operation against Gaza to raze it and send the Palestinians to the Sinai desert. The reality is that this army no longer dares to approach the strip, and furthermore, it is not any more the 1948 era. “Israel” cannot expel or kill two million people. It can only reinforce the inhuman blockade, regularly bombing and killing in order to delay the inevitable fate as long as possible. 

It is the Israeli settler society that has been shocked by the message that its apartheid society and native ghettos have an end date, something its elites already knew. Israeli civilian casualties are “regrettable”, but the settler society must understand that the longer it sustains the regime the higher it will pay the price. The Palestinian defense killed 11 Israeli civilians in one week; in 2014 it was half that number in much longer. Israeli society has never lived under the terror and real death that it has imposed on the societies around it. Damascus and Syrian territory continue to be bombed by “Israel” on a regular basis. Lebanon’s civilians know that price. The new Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, when he was a commander ordered the massacre in 1996 of civilians sheltering in a UN building in the village of Qana, Lebanon. More than a hundred were hacked to death in their sleep, half of them women and children, and Bennett has always been proud of this. Civilians in Jordan, Egypt, Iraq and other countries have also paid a heavy price in the past.

Naftali Bennett was elected leader of the colonial government at the end of this 60-day cycle. For the first time “Israel” has needed to co-opt an indigenous opportunist to emerge from the political crisis  unleashed by rivalry between Zionist political clans. Two indigenous people of the same surname help sustain the crimes and apartheid: one in the Tel Aviv government, Mansour Abbas, and one inside the ghettos, Mahmoud Abbas. Also the South African Bantustan kinglets temporarily helped sustain the apartheid regime in Pretoria. This new government will be a continuation of the previous ones, because the engine is the same: to capture more land with less indigenous people and by whatever means necessary. But it will need more and more violence to achieve less and less results, with a higher and higher price to pay as Afrikaner society paid in South Africa.

The impact on the Western Metropolis

The Western powers are the colonial metropolis of the Israeli artefact. During this time they have recited “Israel’s” right to defend its apartheid regime. They put pressure on the indigenous colonial administration of Mahmoud Abbas (called Palestinian Authority) to suppress the revolts. The new normalizers of the apartheid regime (Emirates, Bahrain, and Morocco) played no role in this crisis. The usual regimes (Jordan, Egypt and Qatar) were pressured to cooperate in suffocating protest and resistance. But the West has no options left. The EU has long been making initiatives to try to co-opt Hamas as the PLO did in 1991. Two years ago the EU removed Hamas from the European list of terrorist groups. Somehow the West seeks to bring Hamas to the table to accept a future of ghettos and apartheid in exchange for money. For this reason, a close ally of the US and EU, the Moroccan regime, invited the Hamas leader a few days after the ceasefire.

But the eternally promised and delayed future of ghettos and apartheid that is called the “Palestinian state” no longer exists. The West can continue to recite the leitmotiv of the “two-state solution” in international institutions and media. Palestinian reunification has buried the coffin containing that ancient corpse of two states.

The international impact

Mass demonstrations, articles, statements, direct actions against Israeli companies and the blockade of Israeli ships all over the world have continued to increase solidarity with Palestine.

In 1991, world solidarity with Palestine declined due to several factors: the fall of the USSR and the new world hegemony, the PLO negotiating with the apartheid regime in Tel Aviv while simultaneously the apartheid regime in Pretoria was collapsing, the forced revocation in the UN of its Resolution 3379 declaring Zionism as a racist ideology, the Oslo Accords, the creation of the indigenous colonial administration called Palestinian Authority, etc.

From 2004 and 2005, solidarity began to recover with the sentence of the Hague Court against the apartheid wall and the launching of the international boycott campaign against “Israel”, BDS.

Today, all over the world, the consensus on Israeli apartheid is spreading and its role as the colonizer of Palestine is being restored. “Israel” is losing the social and legal war despite the efforts of Israeli lobbies in many countries to silence criticism and gain legitimacy through repressive law fare.

The ICC proceedings will continue to move forward with only two paths: issue arrest warrants against Israeli leaders, or close the case by demonstrating that it is a Western court to prosecute only those whom the West decides. Both decisions will have many repercussions and both will damage “Israel” in the eyes of the world’s people.

Antonio Guterres deleted from the UN website in 2017 an internal report singling out “Israel” as an apartheid regime, but other reports are beginning to pile up, and even Western governments are timidly beginning to use the term

It will become the norm to describe “Israel” as an apartheid regime with varying degrees of oppression against the native Palestinians, depending on where they are.

In the war dimension, the victory of the Palestinians against the Israeli nuclear regime’s army also has resonances in the region. The vulnerability of settler society has been exposed. It is no coincidence that a few days after the Gaza ghetto victory, and a Palestinian military spokesman’s thanks to Iran, Antony Blinken said that the US will maintain hundreds of sanctions against Iran, regardless of what happens to the Nuclear Deal. In other words, the Nuclear Deal will not survive because Iran will not agree to add new concessions, whether to its missiles or its relationship with its allies.

The impact on Palestinian society

We have already seen some of the meanings of this 60-day process for Palestinian society.

Internationally, the Palestinian Authority has been further exposed as a subordinate Department of Indigenous Affairs of the West and “Israel”. Mahmoud Abbas dares not accuse the apartheid regime of the crime of apartheid. Its main function is to exercise subcontracted repression, with mass arrests or assassination of grassroots activists. The Palestinian Authority leadership operates in the midst of political and economic corruption, and will do anything to perpetuate itself and sustain the colonial structure. In the midst of these 60 days, Abbas cancelled the theatre of a supposed election because of the risk of someone else taking his seat. But his days as the indigenous governor of the ghetto are about to end, and not only because of his age. After his outrageous repression of the Palestinians, the West is hypocritically condemning Abbas while deciding on his replacement. Abbas will not be honored by the West despite having played his mandated role in stifling Palestinian rights. 

At the end of this 60-day period, on June 12, the Palestinian Polling Centre conducted one of its regular polls. 80% of Palestinians said that Gaza had won the confrontation with “Israel”. They rated each focus of insurrection and resistance positively: 89% approved of the actions of Palestinians in “Jerusalem”, 86% supported the protests of Palestinian citizens of “Israel” and 77% supported the armed resistance of Palestinians in Gaza. The tiny number of Palestinians who support the Palestinian Authority (11%) and Abbas (8%) represent the privileged class that lives by it.

The Palestinian writer murdered by “Israel”, Ghassan Kanafani, warned that one of the enemies of the Palestinian people is the indigenous oligarchies.

The Palestinian people have been reunified but have no political subject in the form of a new national liberation movement. The PLO committed suicide in 1991. Next October marks the 30th anniversary of the fateful Madrid Conference that led to the Oslo Accords. Coinciding with that date, a first attempt will be made to launch a new Palestinian national movement to break with Oslo and apartheid: the alternative route, Masar Badil. Sooner or later a new Palestinian movement will be born.

We in the West have forgotten many lessons. One is that when a people is determined to be free it will apply the maximum of its own suffering during its struggle, however unfavorable it may be to the hostility of the oppressor. 

A fraudulent consensus has been installed in the West, by an ego of white saviors, that only the boycott ended apartheid in South Africa. This is coupled with revisionism of Nelson Mandela and other indigenous South African leaders. In the 1960s, the African National Congress decided to respond to the massacres of the Pretoria regime with armed struggle. To this end it created an autonomous armed wing, Umkhonto weSizwe (MK). Indigenous armed self-defense has been indispensable in decolonization struggles, as it was in South Africa. Colonial societies or occupying entities have paid a price in physical insecurity, as in Algeria or Vietnam. Israeli society knows that the price to be paid will be higher and higher.

Palestine solidarity organizations and the boycott movement do not have to try to appease the West or conform to the frameworks of legitimacy that the West designs. In the face of the criminalization of indigenous resistance in any form, declaring the boycott movement terrorist, or armed self-defense, international legality must be remembered. Especially the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or Resolution 3070: “The General Assembly reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples to free themselves from foreign colonial domination by all possible means, including armed struggle”.The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

The Illegitimacy of Mahmoud Abbas: Complicity and Accountability in Banat’s Killing

July 1, 2021

Prominent Palestinian activist Nizar Banat. (Photo: via Social Media)

By Ramona Wadi

In the international community’s narrative of illusory state-building in Palestine, the Palestinian Authority’s security services are dissociated from violence. Whether such violence is meted out according to PA Leader Mahmoud Abbas’s directives, or in terms of security coordination with Israel, the EU and the US prefer to retain a distant approach and one that is deeply rooted in the dynamics of the two-state paradigm.

Never mind that the EU and the US are directly funding and training the PA’s security services to turn against Palestinian civilians.

The killing of Nizar Banat at the hands of the PA’s security services last week ignited protests across the occupied West Bank. Simmering beneath the immediate protests is the Palestinian people’s awareness of security coordination with Israel, treacherous collaboration with Israel’s colonial violence that has targeted Palestinians with dissenting voices or involved in resistance activities.

At a time when Abbas is descending into a chaos of his own making, notably his refusal to hold democratic elections, Palestinians are protesting against the intricate web of violence which has so far sustained his “authority”.

US State Department Spokesman Ned Price’s statement is indicative of how Washington absolves itself of any role in creating the PA’s security services and their violence. “We have serious concerns about Palestinian Authority restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression by Palestinians and harassment of civil society activists and organizations,” said Price. Anyone else for dodgeball?

However, the US exhibits no concern whatsoever that it trains the PA’s security services to commit acts that lead to the murder of Palestinian civilians. Once again, Palestinian lives are expendable in view of the international commitment, to which the US is bound by consensus, to keeping the Palestinian people tethered to the two-state compromise and protecting the occupation, apartheid state.

The EU’s statement recognized the PA’s “increasingly persistence practice” of targeting its opponents, yet it hesitated to describe Banat’s death as politically motivated. “Apparently” allows the PA to remain on the EU’s agenda, for no other reason than the two-state compromise and the humanitarian agenda forced upon the Palestinian people. In this context, how can the EU’s calls for there to be accountability for Banat’s killing have any meaning?

If scrutiny is projected onto the donors, namely the EU and the US, an additional process of accountability must be taken into consideration; one that calls into question the Oslo Accords, the two-state compromise, and the international oppression which forced Palestinians to bend under PA rule.

In November 2020, Banat was arrested for a video denouncing the PA’s resumption of security coordination with Israel, a betrayal by the PA at the news that Joe Biden had won the US presidential election. Security coordination, therefore, is the main issue. Banat’s dissent threatened what remains of the PA’s repressive power. Without security coordination, the PA risks political dissolution and accountability.

These are two truths that it tries to stave off, even as Palestinians are clearly more emboldened in their protests and less willing to fit within the parameters imposed by the international community in its quest to legitimize Abbas, despite the clear illegitimacy of his political position and absence of a mandate to govern.

– Ramona Wadi is a staff writer for Middle East Monitor, where this article was originally published. She contributed this article to the Palestine Chronicle.

عمرو علان: “نزار بنات” يعري وظيفية السلطة.. فما هي الآفاق؟

عمرو علان

مِن أين يمكننا البدءُ بشكلٍ صحيحٍ؟ فهل نبدأ مِن توصيف جريمة اغتيال الشهيد نزار بنات على أنها جريمةٌ ضد حرية التعبير؟ أم ننطلق مِن كونها جريمة ضد حرية الرأي؟ أم من كونها جريمة فسادٍ أو تجاوزٍ لحدود الصلاحيات داخل جهازٍ أمنيٍّ في ظل دولةٍ ناجزةٍ؟ أم من كونها جريمة ضد “حقوق الإنسان” بمعناها الفضفاض والقابل للتأويل كيفما اتَّفَق؟

يجزم البعض أن هذه المنطلَقات سالفة الذكر تُغيِّب – بقصد أو بدونه – حقيقة توصيف ما جرى وتسلخه عن سياقاته، فما جرى كان في الواقع جريمةٌ ضد خَيارات نزار بنات في الأصل، وذلك بصفته جزء من نهجٍ يقاوم أو يدعو لمقاومة الاحتلال.

لقد جاءت هذه الجريمة المروِّعة لتثبت مجدداً صواب عموم ما طرحه الشهيد وآخرون في توصيف ما انتهت إليه السلطة الفلسطينية، التي يصح فيها ما صح في سائر التجارب السابقة لسلطات الحكم الذاتي تحت ظل الاحتلال في تجارب شعوبٍ أخرى، والتي لا تؤدي في نهاية المطاف إلا إلى خلق مصالحٍ اقتصاديةٍ لطبقةٍ برجوازيةٍ متسلطة، تملك زمام الأمر في مجتمع شعبها الواقع تحت الاحتلال، وعلى ضوء التجارب التاريخية فإن هذه الطبقة البرجوازية تستمدّ “شرعية” وجودها من الاحتلال ذاته، ويصير بقاؤها مرتبطاً ببقاء الاحتلال ومرهوناً باستمراريته.

وفي الحالة الفلسطينية، فإن الطبيعة الوظيفية للكيان الصهيوني تدعم حتمية قيام هذه العلاقة الجدلية بين الاحتلال وسلطة الحكم الذاتي، فأي “دولةٍ” تقام على جزءٍ من الأرض الفلسطينية المحتلة، لا تضع في حساباتها حقيقة أن وجود الكيان الصهيوني يشكل حاجزا أمام أي تكامل عربي أو إسلامي، وهذا منسجم مع طبيعة هذا الكيان بصفته امتداداً للقوى الاستعمارية الغربية وحامي مصالحها، فلابد من أن ينتهي الحال بتلك “الدولة” كجزءٍ من إستراتيجية إدامة هذا الكيان بغض النظر عمن يتولى زمام الحكم فيها، فكيف بسلطة حكمٍ ذاتيٍ كما هو حال السلطة الفلسطينية أو بالأصح سلطة أوسلو؟

حقيقة الصهيوني رئيس فلسطين محمود عباس

لهذا فلا أمل يرجى من حدوث تحوّلٍ في مسار السلطة الفلسطينية، فالمسألة ليست خطأً في التقدير يمكن معالجته بالحوار، أو مسألة وجود إستراتيجية تحرير لدى السلطة الفلسطينية تختلف عن إستراتيجيات فصائل المقاومة، بل إن مكمن القضية يعود إلى الخيارات التي اتخذتها “م.ت.ف” في مرحلةٍ سابقةٍ وأفضت إلى إنشاء سلطة الحكم الذاتي الفلسطينية، تلك الخيارات التي – بالطبيعة – أوصلت السلطة الفلسطينية إلى ما انتهت إليه كأحد الأدوات التي يستخدمها الاحتلال الصهيوني لإدامة احتلاله، وهذه مسألةٌ بنيويةٌ، ترتبط بالظروف الموضوعية لوجود هذه السلطة واستمرار بقائها.

هذه الرواية لم تَعُد تنظيراً، بل باتت واقعاً ملموساً، وإلا فما هو مسوغ عدّ السلطة الفلسطينية “التنسيق الأمني” مقدساً رغم وصول “عملية السلام” إلى طريقٍ مسدودٍ بإقرار الجميع؟ هذا إذا ما تجاهلنا كون “التنسيق الأمني” هو تعريف العمالة بحد ذاتها، ونتمنى لو يشرح أحدٌ لنا الفرق بين جيش لحد اللبناني ومعتقل الخيام وبين السلطة الفلسطينية ومعتقلاتها.

وعليه فإن البعض يرى وجوب وضع جريمة اغتيال نزار بنات في هذا السياق، حالها في ذلك حال الجرائم التي سبقتها ضد مقاومين آخرين، تلك الجرائم التي لعبت فيها السلطة الفلسطينية دوراً رئيسًا بالتعاون مع قوات الاحتلال، إما ليصفِّيهم جسديًا أو ليتم اعتقالهم، فمثلًا ألم يكن الشهيد باسل الأعرج مطلوباً من قبل أجهزة أمن السلطة الفلسطينية؟

تعيد جريمة اغتيال نزار بنات طرح القضية الجدلية في الشارع الفلسطيني عما إذا كان قد حان الوقت للفصائل الفلسطينية الإسلامية والوطنية – وفي طليعتهم حركة “فتح” وباقي فصائل “م.ت.ف” – أن تسمي الأشياء بمسمياتها، وترفع الغطاء الوطني عن سلطة التنسيق الأمني الذي تمنحه إياه، أم أن حالة التكاذب الوطني ستستمر لفترةٍ أطول؟

لعلنا نستطيع أن نستشف الجواب من أحد فيديوهات نزار بنات التي دفع حياته ثمناً لها، والتي قال فيها إن وصف الخلاف بين حركة “فتح” وحركة “حماس” بصفتها حركة مقاومةٍ بالانقسام يجانب الصواب، ولعل الأصح وصفه بالفرز بين مشروعين لا يمكن الجمع بينهما، هذا في النظرة للمشروع الوطني، أما بالنسبة للخلاف على الحكم فهي مسألةٌ أخرى.

وفي الختام، يظل التعويل في الطليعة على أن يُغلِّب أبناء حركة “فتح” المصلحة الوطنية على الخلافات الأخرى المرتبطة بالحكم، ويجروا عملية مراجعة حقيقية للخيارات السياسية السابقة التي ثبت عقمها، ويقوموا بعملية تَقييم موضوعيٍ ومنصفٍ لتجربة سلطة الحكم الذاتي، وأي وضع انتهت إليه، وهي بهذا لم تشذ عن تجارب شعوبٍ أخرى مع سلطات الحكم الذاتي تحت سياط الاحتلال، ويبقى الرهان والأمل الكبيران معقودين على وطنية أبناء حركة “فتح” لتفادي الأسوأ.

لقد آن الأوان لأصلاء حركة “فتح” طيّ صفحة الماضي، ونزع الشرعية عن عملاء “التنسيق الأمني” وسلطتهم، الذين استنزفوا كل رصيد حركة “فتح” النضالي أو كادوا، وليتذكر الفلسطيني أنه مازال يعيش مرحلة التحرير، وفعلياً لا دولة لديه أو كيان ليحكمه، فلينجز الفلسطينيون التحرير أولاً وبعدها ليخوضوا في خلافات الحكم وطبيعته وشكله كما يحلوا لهم.

كاتب وباحث سياسي

Netanyahu Follows Trump’s Footsteps: Political Downfall, Internal Crisis, and Attempt to Bridge the Gap

11-06-2021

Netanyahu Follows Trump’s Footsteps: Political Downfall, Internal Crisis, and Attempt to Bridge the Gap

By Ali Abadi

The recent developments in the Zionist entity reopen the discussion regarding the extent to which this entity is influenced by the US policy as well as the changes inside the United States.

Since Trump’s failure in the US Presidential Elections, the countdown to Benjamin Netanyahu’s downfall has started -who represents the ‘Israeli’ version of Trump’s personality- even though the former was able to reproduce his leadership via three consecutive elections, and prepared to a fourth round to fortify his position against probes in cases of corruption, and to fight the possibility of moving him away from the political scene through a rival party coalition. However, Netanyahu’s ploys didn’t survive in front of the results of the recent war with Gaza, which turned the political atmosphere inside the occupation entity to the extent that Netanyahu’s government was found responsible or losing the deterrence with Gaza, not to mention his weakness to handle the resistance and its growing might.

Herein, we should notice the relative comparison between the American and the ‘Israeli’ arenas:

On the one hand, the extravagance of America’s right wing led to dangerous division that caused an intense desire among all of Trump’s opponents [including some of the Republican party members] to get rid of him via ballot boxes, so they voted majorly against the far-right policies [represented by Trump] more than to support his rival Biden and his electoral program. And in the ‘Israeli’ arena, the right policies led to attractions from within the Zionist society, not between the left and the right, but within the right itself. A dominant agreement emerged that Netanyahu is sticking to power at any price, even if it led to a ‘civil war’, and that he is using Zionist religious parties that exchange with him the electoral services and well as the governmental benefits.

On the other hand, it happened previously that the personalities of Trump and Netanyahu have been linked to each other, in the course of unprecedented similarity in political tendencies of both sides regarding several issues. Trump’s failure in the US has motivated many ‘Israeli’ politicians to think about a way to get rid of his closest ally, Netanyahu. However, they didn’t possess the required energy to unite. Then came the recent confrontation with the Palestinians to uncover the weak structure of the entity as well as the policies of Netanyahu’s government. The decision was among several political parties to scapegoat him based on the rule of preserving the rightist policies that are threatened with the strong Palestinian uprising on the one hand, and the harmony with the American policies as much as possible on the other hand. Hence, the Zionist right settlement scheme would be saved, while Netanyahu’s attempts to shake the alliance with the US due to his objection of its return to the nuclear deal with Iran would fail.

Separation

Both American and ‘Israeli’ societies suffer from not yet hidden political, ideological, and ethnic divisions. Both societies need to absorb the tension from time to time via changing the top of the pyramid. This is one issue. Another remarkable one is that ‘Israel’ didn’t succeed for long in staying away from the requirements of the American interests in the region. And without harboring hopes on a major separation between the two sides, we witness a sort of coldness in relations due to three main points over the past three decades.

First: With launching the Madrid Conference for settlement in the region in the beginning of the 1990s after the US-led war in Kuwait, when Isaac Shamir [Likud] government objected to the principle of establishing an independent Palestinian state, but the Zionist entity’s need for the US financial support to contain the Jewish migration from the Soviet Union and other places pushed ‘Israel’ to reduce its objections and conditions. Washington was able, through guaranteed loans worth billions of dollars, to tame the ‘Israeli’ policy in favor of its wider interests. Then, Shamir was displaced from the ‘Israeli’ scene, and was succeeded by Isaac Rabin [Labor Party] to lead the Oslo track which happened to become later the Palestinian Authority in Gaza and Ariha. However, after the assassination of Rabin in 1995, the abilities of the most harmonized Zionist parties with the US policy declined on the level of their potential to attract, and the base of the far-right parties, which reject the issue of ‘Two-state-solution’ or freezing the settlement activity grew, especially in the aftermaths of the major migration from the previously-known Soviet Union and other places. This led to a change inside the Zionist society, in addition to the structure of its successive governments.

Second: Netanyahu’s impediment of Barack Obama’s attempts to revive negotiations with the Palestinian Authority based on freezing the settlement activity in the West Bank, and then the US signing of a nuclear deal with Iran in 2015. Netanyahu objected to it publicly and inside the US congress in a famous speech. Meanwhile, the dispersion within Netanyahu’s rival ‘Israeli’ parties didn’t allow the formation of a change that suits the US regional policy.  Trump came to power in 2016 to revive Netanyahu’s hopes about change that he didn’t dream about from the part of the American orientation on other levels [such as moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to al-Quds, recognizing the ‘Israeli’ sovereignty in the Golan, supporting the settlement activity in the West Bank, cutting funds of the Palestinian refugees’ UNRWA agency, shutting the office of the Palestine Liberation Organization in Washington, and encouraging the ‘Israeli’ normalization with Arab states regardless to the Palestinians.] A parallel US shift took place when Trump left the nuclear deal with Iran.

Third: Biden’s rising to power in Washington, which modified the ‘Israeli’ expectations. This is not limited to some differences regarding the traditional support of ‘Israel’ between America’s Republican and Democratic parties. The truth is that a change started to be witnessed in the public American mood in which a new political generation in the US, and inside the Democratic party is more liberal than its predecessors and doesn’t grant ‘Israel’ an ultimate support. It also cannot digest the rightist ‘Israeli’ thinking to ban the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the Palestinian people’s right to live on their land within internationally recognized borders. The ‘Israeli’ narrative, which has dominated the minds of the US elite over several decades regarding the right of Jews alone to establish their national Jewish state, has turned less tempting to many Americans. Additionally, the pro-Palestinian activism on social media platforms managed to breach the pro-‘Israel’ traditional media, in which Facebook and Twitter’s restrictions couldn’t curb this activism that was crystal-clear during the latest round of ‘Israeli’ aggression. It also scored important attractions in English and other foreign language.

Moreover, the Biden administration prioritizing of returning to the nuclear deal with Iran formed a separation from Netanyahu government’s orientations. He has started hinting to moving without an agreement from Washington, a matter that is not only underestimated in the US, but also among ‘Israeli’ milieus that are worried about losing the strategic alliance with the US.

Back to the house of obedience

After this third stop, ‘Israel’ returns to the so-called American ‘house of obedience’ or to adapting with the major US interests. This return is based upon avoiding confrontation with the US policies and their regional requirements to deal with the nuclear Iran in particular, reducing tension and difference with the American administration when dealing with the flaming Palestinian issue nowadays. However, it is not necessarily at the expense of the rightist tendencies regarding the settlement scheme that is the core of the Zionist project. The official US interest intersected with the internal ‘Israeli’ parties’ interests to remove Netanyahu from the scene. The US administration will take advantage of this shift in an attempt to revive negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and the occupation’s government to delegitimize the Palestinian resistance and the Axis that supports it in the region. Washington is to offer significant motivations to the future Zionist right government, led by Naftali Bennett, to allow progress in negotiations. Hereby, new obstacles will emerge from the side of Netanyahu’s successors who publicly adopt a hardline track regarding the rights of the Palestinian people, especially regarding the evacuation of some occupied land, freezing settlement, or establishing the Palestinian state. This will later turn things to the previous empty circle on the level of negotiations.

It is worth noting that Biden’s administration is not totally free to dictate its policies on ‘Israel’, especially amid the contradictions within the US political environment and inside the democratic party itself. However, ‘Israel’s’ dire need to the US support is an existential need to bear the pressures and preserve the qualitative military superiority. This will push the next ‘Israeli’ government to reduce the public contact with the US to overcome the challenges posed in this phase.

Finally, it is important to examine the extent to which the future Zionist government would succeed in:

– Managing the internal chaos along with threats of physical killing among the right affiliates

– Managing the military confrontation with the Gaza Strip

– Managing the variations with the US administration regarding the Palestinian issue and the Iran nuclear deal

On the American level, it is important to note the US administration’s ability to:

– Pass the nuclear deal with Iran without shockwaves inside the US congress and the circles of the conservatives who are more sticking to the ‘Israeli’ interests

– Dealing with the critical Palestinian issue, militarily and politically, based on the results of the recent confrontation that raised the voice of the Palestinian resistance

هكذا تكلَّم السنوار

سعادة مصطفى أرشيد _

ألقى قائد حماس في غزة خطاباً يوم السبت الماضي، جاء اقرب إلى حديث مطول مع مجموعة مختارة من الأكاديميين، ومثل فرصة مهمة لمعرفة الشخص الذي قاد الحرب الأخيرة، وأصبح الاسم الأبرز فلسطينياً، معرفة مباشرة لشخصه وأسلوبه وفكره وسياسات حركة حماس خصوصاً، والمقاومة عموماً. فالحديث هو وثيقة سياسية بامتياز، يمكن اعتمادها لزمن آتٍ.

قدّم السنوار تحليلاً متماسكاً لظروف ما قبل الحرب وشرح كيف تدحرجت الأحداث لتصل إلى المواجهة، إذ اعتبر أنّ تراجع السلطة عن التفاهمات الوطنية التي جرت بين حركتي حماس وفتح ثم مع باقي الفصائل، وقدمت بها حركة حماس التنازل تلو التنازل، في سبيل الوصول إلى هذه التفاهمات والشروع ببناء نظام فلسطيني جديد وإنهاء الانقسام، فتراجعت عن إصرارها على تزامن الانتخابات التشريعية مع الرئاسية وانتخابات المجلس الوطني، لتقبل بكامل وجهه نظر السلطة بأن تجري انتخابات المجلس التشريعي أولاً وقبلت بتغيير قانون الانتخابات ليصبح قانون النسبية الكاملة والقوائم، إلا أنّ السلطة في رام الله، ما لبثت أن تراجعت، والسلطة لم تغادر موقعها الذي لا يرى أية بدائل للتفاوض، ولا يرى أنّ العملية الديمقراطية هي أساس الحكم ومصدر شرعيته، وإنما الحكم يقوم ويستمر بالإيفاء بالالتزامات التي قررها اتفاق أوسلو وما تلاه من ملاحق أمنية، يرى السنوار أنّ الوصول إلى هذه الحالة من الخلاف الفلسطيني – الفلسطيني، قد صنع شعوراً زائفاً لدى الاحتلال، بأنه يستطيع والحالة كذلك تمرير مخططاته بالقدس، فكانت أحداث باب العمود وتلتها أحداث حي الشيخ جراح والمسجد الأقصى، تحرك الشعب الفلسطيني بكلّ أطيافه وتشظياته على قلب رجل واحد، وهنا اضطرت المقاومة للتدخل، واضعة القدس تحت جناحها وحمايتها، بعد أن خذل المدينة الجميع بمن فيهم عمان ورام الله.

اتسم حديث السنوار بالشعبويّة والتعبويّة والدعم النفسي، وأدى ولا ريب إلى إكمال دور الصواريخ في إنعاش الحالة المعنوية لعموم أهل فلسطين، بعد مرحلة من الإحباط وانعدام اليقين وانحدار الثقة بالنفس، وأكد في السياق على المكانة التي منحتها الحرب والمقاومة لمن يقاتل ويقاوم، وعلى امتلاك قراري الحرب والسلم، ثم تحدّث في تفاصيل المعركة ومقدار القوة التي استعملتها المقاومة ومقدار القوة التي لا زالت تملكها، فيما الضعف والوهن لم يتسلل إلى النفس المقاومة والى المواطن الغزيّ، في حين انكشفت أكذوبة المشروع المعادي الذي لا تستطيع التكنولوجيا والقوة المجردة التمويه على مقدار ضعفه وهشاشته، فهو ليس إلا بيت عنكبوت. الحصار سوف يُرفَع – أو أنّ ظروف الحصار ستكون أقلّ صرامة – وأنّ ازدهاراً سيلمسه أهل غزة بالقريب، فيما إعادة إعمار ما دمّرته الحرب سيكون سريعاً، بإشراف المقاومة التي لا تحتاج لمدّ اليد لأموال الإعمار، فلديها كثير وسيأتيها كثير من أصدقائها وشركائها في محور المقاومة والممانعة الذي أكد الانتماء له، وإعادة الإعمار لن يكون لرام الله دور فيها، وهو الأمر الذي يؤيده بقوة عموم أهل غزة، بمن فيهم اتحاد المقاولين، ومعهم من اكتوى بنار الخلاف بين غزة ورام الله التي دفّعتهم ثمن خلاف ليسوا مسؤولين عنه.

عبر الطريقة الشعبوية، تحدث السنوار في عمق السياسة، أكد على استقلالية القرار – الحرب والسلم – وعلى ولاية المقاومة على القدس وعلى شرعية تمثيلها للشعب الفلسطيني في كافة أماكن انتشاره، الأمر الذي كان جلياً في الالتفاف حول المقاومة، – وكأنه يقول – بما يمثل تصويتاً وانتخاباً وتفويضاً للمقاومة، وأبلغ مستمعيه من أكاديميين ومشاهدين بما ستعرضه حماس في لقاءات القاهرة يومي السبت والأحد المقبلين، مؤكداً أنّ تفاهمات ما قبل الحرب التي تراجعت رام الله عنها، لم تعد قائمة، فما بعد الانتصار ليس كما قبله، وقدّم نصيحة شبه مباشرة لرام الله، بأن تكفّ عن طرح مبادرات وأفكار من مثل حكومة وفاق، أو قيادة مشتركة، فهذا ليس إلا كلاماً فارغاً ومضيعه للوقت، ولم يعد وارداً في أجندة المقاومة التي أصبحت صاحبة اليد الطولى، وأشار إلى أنّ منظمة التحرير بتركيبتها الحالية عاجزة وغير جامعة وهي تحتاج إلى إعادة بناء تبدأ بانتخابات مجلس وطني أولاً ومن ثم تستكمل هيئاتها بموجب الانتخابات، وأن لذلك أهمية وأولوية تفوق انتخابات المجلس التشريعي، وكانت رسالته الأخيرة للمجتمع الدولي – والتي يُقال إنه أرسلها سابقاً عبر مصر وقطر – عن قبول حركة حماس باتفاق وطني، كما ورد في وثيقة الأسرى، ثم في التفاهمات الوطنية، يقضي بقبول دولة فلسطينية على حدود الرابع من حزيران وعاصمتها القدس، وهو شرط المقاومة البديل لشروط الرباعية الدولية.

إطلالة السنوار ولا شك موفقة، ضرورية وبالغة الأهمية لمعرفة الرجل وما يقول أولاً، والأهمّ لمعرفة برنامجه وسياسته ثانياً، ولكن، ولكي يستمرّ هذا التوفيق وتبقى للرجل صورته التي شاهدها الناس السبت الماضي، لا بد من تسجيل بعض الملاحظات :

أثبت السنوار منذ اليوم الأول للمعركة أنه صادق الوعد والفعل، وذلك منذ الساعة السادسة من مساء العاشر من أيار الماضي حين انطلقت الصواريخ في موعدها الدقيق من غزة للقدس، ونتمنى على الرجل أن يبقى دائماً كذلك، مصداقاً قولاً وفعلاً – وهو تمنّ مصدره الاحترام لا سوء الظنّ – فالأيام المقبلة سوف تكون أطول وأكثر أهمية من الأيام التي انقضت، والمعارك الآتية ولا بدّ، سوف تكون عديدة وأكثر ضراوة في نارها، وأشدّ أثراً في مفاعيلها ونتائجها السياسية، الأمر الذي يتطلّب دقة في القول وعدم الانسياق في مسارب الحماسة.

أطلقت المقاومة على المعركة اسم «سيف القدس»، وهي بلا ريب نقطة مركزية في الوجدان القومي والديني والسياسي، وكان حافز الحرب الدفاع عنها، وإعلان المسؤولية عنها والرعاية عليها، وحمايتها تتطلّب أدوات وجهوداً سياسية واجتماعية واقتصادية وحقوقية صادقة ومخلصة، تسير في موازاة العمل العسكري وتمثل رديفاً كفاحياً يتكامل معه. من هنا، فإنّ المقدسي أولاً والفلسطيني ثانياً ينتظر من المقاومة تطوير برامجها وتفعيل هذه الأدوات، وإيلاء المسائل المذكورة الأهمية التي تستحقها.

إنّ كثيراً من جمهور المقاومة ومناصريها، يتمنون على السنوار، أن يذكر دائماً أنّ الفضل في المعركة المجيدة، للمقاومة بكل عناصرها، وأنّ المقاومة هي من أنزله مكانته الرفيعة في السياسة وفي القلوب، الأمر الذي يدعوه أن يتحدث ويتعاطى مع موقعه بصفته الأكبر وبأنه قائد للمقاومة، ورمز من رموزها، لا قائداً لفصيل، فالعمل وإن تحقق بجزء مهم منه على يد حركة حماس، إلا أنّ جميع تشكيلات المقاومة كانت شريكة في هذا الإنجاز المجيد، ومعهم توحّد الشعب الفلسطيني من أعالي الجليل إلى أقاصي النقب ومن ساحل المتوسط إلى أعماق الأغوار ومن ورائهم الأمة بأسرها والعالم بأجمعه في لحظة تاريخية فارقة، تمثل فرصة فريدة لقائد وطن لا قائد فصيل.

* الكفير ـ جنين ـ فلسطين المحتلة

ما تخافوش

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%8A.jpg

07-06-2021

خلال الشهر الماضي وما شهدته مدينة القدس والأحياء العربية فيها بصورة خاصة من مواجهات، ظهر أن الشباب الفلسطيني في القدس والأراضي المحتلة عام 48 الذي يُعرف بالجيل الثالث، أي الجيل الذي ولد في ظل الاحتلال، يُسقط الرهان على الأسرلة التي شكلت خياراً عمل عليه الكيان ضمن خطة تذويب القضية الفلسطينية والهوية العربية للسكان الأصليين للمناطق المحتلة، واستثمر الكيان الزمن الفاصل منذ مسيرة التفاوض واتفاق أوسلو لتوفير فرص التغاضي عن خطته والاستفراد بأبناء القدس والمناطق المحتلة عام 48.

الذين نهضوا بالانتفاضة الفلسطينية الجديدة التي أسست لجولة الحرب الأخيرة وعنوانها القدس، هم شباب وصبايا فلسطين الذين ولدوا بعد الانتفاضة الأولى، ورافقوا وهم صغار انتفاضة الأقصى وانتصار جنوب لبنان عام 2000، وواكبوا مسار التفاوض البائس، ومسار التطبيع المشين، وأحداث المنطقة سواء في سورية أو في ظهور محور المقاومة، ومقابله تحالف يجمع حكومات الخليج وكيان الاحتلال تحت عنوان الخطر الإيراني المشترك، فقرّروا ودون امتلاك أدوات حزبيّة، ودون الانتماء للتشكيلات السائدة فلسطينياً، وفي مواجهة دعوات للانضواء تحت سقف اللعبة الداخليّة للكيان، عبر انتخابات الكنيست وقبول هوية «عرب إسرائيل»، كما تفرض حصيلة أية تسوية وفق حلّ الدولتين، ستكون أحياء بعيدة عن القدس تحمل تسمية القدس كعاصمة لها، مثل حي أبو ديس، ولن يكون لأبناء مناطق الـ 48 اي مكان فيها، وشق خيار هذا الجيل طريقه وفرض حضوره، وصار عنوان الحدث.

جوهر سياسة الكيان تجاه هذا الجيل قام على الترغيب ومشروع الدمج والتذويب، وقد فشل فشلاً ذريعاً، فقد تكفلت الطبيعة العنصرية للكيان ومشاريع التهجير والاستيلاء على المنازل والأراضي، والإبعاد عن الوظائف، والتضييق في المعاملات الرسمية، عناصر تذكير مستمرة بالاحتلال، وبالهوية الفلسطينية بالمقابل، بينما ظهر بوضوح فشل أي رهان على حماية أو إنجاز يمكن أن تحققهما المشاركة في الانتخابات، وسقف ما بلغته هذه الانتخابات هو توفير حجر شطرنج يمكن التلاعب به في التحالفات الحكوميّة في الكيان، يتمّ حذفه فور انتهاء ترتيب اللعبة، فقرر هذا الجيل خوض المواجهة في الشارع بالصوت والكلمة، مستفيداً من ثورة المعلوماتيّة والاتصالات، ومن كفاءات ومهارات لغويّة وتواصليّة أتقنها الشباب والصبايا الفلسطينيون يخاطبون العالم على مدار الساعة شارحين قضيّتهم وعدالتها.

جاءت المواجهة الأخيرة لتكشف طبيعة الحرب على الوعي، والمعادلة التي صاغها الجيل الثالث بمواجهة معادلة بن غوريون القائمة على زرع الخوف، هي الكلمة التي قالتها الناشطة منى الكرد التي مثلت رمزاً لشباب حي الشيخ جراح في القدس لحظة اعتقالها، «ما تخافوش»، وبعد حرب الأيام العشرة وإعلان السيد حسن نصرالله أن القدس تعادل حرباً إقليمية، زادت ثقة هذا الجيل بأنه يُمسك مفاتيح الحرب في المنطقة. ومن خلال هذا الإمساك بمفاتيح الحرب، تستنفر واشنطن على مدار الساعة لتتابع كل حدث، ويستنفر بنيامين نتنياهو ومن خلفه المستوطنون والمتطرفون لخوض معركة القدس بتصعيد الاعتقالات والتحضير لمسيرة الأعلام الصهيونية في القدس، أملاً بتفجير المنطقة، وتصير بيد هذا الجيل دفة القيادة على معادلات إقليمية ودولية، لتنتصر معادلة «ما تخافوش».

Israel’s new government will deepen rifts, not heal them

Mansour Abbas (R) signs a coalition agreement with Yair Lapid (L) and Naftali Bennett in Ramat Gan, near Tel Aviv, on 2 June 2021 (AFP/United Arab List)

Jonathan Cook

4 June 2021 10:03 UT

The symbolic moment of a Palestinian party sitting in government alongside settler leaders will turn sour all too soon

The photo was unprecedented. It showed Mansour Abbas, leader of an Islamist party for Palestinians in Israel, signing an agreement on Wednesday night to sit in a “government of change” alongside settler leader Naftali Bennett.

Caretaker Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will fervently try to find a way to break up the coalition in the next few days, before a parliamentary vote takes place. But if he fails, it will be the first time in the country’s 73-year history that a party led by a Palestinian citizen has joined – or been allowed to join – an Israeli government. 

There will be a reckoning for this moment, and Israel’s 1.8 million Palestinian citizens… will once again pay the heaviest price

Aside from the symbolism of the moment, there are no other grounds for celebration. In fact, the involvement of Abbas’s four-member United Arab List in shoring up a majority for a government led by Bennett and Yair Lapid is almost certain to lead to a further deterioration in majority-minority relations.

There will be a reckoning for this moment, and Israel’s 1.8 million Palestinian citizens, a fifth of the population, will once again pay the heaviest price.

The sole reason that this makeshift coalition exists – the only glue holding it together – is the hostility of the various parties towards Netanyahu. In most cases, that is not a hostility towards his political positions; simply towards him personally, and towards the corrupting stranglehold he has exerted on Israel’s political system for the past 12 years. 

The “change” referred to by this proposed government coalition begins and ends with the removal of Netanyahu.

Doubly offended

It barely needs stating again that Bennett, who will serve first as prime minister in rotation with Lapid, is even more right wing than Netanyahu. In fact, three of the new coalition’s main parties are at least, if not more, rabidly nationalistic than the Israel’s longtime leader. In any other circumstances, they would be enthusiastically heading into government with his Likud Party.

As Bennett and Mansour huddled inside a hotel near Tel Aviv to sign the coalition agreement as the clocked ticked down on Lapid’s mandate to form a government, far-right demonstrators noisily chanted outside that Bennett was joining a “government with terror supporters”.

Much of the ultra-nationalist right is so incensed by Bennett’s actions that he and other members of his Yamina party have been assigned a security detail for fear of an assassination attempt.

Bennett, set to serve first as prime minister, attends a special Knesset session on 2 June 2021 (AFP)
Bennett, set to serve first as prime minister, attends a special Knesset session on 2 June 2021 (AFP)

No one has forgotten that it was Bennett’s own settler camp that produced Yigal Amir, the man who in 1995 shot dead the then-prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, in a bid to foil the Oslo peace accords with the Palestinians. Amir killed Rabin in large part because the latter was seen to have betrayed the Jewish people by allowing “Arabs” – Palestinian parties in parliament – to prop up his minority government from outside. They did so to pass legislation necessary to begin implementing the Oslo process.

The chain of events that followed the assassination are well-known. Israelis lurched further rightwards and elected Netanyahu. The Oslo track with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was derailed. A Palestinian intifada erupted. And – coming full circle – Netanyahu returned to power and is now Israel’s longest-serving prime minister.

Today’s potential Yigal Amirs are doubly offended by Bennett’s behaviour. They believe he has stabbed the right’s natural leader, Netanyahu, in the back, while at the same time allowing Abbas – seen by the right as Hamas’s man in the Knesset – to dictate policy to the Jewish owners of the land.

Digging in heels

It was notable that Bennett and Abbas were the last to sign the coalition agreement, after both made great play of digging in their heels at the final moment for more concessions. Each risks inflaming their own constituency by being seen to cooperate with the other. 

Commentators will try to spin this agreement between a settler leader and the head of an Islamic party as a potential moment of healing after last month’s unprecedented inter-communal fighting inside Israel.Israel’s incoming government is so unnatural only Netanyahu can keep it togetherRead More »

But such a reading is as misleading as the narrative of the recent “Jewish-Arab clashes”. In fact, protests by Palestinian youths against systematic discrimination escalated into confrontations only after Israeli police turned violent and let Jewish gangs take the law into their own hands. Just as the balance of power on the streets was weighted in favour of Jewish vigilantism, so the balance of forces in this new coalition will work solidly against Abbas.

When Bennett spoke publicly on Sunday, as the horse-trading began in earnest behind the scenes, he underscored his credentials as the former head of the Yesha Council of Jewish settlements. That will be the theme of this proposed “government of change”. 

Pact with the ‘devil’

During the coalition-building negotiations, the more moderate Labor and Meretz parties conceded time and again to the demands of the far-right and settler parties on ministerial positions and policy. That is because the moderates have nowhere else to go. 

They have built their whole electoral strategy on ousting Netanyahu at any cost, using the anti-Netanyahu street protests of the past two years as their rallying cry. They cannot afford to be seen as missing this opportunity.

By contrast, as the death threats highlight, Bennett has far more to lose. Some 60 percent of his party’s voters recently told pollsters they would not have backed him had they known he would join a coalition with Lapid. Equally at risk are Gideon Saar, whose New Hope party broke away from Likud to challenge Netanyahu, and Avigdor Lieberman, a settler politician whose right-wing base has found in him their local strongman.

The Achilles heel Netanyahu will keep prodding as viciously as he can is the fact that his rivals on the right have made a Faustian pact with the Arab ‘devil’

These three must now do everything in their power during the term of this new government – if it happens – to prove to their constituencies that they are not betraying the far-right’s favourite causes, from settlements to annexation. Baiting them from the sidelines at every turn will be Netanyahu, stirring up passions on the right – at least until he is forced to step down, either by his party or by a verdict against him in his current corruption trial

The Achilles heel Netanyahu will keep prodding as viciously as he can is the fact that his rivals on the right have made a Faustian pact with the Arab “devil”. Netanyahu has never been shy to incite against the Palestinian minority. To imagine he will restrain himself this time is fanciful. 

Bennett understands the danger, which is why he tried to legitimise his dealings with Abbas on Thursday by calling him “a brave leader”. But Bennett was also keen to emphasise that Abbas would not be involved in any security matters and that he was not interested in “nationalism” – in this case, indicating that Abbas will neither offer support to Palestinians under occupation nor seek to advance national rights for Palestinian citizens of the kind Israeli Jews enjoy. 

Early on Thursday, Netanyahu had decried the new coalition as “dangerous” and “left wing”. He will most likely be in the driving seat, even while in opposition. Far from healing the country, a “government of change” could rapidly provoke yet more street violence, especially if Netanyahu believes such a deterioration would weaken Bennett as prime minister.

Extracting benefits

Abbas, the United Arab List leader, reportedly held out until last before signing. His whole electoral strategy was built on a promise to end the permanent exclusion of Palestinian parties from Israel’s national politics. He will be keen to show how many benefits he can extract from his role inside government – even if most are privileges the Jewish majority have always enjoyed by right.

Abbas trumpeted that the agreement would “provide solutions for the burning issues in Arab society – planning, the housing crisis, and of course, fighting violence and organised crime”. He has reportedly secured some $16bn in extra budgets for development and infrastructure, and three of the many Bedouin villages the state has long refused to recognise will be given legal status.

Abbas, the United Arab List leader, is pictured in Jerusalem on 5 April 2021 (AFP)
Abbas, the United Arab List leader, is pictured in Jerusalem on 5 April 2021 (AFP)

Abbas is also pushing for the repeal of a 2017 law that makes tens of thousands of homes in Palestinian communities inside Israel vulnerable to demolition.

One of his fellow legislators, Walid Taha, observed of the United Arab List’s new role: “For decades, Arab Israelis [Palestinian citizens] have been without any influence. Now, everyone knows that we’re the deciding votes as far as politics goes.”

Abbas has every incentive to use such claims as a whip to beat his rivals in the Joint List, a coalition of several other Palestinian parties that are staying in opposition. He needs to emphasise his role in bringing about change to make them look weak and irrelevant.

Hostility and disdain

But despite the promises that lured Abbas into the new government, he will face a rough ride getting any of them translated into tangible changes on the ground.

Lapid will be busy as foreign minister, selling this as a new era in Israeli politics. Meanwhile, Benny Gantz, the current defence minister who just oversaw the destruction yet again of Gaza, will offer continuity.

Back home, the key internal ministries will be held by the far-right. Lieberman will control the purse strings through the finance ministry, directing funds to settlements before Palestinian communities inside Israel. Bennett’s partner, Ayelet Shaked, will be interior minister, meaning the settlements in the occupied West Bank will be treated as more integral to Israel than the communities of Palestinian citizens. And Saar will be justice minister, helping to drive the legal system even further to the right.Israel: Four reasons Benjamin Netanyahu’s era is not over yetRead More »

Faced with this bloc, all of them keen to be seen as upholding the values of the right, Abbas will struggle to make any progress. And that is without considering the situation he will find himself in if Bennett pushes for annexation of the West Bank, or authorises another police invasion of al-Aqsa, or oversees the expulsion of Palestinian families from Sheikh Jarrah, or launches a fresh attack on Gaza. 

Abbas put the coalition negotiations on pause during Israel’s assault on Gaza last month. He won’t be able to do the same from inside the government. He will be directly implicated. 

As a result, Palestinian citizens are likely to end up growing even more disillusioned with a political system that has always treated them with a mix of hostility and disdain. They will finally have representatives inside government, but will continue to be very much outside of it. The triggers for the protests that erupted among young Palestinians in Israel last month are not going away.  

The most likely scenario over the coming months is that Netanyahu and Bennett will engage in a furious competition for who deserves the title of champion of the right. Netanyahu will seek to break apart the coalition as quickly as possible by inciting against Abbas and the Palestinian minority, so he has another shot at power. In turn, Bennett will try to pressure Likud to abandon Netanyahu so that Bennett can collapse the “government of change” as quickly as possible and rejoin a large majority, far-right government with Likud. 

Rifts will not be healed; coexistence will not be revived. But the preeminence of the ultra-nationalist right – with or without Netanyahu – will be restored. 

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Read more

رام الله تبدأ انتقامها: حملة مركّزة ضدّ المقاومين

 الأخبار 

الأربعاء 2 حزيران 2021

رام الله تبدأ انتقامها: حملة مركّزة ضدّ المقاومين

تستهدف حملة السلطة في الضفة نخبة من الناشطين والمؤثّرين في الميدان (أ ف ب )رام الله | منذ انتهاء المعركة بين المقاومة الفلسطينية والعدو الإسرائيلي، وتزامناً مع تراجع وتيرة التصعيد الميداني في الضفة الغربية المحتلّة، بدأت أجهزة أمن السلطة حملة حذرة من الاعتقالات والاستدعاءات بحقّ ناشطين ومناصرين لفصائل المقاومة. حملةٌ بدت مفاجِئة وسابقة، نظراً إلى توقّف شبيهاتها طيلة أيام معركة «سيف القدس»، ولأنها طاولت ناشطين من ألوان حزبية مختلفة. وبعد يوم من إعلان وقف إطلاق النار، أفادت مجموعة «محامون من أجل العدالة» بتلقّيها بلاغَين منفصلَين عن وجود معتقلَين سياسيَين اثنين في اللجنة الأمنية في أريحا على خلفية الأنشطة والفعاليات الأخيرة التي شهدتها الضفة الغربية وقطاع غزة والقدس. وفي 27 أيار الماضي، وثّقت المجموعة نفسها، منذ إعلان التهدئة، اعتقال أمن السلطة 16 فلسطينياً على خلفية سياسية، 10 منهم جرى تحويلهم إلى اللجنة الأمنية في أريحا، عدا عن مجموعة من الاستدعاءات للاستجواب والتحقيق.

[اشترك في قناة ‫«الأخبار» على يوتيوب]

وبحسب المعطيات التي توافرت لـ»الأخبار»، فإن هذه الحملة الحذرة، على رغم أنها غير واسعة، إلا أنها مركّزة، وتستهدف نخبة من الناشطين والمؤثّرين في الميدان، فيما تتمحور أسباب الاعتقال والتحقيق حول منشورات تنتقد السلطة الفلسطينية، أو المشاركة في مسيرات مؤيّدة للمقاومة في المعركة الأخيرة وبعدها. ومن بين الذين اعتُقلوا مؤيّدون لحركة «فتح»، وأيضاً لحركة «حماس»، وناشط مناصر لـ»الجبهة الشعبية. ومن أبرز التهم المُوجّهة إلى المعتقلين: إثارة النعرات الطائفية والعنصرية، والذمّ الواقع على السلطة. وحتى الآن، يواصل أمن السلطة اعتقال كلّ من مهدي أبو عواد، إياد رفاعية، مصطفى الخواجا، أكرم سلمة، وكلّهم معتقلون لدى اللجنة الأمنية في أريحا، بينما عاصم ياسين، وفراس يوسف معتقلان لدى جهاز الأمن الوقائي في سلفيت. ويقول مصدر أمني، لـ»الأخبار»، إن نحو 9 فلسطينيين آخرين اعتُقلوا أيضاً – إضافة إلى الـ16 المشار إليهم – من العاملين مع القيادي المفصول من حركة «فتح» محمد دحلان، بسبب مشاركتهم في الإعداد للقائمة الانتخابية الخاصة بدحلان.

وُثّق اعتقال أمن السلطة 16 فلسطينياً على خلفية سياسية منذ وقف إطلاق النار


وبعد وقف إطلاق النار، اعتقل جهاز الأمن الوقائي مؤذّن مسجد «دورا» الكبير، الشيخ حسين الحروب، وهاجمه ضابطان بالضرب المبرح وعذّباه، بسبب فتحه المسجد والشروع بالتكبير والاحتفال بانتصار المقاومة، لتُصدر عشيرة الحروب بياناً يدين وقائع التعذيب ويطالب بالحق العشائري لابنها. الناشط طارق خضيري، نموذج آخر من الاعتقالات التي نفّذتها السلطة أخيراً. ويُعرف خضيري بتصدّره التظاهرات والمسيرات الوطنية في رام الله، وبالهتافات المميّزة، وأيضاً بالصوت الوحدوي الكاره لمفاوضات التسوية و»الحلّ السلمي». وبسبب ذلك، روّجت مجموعات تتبع الأجهزة الأمنية وبعض ناشطي «فتح» فيديو قالوا إن أحد مناصري المقاومة يردّد فيه هتافاً مسيئاً لرئيس السلطة الراحل، ياسر عرفات، خلال الاحتفال بالانتصار في رام الله. وخلال دقائق، انتشرت إشاعة كالنار في الهشيم حول اعتقال أمن السلطة لصاحب الهتاف المسيء، والذي ادُّعي أنه نفسه الناشط خضيري، ليتّضح لاحقاً أن هذا الافتراض «كاذب وملفّق». وقالت عائلة خضيري، آنذاك، إن أمن السلطة أكد لها أنه يعتقل نجلها طارق لحمايته من الاعتداءات بعد التحريض ضدّه. وبحسب مصادر لـ»الأخبار»، فإن مَن حرّض على طارق مجموعات معروفة عبر «واتسآب» تتبع مناصرين لأمن السلطة، وأيضاً صفحات عبر «فيسبوك»، بعدما وصل تعميم إلى عدّة أجهزة أمنية حول ضرورة نشر خبر «اعتقال طارق خضيري الذي أساء لأبو عمار»، مع نشر صورته. وفي وقت لاحق، قرّرت النيابة العامة في أريحا الإفراج عن خضيري وعدم إحالة ملفّه إلى القضاء. وفتحت الحملة التي رافقت اعتقال طارق الباب أمام حملة مضادّة للاعتقال السياسي ورافضة لتصعيده، وداعية إلى الوحدة الوطنية وعدم العودة إلى المربّع الأول من الانقسام والاقتتال الداخلي. وفي هذا الإطار، عقدت فصائل فلسطينية اجتماعاً لها في رام الله، ضمّ القيادي في «حماس» حسين أبو كويك، وعضو اللجنة المركزية لـ»فتح» دلال سلامة، شدّد على ضرورة الإفراج عن المعتقلين السياسيين.

هكذا، يبدو أن السلطة الفلسطينية تنفّذ حملة اعتقالات حذرة وضربات مركّزة بهدوء، لكن مع الحرص على عدم التوسّع في ضربة شاملة تشمل عشرات الناشطين في محافظات الضفة الغربية، حيث الوضع أشبه بموجات قصيرة المدى، كلّ موجة تستهدف ما لا يزيد على 20 ناشطاً أسبوعياً. والظاهر أن حملات الاعتقال هذه ستطاول الناشطين الأكثر تفاعلاً وتأثيراً في كلّ المحافظات، إذ ليس من المعقول أن تعتقل السلطة الآلاف من مؤيّدي المقاومة الذين خرجوا في أوسع مسيرات في الضفة وضواحي القدس.

من ملف : «خفافيش» السلطة تتحرّك: لا إعمار… لا تهدئة… لا تبادل

مقالات ذات صلة

Gaza – US and the West Supports Israel’s Crimes Against Humanity – Understanding the Never-Ending Conflict

May 18, 2021

Gaza – US and the West Supports Israel’s Crimes Against Humanity – Understanding the Never-Ending Conflict

By Peter Koenig for the Saker Blog

“I said we would exact a very heavy price from Hamas and other terror groups, and we are doing so and will continue to do so with great force,” Netanyahu said in a fiery video address.

Israel’s PM Netanyahu is a war criminal and should be held accountable for war crimes throughout his PM-ship of Israel, according to the 1945 / 1946 Nuremberg trials criteria. His crimes against humanity, against a defenseless Palestine are comparable to the Holocaust.

In 2016 Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu had been indicted on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust. The trial is ongoing but has temporarily been “suspended”. Netanyahu has dismissed the charges as hypocritical and acts as if they didn’t exist. Even though he lacks the majority to form a government, he acts with impunity, because he can – he can because he has the backing of the United States.

More importantly, Israel has been accused before the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague for crimes against humanity and war crimes against Palestine. The prosecutor of the ICC, Ms. Fatou Bensouda, said on 3 March 2021 that she has launched an investigation into alleged crimes in the Palestinian territories. She added the probe will look into “crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court that are alleged to have been committed” since June 13, 2014, and that the investigation will be conducted “independently, impartially and objectively, without fear or favor.”

In a quick response, PM Netanyahu accused the Court of hypocrisy and anti-Semitism. Of course, the quickest and often most effective defense and counter-attack is calling any accusation, no matter how rightful it is, as anti-Semitism. Calling someone an anti-Semite shuts most people up, no matter whether the accusation is true or false. That explains in part why nobody dares to even come forward with the truth about crimes committed by Israel.

Imagine, Jews were the chief victims of the German Third Reich – a Nazi Regime, and today the descendants of these very Jews, persecuted and slaughtered in Nazi-concentration camps, allowed the transformation of Israel into a Zionist Fourth Reich, executing Palestinians Holocaust-style. They have done this with impunity for the last 73 years, with the current massacres reaching unheard-of proportions.

Pro-Palestine protests take place around the world – and especially now, finally, throughout Europe. Workers and young people joined protests across Europe on Saturday, 15 May, including in London, Paris, Berlin and Madrid, to oppose Israel’s bombardment of the Palestinian population in Gaza. The demonstrations coincided with the Palestinian Nakba (Catastrophe Day, 14 May 1948)—marking the founding of the state of Israel, through the forced expulsion of 760,000 Palestinians from their villages.

Here is what one protester, Khalid, in Manchester, UK, had to say. Khalid held a placard reading “Lift the siege of Palestine-Stop bombing Palestine”. He said, “Israel should know better. They know how it feels to be exterminated. They had no homeland and came to Palestine as guests and now they have taken the Palestinians’ homes and are trying to throw them out. The Palestinians have no water, they have no food. You have got people like [UK Prime Minister] Boris Johnson and presidents colluding with Israel and giving them money to destroy human life” – http://www.defenddemocracy.press/protests-across-europe-against-israeli-war-on-gaza/

Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity, always take place with the unwavering support of the United States. No US presidential candidate has a chance of being “elected” to the empire’s highest chair, the Presidency, without having proven his or her unquestioned support for Zionist-Israel. Without that western support, Israel’s war against and oppression of Palestine would soon be over.

Palestine could start breathing again and become a free country, an autonomous, sovereign, self-sustained country, what they were before the forced UN Partition Plan for Palestine, and as was foreseen by UN Resolution 181 II of 1947. This genocidal conflict situation has lasted almost three quarters of a century – and has little chance to abate under the current geopolitical constellation of the Middle East and the world, where obedient submission to US-Israeli command and atrocities is the name of the game.

Background
The conflict started basically with the creation of Israel. The UK, since the end of WWI and the Dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, occupier of the Palestine Peninsula (Palestine and Transjordan, see map), proposed to the UN as a condition for UK withdrawal, the creation of Israel in the western part of what was then known as Palestine and Transjordan. The so-called UN Partitian Plan for Palestine, was voted on 29 November 1947 by the UN General Assembly, as Resolution 181 (II). The then 57 UN members voted 33 (72%) for, 13 against the resolution, with 10 abstentions, and one absent. The Palestinian Authority was never consulted on this proposal. Therefore, for many scholars the UN Partition Plan’s legality remains questionable.

The Plan sought to resolve the conflicting objectives and claims of two competing movements, Palestinian nationalism and Jewish nationalism, or Zionism. The Plan also called for an Economic Union between the proposed two states, and for the protection of religious and minority rights.

However, immediately after adoption of the Resolution by the General Assembly, a civil war broke out and the plan was not implemented. The remnants of this civil war, the non-acceptance by Palestine of this UN Resolution 181, for which the historic owners of the land were not consulted, are lingering on as of this day.

British Mandate Palestine map

After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the British administration was formalized by the League of Nations under the Palestine Mandate in 1923, as part of the Partitioning of the Ottoman Empire following World War I. The Mandate reaffirmed the 1917 British commitment to the Balfour Declaration, for the establishment in Palestine of a “National Home” for the Jewish people, with the prerogative to carry it out.

The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 during the First World War, announcing support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population. The declaration was contained in a letter dated 2 November 1917 from the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland. The question is still asked today: How legitimate was that declaration in terms of international law? Many academics see this declaration still today as a unilateral move and a breach of international law, as no consultation of the Palestine Authority ever took place.
——

In the November 1947 UN General Assembly vote, the US was among the 33 countries voting FOR the Partition Plan. Interestingly, though, President Truman later noted, “The facts were that not only were there pressure movements around the United Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but that the White House, too, was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leaders—actuated by political motives and engaging in political threats—disturbed and annoyed me.” – This Zionist pressure was to set the bar for what was to follow – up to this day.

David Ben-Gurion, Zionist statesman and political leader, was the first Prime Minister (1948–53, 1955–63) and defense minister (1948–53; 1955–63) of Israel. In a letter to his son in October 1937, Ben-Gurion explained that partition would be a first step to “possession of the land as a whole” (emphasis added by author).

As of today, seventy-three years later and counting, the conflict is not resolved. To the contrary. It has become the longest lasting war, or aggression rather, in recent human history. A war it isn’t really, because a sheer oppression and literal slaughter against a perceived enemy, like Palestine that has no weapons to speak of, being bombarded and shot with the most sophisticated US-sponsored weapons systems, cannot be called a war. It is sheer genocide. The Palestinian weapons of choice are mostly rocks; rocks thrown by Palestinians at the Israeli IDF invaders, who then mow them down with machine guns, mostly civilians, women and children.

The Israel armed-to-the-teeth Defense Forces (IDF), invade Gaza and Palestinian West Bank areas with the most sophisticated machine guns, bombs, white phosphorus, practicing indiscriminate killing. The IDF destroys Palestinian living quarters, administration buildings, schools, shops, the little manufacturing industries that makes up their economy – destroying a people already teetering at the edge of extreme poverty and despair. No mercy. What does one call people who are committing such unspeakable crimes?

What does one call this style of aggression? – Literally killing hundreds, thousands of people without defense, in the world’s largest open prison – Gaza – home to more than 2 million people, living in misery, housing and infrastructure constantly destroyed, painfully partially rebuilt – just to be destroyed and bombed to pieces again. Those who don’t die from Israeli direct aggressions, may die from the indirect effects – famine, misery, disease and suicide – of this constant, abject hostility perpetuated upon what was supposed to be, according to the UN Partition Plan, an autonomous Palestine home of the Palestine people.

It is an ongoing – seemingly never-ending conflict, ever since the first Intifada beginning in December 1987 (Intifada in the context of the Israeli-Palestine conflict is a concerted Palestinian attempt to shake off Israeli power and gain independence).

The Oslo Accords I and II are a pair of agreements between the Government of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), of 1993 and 1995, respectively, sponsored by Norway in an attempt to achieve peace between the two parties. The Oslo Accords failed bitterly, over the issue of Jerusalem that was to become the religious capital for both countries, but Israel refused, claiming Jerusalem as her own, making the holy city to Israel’s capital. The first foreign leader recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, was US President Donald Trump on 6 December 2017.
—-

There was, however, another, less talked-about but equally important issue – an issue of survival – within the Oslo Accords: The fair sharing of the water resources. Israel never agreed, as about 85% of all water resources of what used to be the Palestinian Land, falls currently within the borders of what was defined by the Partitian Plan as Palestine. This is based on a World Bank study, in which I participated. On the insistence of Israel, the US vetoed publication of the study. Hence, the report was never officially published and publicly available.

Subsequent, so-called Peace processes, mostly US-sponsored, failed as of this day, because both Israel and the US have no interest in finding a peaceful solution. Neither one of the two nations have an interest in a Peace Accord, as the US needs the conflict to keep control over the Middle East, while Israel has no intentions to give up (slave)-control over Palestine, as her wellbeing depends on the overall control of what used to be Arab-Palestinian territory, and especially Palestine’s water resourcesWithout them, Israel would be a dry and unproductive desert.

There is a purpose behind these illegal, but ever-growing number of Israeli settlements on Palestine territories: Control over water. The settlements are usually over or near underground water resources. This is one way of controlling Palestine’s water. This happens not only in the so-called West Bank, but also in Gaza, where water resources are really scarce. Gaza is the world’s per capita water-scarcest area. The few Gaza water tables are super-posed by Israeli settlements.

This totally illegal and often UN-condemned Israeli Settlements strategy – also totally ignored by Israel – gradually reduces Palestine land and increases Israel’s control over crucial Palestinian water resources. See map

The impediment of being able to manage their own water resources, therefore increasing their food self-sufficiency through their own agriculture, makes out of Palestine an Israeli slave-state.

In addition, Israel has a handle on opening or closing the Gaza border, letting at will minimal food, medication and other life-essentials into Gaza, as well as allowing exactly the number needed of low-paid Palestinians (literally slave-labor) cross the border in the morning to work in Israel, and having to return at night to their Palestine homes. It is sheer Apartheid exploitation. Furthermore, Israel does not recognize Gaza’s territorial Mediterranean waters which would be a means towards Palestinians self-sustention and economic industrial activity.

According to an OECD report of 2016, Israel ranks as the nation with the highest poverty rate among OECD countries, i.e. 21% of Israelis are living under the poverty line. This is more than Mexico, Turkey and Chile. The OECD average is about 11%. This figure (21%) may be slightly exaggerated, given the relatively large informal sector and transfer payments to Israel from Jews abroad, as well as from international Jewish organizations.

Nevertheless, it is clear that Israel is economically not autonomous and needs Palestine to survive, both in terms of confiscated Palestinian water resources, as well as Palestinian slave labor. Therefore, there is hardly any hope for the UN-planned two-state solution to eventually materialize. There is little hope that this situation will change under the current geopolitical conditions. The US wants to dominate the Middle East and needs Israel as a garrison state that will be armed to the teeth for the US – to eventually grow and become Washington’s proxy ruler of the Middle East.

A question that is rarely asked, if ever: What is Hamas’ role in this never-ending Israeli-Palestine conflict? Since 2007 Hamas is officially governing the 2-million-plus population of the 363 square kilometer Gaza Strip. Hamas is also the Palestine paramilitary or defense organization. Hamas is said to be funded largely by Iran. Is it true? And if so, is Iran the only funder of Hamas?

It is odd, however, that ever so often, Hamas attacks Israel by launching unsophisticated rockets at Israeli cities, rockets that most often are intercepted by the IDF defense system, or cause minimal damage. But they cause, predictably minimal damage against an IDF which is US-equipped with the latest technology weapons- and defense systems.

Yet, a Hamas attack on Israel prompts regularly a ferocious retaliation; bombardments, not so much aiming at Hamas, as Netanyahu intimidates, “We would exact a very heavy price from Hamas and other terror groups…” , but at the civilian populations. The heaviest casualties are civilian Gaza citizens, many women and children among them, after an Israeli “self-defense” retaliation. This is of course no self-defense. The Hamas attacks usually follows an Israeli provocation.

Why would Hamas hit back, knowing that they won’t wreak any damage on Israel, yet they will trigger each time a deadly massacre on the Gaza population? – At the outset, Israeli provocations look like “false flags”. Could they be false flags with the willing participation of Hamas? If so, with whom does Hamas collaborate?

These are questions which certainly do not have an immediate answer. But the 14-year pattern of repeatedly similar events begs the question – is there another (Hamas) agenda behind what meets the eye?
——-

What is nearly as criminal as the IDF’s aggressions, is the almost complete silence of the west, and the world at large, vis-à-vis Israel’s atrocities committed on the Palestinian population. It is an unspoken tolerance for the carnages Israel inflicts on Palestine, especially in the Gaza Strip, the world’s largest open-air prison.

For example, the political UN body, despite hundreds of Resolutions, condemning and flagging Israel’s illegal actions against Palestine, including the ever-increasing number of illegal Israeli settlements on Palestine territories, seems to be hapless against Israel. Weak condemnations of Israel, calling both parties to reason – leaves Israel totally cold and undisturbed. There is no punishment whatsoever, not from the UN system, not from the western allies, most of whom are Washington and NATO vassals.

The Biden Administration has taken the usual imperialist position of cynical neutrality, like it was an uninvolved disinterested player, while painting up Israel as being some kind of victim instead of the brutal Zionist apartheid state that it is. It is important to remember that the creation of Israel was so that the US had a garrison state to protect her interests in the Middle East.

Take the UN Secretary General. Instead of condemning Israeli ruthlessness and demanding accountability, the spokesman for UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, merely called on the Netanyahu regime to “exercise maximum restraint and respect the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.”

The Secretary General himself reiterates his commitment, including through the Middle East Quartet, “to supporting Palestinians and Israelis to resolve the conflict on the basis of relevant United Nations resolutions, international law and bilateral agreements.” The Quartet, set up in 2002, consists of the United Nations, the European Union, the United States and Russia. Its mandate is to help mediate Middle East peace. As of this day they have not achieved any tangible results.

Because they do NOT WANT to achieve any peace. For the reasons mentioned before, Peace is not in the interest of Israel, nor in the interest of the West, led by the United States. To keep the conflict burning, sacrificing hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of Palestinian lives is not important. It’s just a collateral damage of a larger agenda – control over the Middle East and her riches, a step towards controlling the entire world.

Time and again, Guterres disgraced himself and the office he holds by failing to denounce US/NATO/Israeli aggression and demand accountability for high crimes too serious to ignore.

If the UN is incapable or unwilling of assuming the responsibility of reigning in Israel, perhaps the Group of 77 (by now more than 120 UN member countries) should take a joint stand, exerting pressure on Israel, asking as an intermediary for outright negotiating with Israel and Palestine to reach a sustainable peace settlement, including the original two-state solution, back to the pre-1967 Israeli-Palestine borders. Let us, the UN, become pro-active in seeking and finding a permanent solution for the stressed-to-death, starving and tortured Palestinians, especially those from the Gaza Strip.


Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he has worked for over 30 years on water and environment around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

Peter Koenig is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

انتفاضة «القدس» وحتميّة المقاومة

See the source image
 د. جمال زهران

حادث جديد منذ عدة أيام… أهدانا الله إياه.. وهو انهيار جسر في الكيان الصهيوني وسط احتفالات يهوديّة للمغتصبين والمستوطنين، راح ضحيته (60) شخصاً، وإصابة أكثر من (400) آخرين، والمؤكد أنّ غطرسة القوة لدى العدو الصهيوني لن تجعله ينتبه إلى أخطائه، وهو ما نتمناه حتى ينهار هذا الكيان من الداخل، وهو أمر محتمل إلى حد كبير، كما انهار نظام الأبارتهايد في جنوب أفريقيا ورحل الرجل الأبيض الحاكم والمغتصب، بإرادة المقاومة لشعب الجنوب، والتفتيت الداخلي. فهناك قاعدة واضحة، وهي لا عمر لمغتصب وإن طال الزمان.

كما أن شهر رمضان المعظم الذي يأتي بالخيرات دائماً، مهما كانت الكوارث العالميّة، فقد هلَّ بخيره في أرض المقدس الشريفة، باندلاع انتفاضة شعبية فلسطينية ضد العدو الصهيونيّ الذي هدف من وراء منع المصلّين الفلسطينيين من الصلاة في ساحة المسجد الأقصى، إثارة هؤلاء، ووضع العقبات أمام إتمام الانتخابات الفلسطينية في مدينة القدس، حيث أصبحت تحت السيطرة الصهيونيّة وعاصمة دولة الكيان، حسب تقديرهم وإعلاناتهم المدعومة أميركياً. وبالتالي يمكن أن يعوق ذلك إتمام الانتخابات الفلسطينية، تحت شعار أن لا انتخابات فلسطينية من دون القدس، باعتبارها رمز السيادة للدولة الفلسطينيّة وشرعيتها.

وما حدث يوم السبت 24 نيسان/ أبريل الماضي، هو انتفاضة جديدة للشعب الفلسطينيّ في القدس، حيث إنه يوم تاريخي جديد، وفصل جديد من فصول المقاومة الفلسطينيّة ضد الاستعمار والاستيطان الصهيوني. فقد قدم المقدسيون، أجسادهم بصدور الشباب العارية، والذين ولدوا بعد اتفاق أوسلو الكسيح، لمجابهة العدو الصهيونيّ العنصري، لإجباره على التراجع عن منع الفلسطينيين من الصلاة في بيت المقدس، وحدث ذلك، أن تراجع هذا العدو كالعادة مع ازدياد درجة المقاومة.

ولا يمكن نسيان الصورة التي تبنّتها وسائل الإعلام في فيديو رائع، حيث الشرطيّة الصهيونيّة، وهي تمنع فتاة فلسطينية من دخول المسجد، بالقوة، وكانت معها والدتها. فمع إصرار الفتاة على دخول المسجد، وإصرار الشرطية الصهيونية على منعها باستخدام الأيدي والضرب والسحل، إلا أن الأم رفضت تعرّض ابنتها لهذا الاعتداء، وقامت بالاشتباك مع الشرطية الصهيونية، فتم ضربها وسحلها وإلقائها في الأرض بقوة وشدّة، حتى تجمّع الكثيرون، وتجمّع أفراد الشرطة الصهيونية، وأصبحت «معركة» كبيرة، كان على إثرها، نجاح الفتاة وأمها، في دخول المسجد الأقصى، لأداء الصلاة (العشاء والتراويح).

هكذا هي المقاومة اليومية بما تحمله من مجابهات بين المقدسيين وبين الصهاينة العنصريين. وانتصرت المقاومة في معركة جديدة لدخول المسجد الأقصى في رمضان، بإجبار العدو/ الصهيوني على التراجع بالمنع، والسماح للفلسطينيين بأداء صلواتهم في المسجد الأقصى الشريف.

تلك صفحة جديدة من صفحات الجيل الجديد الشاب، الذي يتشبّع بروح المقاومة ضدّ الصهاينة الأمر الذي يعني استمرار سريان المقاومة ضدّ الوجود الصهيوني في أرض فلسطين المحتلة، وتأكيد على فشل كلّ مشروعات السلام المزعوم/ والتسويات، الكسيحة، وأن الأمل كلّ الأمل، في هذا الجيل المشبع بفكر وروح المقاومة.

وقد عبّر الكاتب/ عريب الرنتاوي، في مقاله بجريدة «الدستور» الأردنيّة يوم 25 نيسان/ أبريل الماضي، بالقول: «إن القدس هي درّة المشروع الوطني الفلسطيني، وتاج المشروع القوميّ العروبي، وعنوان وحدة المسلمين، وقبلة المسيحيين الشرفاء والأحرار في العالم كله..». وأنا اتفق معه، وتلك هي الحقيقة التي لا يجب أن تغيب عن كل المناضلين الأحرار في العالم العربي، والعالم كله.

فتحرير فلسطين من النهر إلى البحر، وتحرير كلّ التراب الفلسطيني، وفي القلب القدس بطبيعة الحال، وطرد العدو الصهيوني الغاصب، وكسر إرادة المشروع الصهيو/أميركي، التآمري، هو المشروع الوطني الفلسطيني، والمشروع القومي العروبي بلا جدال. ولا يمكن بحال من الأحوال أن تتحرّر فلسطين كاملة، عبر الاتفاقيات الكسيحة والعميلة والتآمرية على القضية والشعب، مثل كامب ديفيد.. وادي عربة – أوسلو) فضلاً عن اتفاقيات التطبيع التي تتسم بالعمالة والحقارة والفجور من بعض الأنظمة العربية العميلة لأميركا وللصهيونية. فالمقاومة هي الحلّ، بلا جدال، وهي الآلية لتحرير فلسطين وتحرير بيت المقدس، كما سبق أن حرره صلاح الدين الأيوبي (جدّي الذي افتخر به مثالاً للمقاومة والصمود).. ومن بعده الزعيم جمال عبد الناصر الذي تظلّ كلماته المقاومة هادية لكلّ مناضل عربي حقيقي، حينما قال: (لا للتفاوض لا للاعتراف لا للصلح مع الكيان الصهيوني).

وأختم بالقول إن نهاية الكيان الصهيوني قد حانت، وأراها قريبة، واستشهد بقول الكاتب الصهيوني المعروف (آرى شبيث)، في صحيفة هآرتس الصهيونية: «لقد اخترنا نقطة اللاعودة.. ولم يعد بإمكان «إسرائيل» إنهاء الاحتلال، ووقف الاستيطان، وتحقيق السلام، كما لم يعُد بالإمكان إصلاح الصهيونيّة، وإنقاذ الديمقراطيين وتقسيم الناس في هذه الدولة. ولم يبق أمامنا إلا مغادرة البلاد.. والانتقال إلى سان فرانسيسكو – برلين – باريس – فقد فشلت صهيونيتنا».

وهذا ما أشرت إليه بالتحليل العلمي في كتابي (مناهج قياس قوة الدول.. ومستقبل الصراع العربي الإسرائيلي)، الصادر في أعقاب حرب تموز 2006، عن مركز دراسات الوحدة العربية، بيروت، عام 2007. فللشعب الفلسطيني كل التحية عموماً، وللمقدسيين كل التقدير والاحترام، فلا تحرير لفلسطين والقدس من دون استمرار المقاومة، وهو حادث بإذن الله..

ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ

*أستاذ العلوم السياسية والعلاقات الدولية، والأمين العام المساعد للتجمع العربي الإسلامي لدعم خيار المقاومة، ورئيس الجمعية العربية للعلوم السياسية.

هَبَّة باب العمود طريق لتصويب المسار

عمرو علان - Amro 🇵🇸 (@amrobilal77) | Twitter

عمرو علان

الأحد، 02 مايو 2021 07:31 م بتوقيت غرينتش

بناءً على تقدير موقف واقعي، وقراءة متكاملة للمشهد الفلسطيني بكافة أبعاده، كان قد استشرف البعض منذ بدايات مسار الانتخابات التشريعية الفلسطينية الجديدة بأن يقوم رئيس السلطة الفلسطينية محمود عباس بتأجيلها كما حصل فعلاً. ولسنا هنا بصدد العودة إلى النقاش الذي دار قبل قرار الفصائل الفلسطينية خلا حركة الجهاد الإسلامي حول خوض مغامرة انتخابية جديدة، لا سيما أننا في حضرة هبَّةٍ مقدسيةٍ عظيمة، قد أنجزت في الميدان وتُبشِّر بالمزيد إذا ما استفاقت الفصائل الفلسطينية لا سيما في الضفة والقدس من غفوتها، وتجاوزت ملهاة انتخابات مجلس تشريعي لدولة تخيُّلية؛ ما هي – في حقيقة الأمر – إلا جزءٌ صغير من كلٍ مغتصَب، يرزح تحت سلطة احتلال تتحكم بكل مفاصل حيات ذاك الفلسطيني الذي مازال صامداً على أرضه يقاوم، بما في ذلك انتخاباته وباعتراف رئيس السلطة الفلسطينية، بغض النظر عن وجاهة التبرير الذي ساقه هذا الأخير لتأجيل أو بالأصح لإلغاء الانتخابات التشريعية.

ما شهدته ساحات الأقصى وأزقة القدس العتيقة في الأيام القليلة الماضية يعيد التأكيد على معادلتين: أولاهما كون الشعب الفلسطيني في الضفة والقدس وحتى في أراضي 48 جاهزاً وحاضراً للقيام بحركة شعبية قابلة لأن تتطور وتتصاعد حتى تصل إلى العصيان المدني وانتفاضة ثالثة طال انتظارها. فبمجرد إقدام الاحتلال على المساس بالمقدّسات تراجعت الهموم الحياتية للمواطن الفلسطيني لتأخذ مرتبة ثانية بعد الهم الوطني، فهذا الصامد في أرضه الذي يرى بأُم العين تغوّل الاستيطان، سواءً في الضفة أو عبر المحاولات المستمرة لتهويد القدس، أثبت أنه يدرك طبيعة الصراع وجوهره، ويفهم أكثر من غيره مسؤولياته التي لا يتردد في القيام بها، وكان هذا شاخصاً في مدى رقعة امتداد الاحتجاجات التي شملت بالإضافة إلى القدس أراضي الضفة الغربية ومناطق 48. وقد تجلى الوعي الفلسطيني في طبيعة الهتافات التي صدرت من قبيل “سامع يا صهيوني سامع.. جاي تسكير الشوارع..”، و”مِن أم الفحم تحية.. لقدسنا الأبية..”، و”بلا سلمية بلا بطّيخ.. بدنا أحجار وصواريخ.. يا أقصى إحنا جينا.. والشرطة ما تثنينا..”. ولعل الهتاف الأكثر بلاغة كان “حط السيف قبال السيف.. إحنا رجال محمد ضيف..”، فكان لافتاً أنه لم يُهتف باسم أيٍ من السياسيين سواءً أكانوا من “حماس” أم من “فتح”، بل هُتِف باسم القادة العسكريين والشهداء.

بمجرد إقدام الاحتلال على المساس بالمقدّسات تراجعت الهموم الحياتية للمواطن الفلسطيني لتأخذ مرتبة ثانية بعد الهم الوطني، فهذا الصامد في أرضه الذي يرى بأُم العين تغوّل الاستيطان، سواءً في الضفة أو عبر المحاولات المستمرة لتهويد القدس، أثبت أنه يدرك طبيعة الصراع وجوهره


أما المعادلة الثانية التي أكدت عليها هبّة باب العمود فكانت الخشية الكبيرة لدى العدو من تفاقم الوضع في الأراضي المحتلة، وظهر ذلك جلياً في طريقة تعاطيه مع الأحداث، سواءً أكان مع صواريخ المقاومة التي انطلقت من غزة بشكل محسوب دعماً لهبّة القدس، أو في تعامل شرطة الاحتلال مع المتظاهرين المقدسيين التي على ما يبدو تفادت سقوط شهداء بين المتظاهرين خوفاً من التصعيد.

وتمكن قراءة القلق الأمريكي أيضاً من انزلاق الوضع إلى انتفاضة ثالثة في لغة التصريح غير المألوفة الصادر عن المتحدث باسم الإدارة الأمريكية نيد برايس، حيث أبدى قلق الإدارة الأمريكية من تصاعد العنف في القدس، وطالب بوقف شعارات الكراهية مع الدعوة إلى الهدوء، بالإضافة إلى مطالبة السلطات بحفظ أمن وسلامة جميع من في القدس، على عكس الموقف الأمريكي التقليدي الذي ما انفك عن تحميل الفلسطينيين مسؤولية جرائم الاحتلال مشفوعاً بعبارته الممجوجة بأن لدى “إسرائيل” حق الدفاع عن النفس. ولم تكن هذه صحوة ضمير، بل مؤشرا على إدراكه للنتائج الوخيمة على كيان الاحتلال إذا ما تطورت الاحتجاجات لتصل إلى انتفاضة ثالثة، يُحتمَل أن تعم هذه المرة كل الأراضي المحتلة في القدس والضفة وأراضي 48، ويكون ظهرها محمياً بمقاومة مسلحة قادرة في غزة يدعمها محور مقاومة صاعد بات يغير المعادلات على الأرض، ويمكنه رسم الخطوط الحمر أمام كيان الاحتلال في طريقة تعاطيه مع انتفاضة الشعب الفلسطيني، خطوط حمر وقواعد اشتباك لن يجرؤ الاحتلال على تجاوزها كما بات واضحاً في سلوكه خلال الأعوام القليلة الماضية.

هاتان المعادلتان كانتا الحاكمتين خلال السنوات الثلاث أو الأربع الأخيرة على أقل تقدير وما تزالان، ونُذكّر بهبّة كاميرات الأقصى التي خسرها الاحتلال، والعمليات الفردية وعمليات الطعن والدهس المتكررة ضد المستوطنين، وتراجع نتنياهو عن تنفيذ خطة الضم في الأول من تموز الفائت خوفاً من اشتعال الأراضي المحتلة حسب تقارير أجهزته الأمنية والعسكرية، ناهيكم عن الحذر الشديد لدى الاحتلال من الانزلاق إلى مواجهة جديدة مفتوحة مع المقاومة في غزة، وتوازن الرعب الذي يعيشه المحتل على جبهة جنوب لبنان المحرر أمام حزب الله.

وعليه يصير السؤال المطروح بإلحاح على الفصائل الفلسطينية: أما حان الوقت للبناء على معادلات القوة هذه في الميدان بشكل منظم، مما يؤدي إلى انتزاع تنازلات حقيقية من العدو من قبيل تفكيك المستوطنات في الضفة أو وقف تهويد القدس على أقل تقدير؟

أما حان الوقت للبناء على معادلات القوة هذه في الميدان بشكل منظم، مما يؤدي إلى انتزاع تنازلات حقيقية من العدو من قبيل تفكيك المستوطنات في الضفة أو وقف تهويد القدس على أقل تقدير؟


لدى الشعب الفلسطيني وفصائله اليوم فرصة جديدة واقعية تتمثل بهبّة مقدسية مباركة يمكن تطويرها وتأطيرها، ويمكن من خلالها استعادة وحدة وطنية حقيقية في الميدان بين كل من يؤمن بمقاومة الاحتلال، عوضاً عن اللهث وراء مشاريع لن تؤدي إلا إلى زيادة التشظي في الساحة الفلسطينية كما حصل عقب القرار البائس في التوجه إلى انتخابات تشريعية في ظل الاحتلال وتحت سقف “أوسلو”.

وإذا ما سلمنا بأنه قد ثبُت بالدليل الحسي انقطاع الأمل في قيام السلطة الفلسطينية ورموز التنسيق الأمني بتعديل مسلكهم، عندها يصبح على عاتق الفصائل مع الذين ما زالوا يؤمنون في “فتح” الرصاصة الأولى لا “فتح” القبيلة؛ اجتراح السبل لتفعيل العمل الميداني، لمواكبة تحركات الشارع الفلسطيني المنتفض، وعلى السلطة حينها الاختيار بين أن تكون جزءاً من الشعب الفلسطيني الثائر أو الوقوف على الحياد، وإما أن تستمر بالتنسيق الأمني مع قوات الاحتلال، وعندها لا ملامة على شعبنا إن عاملها معاملة العملاء في الانتفاضتين السابقتين.

وختاماً نُذكِّر بأن تفعيل المقاومة الشعبية الجادة والعصيان المدني كانا من أهم مخرجات اجتماع أمناء الفصائل الأخير المنعقد في أيلول الماضي، فماذا إذن هم منتظرون؟

Palestine On the Way to Another Intifada – Olmert

1/5/2021

Palestine On the Way to Another Intifada - Olmert

By Staff

In an opinion piece published by the ‘Jerusalem Post’, former Zionist Prime Minister Ehud Olmert wrote that the events that have transpired in occupied al-Quds these last few days are not a coincidental occurrence that will disappear so quickly.

“We are on the brink of a violent awakening that could intensify and lead to violence on our streets. These clashes could end in a significant number of casualties,” according to Olmert.

The former Zionist premier cited the recent days to conclude that new circumstances have arisen, which could drag ‘Israel’ into a new round of ‘violent’ activity, which he described as ‘terrorist’, and bloodshed on both sides.

The first Palestinian Intifada was a sustained series of Palestinian protests and riots in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and the ‘Israeli’-occupied territories. The protests were against the Zionist occupation of the West Bank and Gaza that had begun twenty years prior, in 1967. The intifada lasted from December 1987 until the Madrid Conference in 1991, though some date its conclusion to 1993, with the signing of the so-called ‘Oslo Accords.’

The intifada began on 9 December 1987, in the Jabalia refugee camp after an ‘Israeli’ occupation force truck collided with a civilian car, killing four Palestinian workers.

The Second Intifada, also known as the Al-Aqsa Intifada, started in September 2000, after then Zionist Prime Minister Ariel Sharon made a highly provocative visit to the holy al-Aqsa Mosque. The visit sparked protests and riots which the occupation police put down with rubber bullets and tear gas.

“Israel” is worried about the Palestinian elections. It believes Abbas is too

The Israeli security services have no wish to rock the boat, but they have few measures to influence the upcoming polls

An electoral worker leaves the Palestinian Central Elections Commission’s office in Gaza City (Reuters)

By Yossi Melman in Tel Aviv, Israel

Published date: 24 February 2021 15:34 UTC 

From the perspective of the Israeli security establishment, it would have been better if the scheduled Palestinian elections would not take place at all.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has ordered general elections to be held on 22 May, a presidential one on 31 July and Palestinian National Council polls on 31 August.

Hamas, the main opposition to Abbas’ Fatah movement currently running a parallel administration in Gaza, welcomed the announcement.

About two million Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem and besieged Gaza Strip are eligible to vote. Israel, which annexed East Jerusalem in 1967 in a move never recognised by the international community, most likely will not allow Jerusalemites to vote.

‘The elections pose for Israel more risks than opportunities’

– Colonel Michael Milshtein, ex-Israeli Military Intelligence

But Israel also remembers how it was shocked to realise that Hamas had won the last elections for the Palestinian legislature in 2006. Judged to be free and fair by international observers, Hamas defeated Fatah, which had been established by its founding father Yasser Arafat and led since his death by Abbas.

“The elections pose for Israel more risks than opportunities,” says Colonel Michael Milshtein, who headed the Palestinian branch in the research department of Israeli Military Intelligence, known by its Hebrew acronym as Aman.

A year after the elections, Hamas took power in Gaza in a coup following violent clashes with Fatah – and has controlled the coastal enclave ever since.

The general elections are a promising development to enhance the democratic process, increase public trust, create international support for the Palestinian predicament and refresh the stagnated Palestinian politics and its ageing politicians.

Fatah suffers from internal tensions, factional rifts and a deteriorating public image. Meanwhile, Hamas shows determination, a high degree of unity and organisational skills.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas hands the election decree to Chairman of the Palestinian Central Election Committee Hana Naser in Ramallah in the Israeli-occupied West Bank (Reuters)
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (R) hands the election decree to Chairman of the Palestinian Central Election Committee Hana Naser in Ramallah in the Israeli-occupied West Bank (Reuters)

These traits were already present in the turbulent years of 2006-2007, which resulted in Hamas’s election victory and domination of Gaza.

Thus, Israeli security officials from Military Intelligence and the Shin Bet, who monitor and analyse developments in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, are worried.

Fatah fears

According to Israeli security officials, Abbas and his top lieutenants are no less concerned than Israel. They say that Abbas was very reluctant to agree to call the elections.

Abbas’s weakening leadership is challenged by Marwan Barghouti, who is considered the most popular leader among Fatah and Palestinian Authority supporters. So far, all attempts by Abbas to persuade Barghouti to drop his candidacy have failed.

To facilitate Abbas’s aim, Israeli security officials went out of their way to allow the president’s advisers to visit Barghouti in his prison cell, where he is serving multiple life sentences after being convicted of murder by an Israeli court during the Second Intifada.Palestine elections: Gaza voters sceptical about upcoming polls.

But, eventually, Abbas succumbed to the pressure, which was mounted on him by the younger generation of Palestinians that hope to see a change of guard, and by Egypt.

Egypt has over the years played a major role in the attempts to bring about a genuine national Palestinian reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas, which has so far failed. Calling the elections is another effort to unify the Palestinian people.

Abbas now faces a dilemma. Without the elections, his attempts to bring national unity and to reinstate Fatah as a significant force in Gaza are doomed to fail. But if the elections take place, Fatah may be defeated again and Hamas would increase its power, not only in its solid base of Gaza but also in the West Bank.

The Israeli security perception is that the elections are a threat.

If Hamas wins the elections, it will increase its self-confidence to challenge Israel more drastically.

Military Intelligence and Shin Bet analysts have already drawn up scenarios arguing that if Hamas emerges as the winner, or only increases its power in the elections, it will employ the same military tactics used in Gaza – launching rockets, planting bombs and using hit and run tactics – against Israeli troops and Jewish settlers in the West Bank.

Israel’s approach is: why rock the boat?

However, there is truly little that Israel can do. It cannot openly oppose the elections, and it knows that it has no real measures to influence them.

Related Videos

Related Articles

Palestine elections: A leap into the unknown for Fatah and Hamas

HearstDavid Hearst is co-founder and editor-in-chief of Middle East Eye. He is a commentator and speaker on the region and analyst on Saudi Arabia. He was The Guardian’s foreign leader writer, and was correspondent in Russia, Europe, and Belfast. He joined the Guardian from The Scotsman, where he was education correspondent.

David Hearst

18 February 2021 14:31 UTC

Both parties are going into the elections without an agreed vision for Palestine and a detailed plan for obtaining it

You can tell when elections are being planned in the occupied West Bank. 

This is the fifth time elections across Palestine have been attempted in the past 15 years since they were held in 2006, when Hamas, to everyone’s surprise, not least their own, swept the board. This time President Mahmoud Abbas appears to be serious about holding them.

How can one tell? Because between them his Preventive Security and Israeli forces are arresting anyone who opposes their candidates. The Palestinian Prisoners Club says that 456 civilians were arrested in January in the West Bank and on one night alone in February, 31 Palestinians were rounded up. 

A Palestinian member of Central Elections Commission displays an ID to a colleague as they check the work of the first Voter Information and Registration Centre in Gaza City on 10 February, 2021 (AFP)

A serious escalation

The arrests are politically colour blind. Every faction has been targeted – even those that have not yet been established. For over a year, Israeli forces have been targeting hundreds of young men and women from a left-wing social and political network.

Politically motivated arrests are nothing new in the West Bank. What may surprise some is that the Hamas leadership in Gaza is still pushing ahead with the election plan regardless

They face charges of  “terrorist activity,” “visiting an enemy state” or even vaguer “communicating with foreign agents”. Their interrogators put them in little doubt about why they are being detained . They want fear to spread in the community.  Detention and torture are tools to stop the network before it can grow. Hamas members in the West Bank are threatened they will be next if they dare to stand. 

Khaled al-Hajj, a Hamas leader in Jenin who supported President Abbas’s elections decrees, was arrested last week. Another Hamas member, who had just had surgery for cancer, was severely beaten.

Wasfi Kabha, a former Hamas minister, told MEE: “We are facing a dangerous and serious escalation, not only by the occupation, but also by the security services that belong to the PA. That arrest campaign aims to scare, intimidate and terrorise members of the movement and also those who have sympathy for Hamas. The arrests are meant to influence the election. There are many others that the Israeli forces threaten to arrest if they nominate themselves or take part in the elections.”

Kabha added: “The Palestinian security services severely beat Abdel Nasser Rabbi despite the fact he had suffered from cancer and had surgery a short time ago. Unfortunately, Palestinian security services finish the job of whoever Israel can not manage to arrest.”

Politically motivated arrests are nothing new in the West Bank. What may surprise some is that the Hamas leadership in Gaza is still pushing ahead with the election plan regardless.

A divided Hamas

The interesting question is why? During three rounds of negotiations with Fatah in Beirut and Ankara, the Hamas leadership insisted on holding all three elections for the Legislative Council , the presidency, and the National Council of the PLO simultaneously. This is because they did not trust Abbas to keep his word once he himself had been reelected as president.After 15-year wait, Palestinian elections face new obstacles following law amendments

Hamas also insisted that the PA end its security cooperation with Israel and the arrest campaign in the West Bank. For a while Abbas complied, only to abandon that strategy when it became clear to him last November that Donald Trump was out of office. In subsequent talks in Cairo, Hamas failed to get either demand. 

The other two factions, the Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), both tabled reservations. Islamic Jihad announced it was not running for the elections, but the delegation from Hamas stayed in.

Proponents of the deal with Fatah claim that Hamas were given guarantees that some 38,000 civil servants in Gaza would not only be paid by the PA, but receive permanent tenure. They claim a new election court would be formed to avoid the heavily weighted constitutional court that Abbas created. They also claim Hamas would secure the collaboration of the international community, including renewing relations with the European Union. They also claim that no one could criminalise the resistance.

Opponents of the deal within Hamas say all of these promises are wishful thinking. They point out that the issue of civil servants, which is at least a decade old, has been put off until after the elections. A new election court has not been announced by Abbas and, even if it were to be formed, it could not supplant the existing constitutional court, which remains the highest legal authority in the West Bank. 

Lastly, they say that it is not in Fatah’s power to guarantee international recognition of Hamas, which is still designated as a terrorist organisation by both the US and the EU

This combination of pictures created on 11 January, 2019 shows (L) Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh (AFP)
This combination of pictures created on 11 January, 2019 shows (L) Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh (AFP)

Hamas’s senior leadership is clearly divided. Hamas in Gaza is hemmed in, unable to break out of the prison camp that has become Gaza following the 2006 elections, the attempted coup by Fatah leader Mohammed Dahlan, and the split with Fatah. They are fed up with being held responsible for the continuing siege and are desperate to find a way out. Money is also running out. Iran is no longer funding them as before, and there are signs that other foreign backers are pushing them into Fatah’s arms.  Israel’s arrest campaign aims to destroy a new Palestinian movement

But the anger at the crackdown on Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the PFLP members in the West Bank is mounting. While there is sympathy over the conditions they face in Gaza, the Hamas leadership, which is now based entirely in the enclave, will face mounting pressure to pull out of elections in which Hamas can only lose. 

No one expects a rerun of the 2006 result.

One measure of the backlash which the leadership in Gaza will face is spelled out in a leaked letter from one of the most prominent Hamas leaders in Israeli prisons. Ibrahim Hamid was a leader of the military wing in the West Bank during the Second Intifada and received one of the harshest terms: 54 concurrent life imprisonment sentences. Hamid called the decision by Hamas’ political bureau to run in the elections “hasty”.

He said the decision had been made independently of the Shura Council, a consultative body that elects Hamas’s politburo, and without the full knowledge of the prisoners’ movement. Ibrahim added that running for the elections would only serve Abbas’s purpose of reviving his legitimacy while curtailing that of Hamas.

In Hamid’s analysis, Hamas is facing a lose/lose scenario: should it win the elections, what is to prevent a repeat of the 2006 scenario, which launched the siege of Gaza and the split with Fatah? Should it lose the elections, would Hamas hand over both the administration and its rockets to Fatah in Gaza?

Even if Abbas kept his word and created a genuinely representative national Palestinian government, and Hamas was allowed to return to parliament and enter the PLO, what would stop Israel from arresting MPs as they do now? 

Fatah’s problems

Fatah is faring no better. Abbas’s drive to refresh his mandate and seek the legitimacy he has lost as one of the architects of Oslo is being threatened by two other Fatah leaders. Abbas has long been aware of the plan which I first revealed in 2016 to replace him with his arch-rival Dahlan.

The plan for a post-Abbas era was hatched by the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Egypt. Since 2016, Egypt and Jordan have not stopped pressuring Abbas to reconcile with Dahlan. The latest message was passed to Abbas when Egypt and Jordan’s heads of intelligence visited Ramallah recently.

The new card in this operation is the man who ran against Abbas and then withdrew his candidacy in the 2005 presidential election, the Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti, a leader of the First and Second Intifadas who is in prison on five concurrent life sentences. 

Barghouti remains a consistently popular figure of the resistance. At one point he polled higher than both Abbas and Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader, for the post of president. In April 2017 Barghouti organised a hunger strike of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.

This time round, Barghouti announced his intention to run for the presidency and the PNC through one of his supporters, Raafat Ilayyan. Ilayyan quoted Barghouti as saying that a united Fatah list “should be open to all including those accused of taking sides and those sacked from the movement”.

A man holds a photo of prominent Palestinian prisoner Marwan Barghouti calling for his release during a rally supporting those detained in Israeli jails after hundreds of them launched a hunger strike, in the West Bank town of Hebron on April 17, 2017
A man holds a photo of prominent Palestinian prisoner Marwan Barghouti calling for his release during a rally on 17 April 2017 (AFP)

This was a clear reference to Dahlan, who lives in exile and has been sentenced in absentia to three years in prison on corruption charges and expelled from the party. Dahlan’s lawyer at the time called the conviction a “cleansing exercise” for Abbas.

Does Fatah want to liberate Palestine from the occupation, or does it want to govern as a surrogate for Israel, whatever conditions it is put under?

After nearly two decades behind bars, Barghouti wants to get out of jail. Is Dahlan, who is Israel’s preferred Palestinian leader, the Fatah leader’s get out of jail card? Barghouti’s announcement ruffled feathers in Fatah. Jibril Rajoub, secretary general of Fatah’s central committee, who led negotiations with Hamas, accused foreign countries of meddling in the Palestinian elections. 

Rajoub told Palestinian TV: “Some messages have been received from some countries trying to interfere in the path of dialogue, including Arab states which rushed [to normalise relations with Israel]. However, Fatah’s position is clear and does not take directions from any foreign capital.” 

In their campaign to position Dahlan as the next Palestinian leader, Egypt, Jordan and UAE are keen to exploit the distrust between Fatah and Hamas. The latest sign of this is the arrival of the first of what will be a large group of Dahlan men in Gaza after many years in exile. This could only have been achieved with the consent of Hamas leaders in Gaza. 

The true winner of the election may, therefore, be a man who does not even stand on the ballot. One way or another, Dahlan is determined to return to Palestine at the expense of both Abbas and Hamas. 

The jockeying for position within Fatah is about power. But aside from this, Fatah has a real problem with its identity and its purpose. Does Fatah want to liberate Palestine from the occupation, or does it want to govern as a surrogate for Israel, whatever conditions it is put under?

Rajoub and Dahlan are sworn enemies only because they are rivals. Neither has a vision for a free Palestine. Abbas momentarily found his voice as a Palestinian leader in pushing back against the normalisation of ties with Israel, which he called a betrayal. But as soon it became clear Trump was on his way out, Abbas tossed his principles out of the window and returned to business as usual both with Washington and Israel.

The real leaders

Who then are the real leaders of this struggle? For this, we should not look to elections but to what is happening on the streets because it is only here that liberation movements are reborn. That was the case when the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat started Fatah and when Hamas became a dominant force in the First Intifada. No one, either in Ramallah or Gaza, is leading or directing events that are now taking place in Palestine.

Israel is playing a delaying game, and unhappily, both Fatah and Hamas leaders are playing into its hands

It has been a long time since there were major demonstrations by Palestinian citizens of Israel. Earlier this month, protests erupted in several towns and villages. The spark this time is the crime rate and the lack of policing. But the Palestinian flags and the slogans tell a different story, one that has not been seen or heard since the First Intifada. 

There are more and more youth initiatives taking root in the West Bank, including the one Israeli forces are so keen to dismantle. There is clearly a new generation of protest underway that is independent of Fatah, Hamas or the now divided Joint List in the Israeli Knesset.

In the diaspora, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) is becoming an international movement. This, too, is independent of any Palestinian leadership. Rudderless, there is every chance that a new Palestinian movement in and outside Palestine will seize control. 

Israel is playing a delaying game, and, unhappily, leaders of both Fatah and Hamas  – one crippled by its decision to recognise Israel, the other imprisoned by it – are playing into its hands. If this continues, the impetus to break the deadlock will come from the streets, as it always has done in the past.

No vision

What a contrast Palestinian leaders make to other liberation movements. When Nelson Mandela walked out of prison on 11 February 1990, he made a speech that resonates to this day. He said the armed struggle would continue until apartheid collapsed. He called on the international community to continue the boycott of the apartheid regime.

Mandela and the ANC showed determination and vision to the end. Both are sadly lacking in Palestine

“The factors which necessitated the armed struggle still exist today. We have no option but to continue. We express the hope that a climate conducive to a negotiated settlement would be created soon so that there may no longer be the need for the armed struggle… To lift sanctions now would be to run the risk of aborting the process towards the complete eradication of apartheid. Our march to freedom is irreversible. We must not allow fear to stand in our way,” Mandela said.

Compare this to what Fatah has done. It signed the Oslo agreement that criminalised the armed struggle and opened the way for Israel to normalise its relations with China, the Soviet Union in its last days, India and many African countries. Oslo gave nothing to the Palestinians. It ended up giving a lot to Israel, culminating in the opening of embassies in Abu Dhabi and Manama. 

The Palestinian Authority created by Oslo became a surrogate of Israeli forces, even when Israel was starving Ramallah of tax revenue collected on its behalf. In Abbas’s own words, the PA provided Israel with “the cheapest occupation in history”.

What did Abbas get in return? Another 600,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. 

Mandela and the African National Congress showed determination and vision to the end. Both are sadly lacking in Palestine. The mice of this struggle are in Ramallah. The lions are on the street – where they have always been.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.David

Related

Palestinian Resistance running in the New Legislative Elections Simulates Insanity,إستراتيجية فلسطينية واقعية في مقابل انتخابات تحاكي الجنون

**Please scroll down for the Arabic original version **

Palestinian Resistance running in the New Legislative Elections Simulates Insanity

عمرو علان - Amro 🇵🇸 (@amrobilal77) | Twitter
* Palestinian writer and Political researcher

Amro Allan

First published in Global Research

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results:” this quote is wrongly attributed to Einstein, but regardless of who said it, this is what best describes the Palestinian resistance participation in the new Palestinian legislative elections. The new elections are being sold as the way for reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas. However, the Palestinian division occurred in the light of the results of the 2006 legislative elections, and as a direct result of the contrast between Hamas and Fatah strategies towards the Palestinian cause. 

The strategies of the Palestinian factions have not changed since the previous elections. On the contrary, the Palestinian Authority (which in fact represents Fatah) has become entrenched further with the occupation, and the foreign actors’ stance against the Palestinian resistance has become more rigid. And it is stands to reason that a significant change in at least one of these two factors is a prerequisite to expect different outcome of any new elections 

So, away from the slogans of the reconciliation between Palestinian factions and the accompanied PR campaigns, what does each of the Palestinian factions hope to achieve from these elections?  And more importantly, what is the solution to break the siege imposed on the Palestinian resistance in Gaza?

The Palestinian Authority (PA)

In January 2020, the former U.S. administration announced the ‘deal of the century’; this deal in fact exposed the hidden intention of the successive U.S. administrations. This announcement was preceded by the Zionist Entity revealing its intention to annex the West Bank. Add to this, the ‘Jewish nation-state’  laws which the Zionist Entity passed in 2018 that may lead to transportation of the Palestinians in the 1948 territories out of their homes. After all these developments, Mahmoud Abbas declared Oslo Accords dead and the end of the security coordination with the occupation. With this, a glimmer of hope within the Palestinian factions that the PA had finally benefited from its disastrous experience over the past 30 years has emerged. It was said at the time that it was possible for Fatah to agree with the other Palestinian factions on the basis of civil resistance to the occupation. And a meeting of the Secretaries-Generals of the Palestinian factions was held in Beirut on this basis. However, soon the hope of any change in the performance of the PA evaporated. The PA continued to coordinate fully with the ‘Israelis’ forces in order to thwart any attempt to resist the occupation and continued to suppress any popular movement on the ground, no matter how peaceful it was. The PA relentlessly suppressed Even the peaceful popular demonstration of solidarity with the hunger-striking detainee Maher al-Akhras at the time. Then came the shocking statement of Hussein al-Sheikh, the PA Civil Affairs Minister, when he announced the return of the PA diplomatic relations with ‘Israel’ to how it was, including the security coordination- which in truth never ceased. 

It has become clear to most observers that the PA function has become limited to two tasks: first, collecting financial aid; and second, paving the way (knowingly or unknowingly) for the occupation to accomplish its aims of annexing what little that remains of the West Bank. 

By stifling any form of Palestinian movements, peaceful or otherwise, to resist the occupation’s changing the facts on the ground, the Pa has become de-facto complicit of the occupation. Hence, all PA talk still possessing a Palestinian national project becomes no more than empty rhetoric. Because even he who believes in the negotiations as the only path to attain Palestinian rights does not strip himself of all negotiation leverages as the PA has indeed done. The PA has become a mockery of itself. It now mimics the French government of Vichy or the South Lebanon Army; with the difference that the last two had a project, regardless of our view of their projects, whereas the PA no longer has a task to speak of. These are not labels that can be given lightly or as a matter of populism, nor it is a call for internal fighting which must be avoided at all cost, especially in the presence of the occupation. But this is a description of the current situation that must be taken into account when assessing any future Palestinian strategy.

Thus, it can be reasoned that the goal of Mahmoud Abbas and the PA from the elections is to renew their legitimacy, or more precisely to take allegiance from Hamas and the rest of the Palestinian factions, and then to return to the vortex of what they call peace process and with no horizons in sight, of course. 

Hamas and the Palestinian resistance factions

Hamas and the Palestinian resistance are going through an evident crisis, because of their limited options and their failure to lift the 15-year siege imposed on the Gaza Strip. It can be argued that the origins of the blockade were Hamas’s strategic miscalculations to run in the 2006 legislative elections- which did not secure Hamas any immunity nor protected it as it had hoped. Notwithstanding this argument, the occupation remains the prime source of the blockade. The Zionist Entity is the holder of the blockade keys and no one else. This is the primary fact and must not be ignored when formulating any   strategy to dismantle the blockade.

It is not a secret that Hamas is hoping that running in the upcoming elections will lead to lifting the blockade or at the very least easing it. This presents two assumptions: either Hamas competes against Fatah to win the majority in the legislative elections or runs with Fatah on the same party list. Suppose it is the former, and Hamas wins the election. In that case, Hamas will face a repeat of the 2006 scenario if there is no change in the Palestinian faction’s policies nor any change in the key international players’ stance towards the Palestinian resistance. 

But if Hamas runs in the elections on a party list with Fatah, and it agrees to be a minority in the legislative elections, it will become an opposition party within the Oslo system. At which point, they will be obliged to play according to the Oslo rules. We observe the emergence of two parallel lines on the Palestinian scene- that can never converge. One represents the PA which has become linked to the occupation (and part of it, in reality), and which does not believe in any form of confrontation with the occupation, even a peaceful one; whilst the other believes in Resistance to restore Palestinian rights. As a result, the resistance factions will find themselves facing the same current dilemma. With the difference that this time they will have given to the opposite side new ammunition to use against them. The Palestinian resistance will be required internally and internationally to respect the elections’ results and hand over the Gaza Strip to the PA before any easing of the blockade takes place.  And because the blockade keys are with the occupation, the Palestinian resistance will have to follow the Zionist Entity’s definition of handing over control of the Gaza Strip. And that means the disarmament of the Palestinian resistance and nothing else.

The solution to break the siege on the Palestinian resistance

It must be recognized first that finding a solution to the Gaza crisis is not a simple task, because the blockade is linked first and foremost to the occupation itself and is only one of its   symptoms. Nevertheless, what deserves attention is that the Occupation Entity has allowed a lot of financial aid to the PA in Ramallah and even to the Gaza Strip, whenever the status quo nears the point of collapse in the West Bank or Gaza. This indicates that the Zionist Entity fears an explosion in either of these arenas. For instance, Netanyahu retreated from his decision to announce the West Bank’s annexation fearing the break of a third intifada based on the estimates of his security advisers and nothing else. This casts doubt on the idea that the West Bank    is not ready for a popular movement and a third intifada. It is true that starting a popular movement is not without many obstacles, first of which   is the presence of the PA intelligence services, who are now directly coordinating with the Shin Bet. Nevertheless, is it really possible that the Palestinian factions are short of the means to motivate people and move onto the street if they put their mind to it?

In addition to what has been said, if we put the blockade imposed on the Palestinian resistance in its broader context as part of the economic war imposed on all resistance forces in the region, movements and states alike, the lifting of the siege on Gaza clearly becomes a common interest for all these actors. And this calls for the Palestinian factions to try to formulate a unified strategy with all the resistance forces in the region (i.e. the Axis of Resistance) to lift the blockade. It is, of course, obvious that this requires rounds and rounds of discussion, and that any strategy to break the siege with the support of the Axis of Resistance will be a medium-term strategy, but this remains the more productive option. Engaging in uncalculated adventures such as new elections will only lead to more time-wasting, even according to the most optimistic estimates.

Conclusion

The siege imposed on the Palestinian resistance in the Gaza Strip is a vital component in the overall strategy of the Zionist Entity, and any counter plan to break the siege that does not take in account this fact is bound to fail. Therefore, steps that can change the equations on the ground and the development of a comprehensive national Palestinian strategy are paramount for dismantling the siege. Today the Palestinians have a realistic opportunity to impose withdrawal of the occupation from the 1967 territories through a   third intifada. This would undoubtedly change all the existing equations on the ground. 

What is put forward in this article are only thoughts for deliberation. The formulation of a complete future Palestinian strategy needs the participation of many minds. But what this article has tried to avoid is sugar-coating the reality, simplifying the status quo, and providing solutions that appear attractive on the outside but bear the seeds of their own failure in the inside.

* Palestinian writer and Political researcher

إستراتيجية فلسطينية واقعية في مقابل انتخابات تحاكي الجنون

عمرو علان - Amro 🇵🇸 (@amrobilal77) | Twitter
*كاتب فلسطيني وباحث سياسي

عمرو علان

First published in Arabic in Al-Akhbar Fri 5 Feb 2021

الأخبار الجمعة 5 شباط 2021

«الجنون هو أن تكرّر الفعل نفسه أكثر من مرّة وتتوقّع نتائج مغايرة». يُنسب هذا الاقتباس خطأ إلى آينشتاين، لكن بغضّ النظر عمّن كان قائله الحقيقي، لعلّه أفضل ما يُوَصِّف حالة انتخابات المجلس التشريعي الفلسطيني المزمع إجراؤها قريباً. لقد وقع الانقسام الفلسطيني، أصلاً، على ضوء نتائج انتخابات عام 2006 التشريعية، وكنتيجة لتباين النظرة بشأن الاستراتيجيات بين حركتَي «حماس» و«فتح»، ومنذ ذلك الحين، لم يطرأ أيّ تغيير على الظروف الداخلية الفلسطينية من ناحية المواقف، ولا الرؤى تجاه المشروع الوطني الفلسطيني، ولا الموقفان الخارجيان الدولي والعربي قد تبدّلا بشيء. بل على العكس، زاد انحدار السلطة الفلسطينية وارتباطها بالاحتلال داخلياً، وزاد الموقفان الدولي والعربي نكراناً للحق الفلسطيني وصلفاً تجاه القوى الفلسطينية عموماً، فكيف إذن يمكن توقّع أن تكون نتائج الانتخابات الجديدة أفضل من سابقتها، وأن تؤدّي إلى مصالحة فلسطينية؟ فما الذي يبتغيه، إذن، كلّ طرف من هذه الانتخابات بعيداً عن الشعارات المعلنة وحملات العلاقات العامّة؟ وما هو الحل للخروج من حالتَي المراوحة والتيه الواضحتين في الوضع الفلسطيني؟

السلطة الفلسطينية

مع إعلان الإدارة الأميركية السابقة عن صفقة القرن، هذه الصفقة التي تمثل التوجه الحقيقي للإدارات الأميركية المتعاقبة، وما تلاها من إفصاح الكيان الصهيوني عن مسعاه لضمّ أراضي الضفّة الغربية، ناهيك بسَنّ قوانين يهودية الدولة التي تهدّد أصل وجود فلسطينيّي أراضي الـ48 في ديارهم، ظهر بصيص أمل ولو كان ضئيلاً عن احتمالية كون السلطة قد استفادت من تجربتها الكارثية، خلال الأعوام الثلاثين الماضية، عندما أعلن محمود عباس عدم الالتزام بمخرجات أوسلو ووقف التنسيق الأمني، وقيل حينها إنّه يمكن التوافق بين سائر القوى الفلسطينية على أرضية الحدّ الأدنى في مقاومة الاحتلال على أساس المقاومة الشعبية. وعلى وقْع ذلك، تمّ عقد اجتماع أمناء الفصائل في بيروت، لكن سرعان ما تبدّد الأمل في أي تبدّل ولو كان طفيفاً في أداء السلطة، فقد استمرت السلطة في التعاون الكامل مع قوات الاحتلال بهدف إحباط أيّ محاولة لمقاومة الاحتلال، وتابعت قمع أيّ حراك شعبي على الأرض مهما كان سلمياً، وحتى مجرّد التظاهرة الشعبية السلمية للتضامن مع الأسير المضرب عن الطعام آنذاك، ماهر الأخرس، تمّ قمعها دون هوادة. وتبع ذلك تصريح حسين الشيخ مستهزِئاً بعقول كلّ الشعب الفلسطيني بلا استثناء، عندما أعلن ما أسماه «انتصار الشعب الفلسطيني» وعودة التنسيق الأمني رسمياً (ويا دار ما دخلك شر).

لقد بات جلياً من طريقة تعاطي السلطة الفلسطينية مع الواقع الفلسطيني، أنّ وظيفتها صارت محصورة بأمرين لا ثالث لهما؛ الأول: تحصيل المخصّصات، والآخر: تمهيد الأرضية في الضفة الغربية – بعلم أو بدون علم – كي يُنجِز الاحتلال مشروعه بابتلاع ما بقي من أراضي الضفة عبر منعها لأيّ شكل من أشكال المقاومة أو الحراك من أجل التصدّي لخطوات الاحتلال التي يستمر بتنفيذها على أرض الواقع. وكلّ حديث عن مشروع وطني فلسطيني لدى السلطة ما هو إلا صرخات في البرّية، فحتى من كان يؤمن بطريق المفاوضات لتحصيل حقوقه لا يعمد إلى تجريد نفسه من كلّ ما لديه من أوراق ضغط أو تفاوض من تلقاء ذاته. وعلى هذا، صارت السلطة الفلسطينية تحاكي حكومة فيشي الفرنسية أو جيش لحد الجنوبي مع فارق أنّه كان لهذين الأخيرين مشروع، بغضّ النظر عن رأينا في مشروعيهما، بينما لا يوجد أي أفق مستقبلي أو مشروع للسلطة الفلسطينية، هذه ليست توصيفات يمكن إطلاقها بِخِفّة أو من باب الشعبوية، ولا هي دعوة إلى الاقتتال الداخلي الذي يجب اجتنابه بأيّ ثمن، ولا سيما في ظلّ وجود الاحتلال، لكن هذا توصيف لواقع حال يجب أن يؤخذ في الحسبان عند تقدير أيّ موقف.

وإذا ما ألقينا نظرة فاحصة، نجد أنّ السلطة فعلياً باتت تمثّل مشروع الفلسطيني المهزوم. لذلك، نجد محمود عباس يقول إنّه سيفاوض ويستمر بالمفاوضات والاستجداء عساه يُحصِّل شيئاً من الحقوق الفلسطينية، ويُعلّل ذلك بكون الفلسطيني جرّب الطرق الأخرى ولم يحصل على مراده لأنّ الظروف الدولية والإقليمية والداخلية في غير مصلحته، بحسب فهمه غير الدقيق ولا الواقعي. لكن يغيب عن هذا التصوّر أنّه حتى خيار الاستسلام غير متاح للفلسطيني الموجود في الضفة وأراضي الـ48، فالكيان الصهيوني لم يَعُد يخفي مشروعه في هضم أراضي الضفة وترحيل سكانها عاجلاً أم آجلاً، وربما يكون مردّ التشويش في هذا التصوّر تجاهل أصل المشروع الصهيوني الذي هو مشروع إحلالي يقوم على اقتلاع السكان الأصليين للأرض وإحلال المستوطنين مكانهم، وقد ساعد في ظهور هذا التصوّر بروز بعض الأطروحات المشوِّهة لحقيقة الصراع من قبيل نظريات الفصل العنصري (الأبارتايد)، أو أنّ القضية الفلسطينية هي قضية كرامة أو مساواة. لكنّ المفارقة، هنا، أنّ خيار الاستسلام ربما يكون متاحاً لأهالي غزّة إذا ارتضوا العيش بذلّة تحت سيطرة الصهيوني، وليس لباقي سكّان المناطق الأخرى في أرض فلسطين. نكتفي بهذا القدر كي لا نستطرد عن أصل النقاش الحالي أكثر.

بناءً على هذا العرض، يمكن الخلوص إلى كون هدف محمود عباس والسلطة عموماً من إجراء الانتخابات هو تجديد شرعيتها، أو أخذ البيعة من حركة «حماس» وباقي الفصائل، بتأييد خطّها السياسي إن صحّ وصفه بالخط سياسي، ومن ثم لتعود إلى دوّامة ما يسمونه مفاوضات سلام وبلا أيّ أفق طبعاً، بينما تواصل تأدية دورها الوظيفي في تأمين الحماية لقوات الاحتلال والمستوطنين، ريثما يُجْهِز الكيان الصهيوني على باقي أراضي الضفة وعلى الوجود السكاني لأهالي الضفة وأراضي الـ48.

«حماس» وفصائل المقاومة

تمرّ «حماس» بأزمة خيارات واضحة وحقيقية، بسبب إخفاقها في فكّ الحصار عن قطاع غزة، هذا الحصار الذي تشارك فيه السلطة ذاتها وبعض الدول العربية المتواطئة، والذي بات يشكّل عبئاً على أهالي القطاع ويتسبّب في عجز الحكم في غزة عن تأمين الكثير من الحاجيات الأولية للغزّيين، ناهيكم بتعطيل حركة الدخول والخروج من وإلى القطاع، ما حوَّل قطاع غزة إلى سجن مفتوح بكل معنى الكلمة. ويمكن المحاجّة بأنّ منشأ الحصار كان بسبب تقدير «حماس» الاستراتيجي الخاطئ الذي خاضت بموجبه الانتخابات التشريعية في عام 2006، التي لم تؤمّن للحركة أي حصانة ولا هي حمت ظهرها كما كان مرجواً، لكن بعيداً عن كلّ هذا النقاش يبقى الاحتلال هو مصدر الحصار الأول والأخير، ومفتاح فكّه ليس مع أحد سواه، لا مع السلطة ولا مع تلك الدول العربية المتواطئة، وهذا أمر أساسي لا يصحّ تجاهله عند صياغة أي استراتيجية لفكّ الحصار.

بناءً على ما سلف، يمكن استنتاج أنّ «حماس» تأمل من دخول الانتخابات فكّ الحصار أو تخفيفه على أقلّ تقدير، وهذا بالتالي يطرح فرضيّتين: إما دخول «حماس» الانتخابات على أساس المغالبة، وإمّا خوضها على أساس المشاركة بصيغة قائمة مشتركة مع «فتح» أو بصيغة أخرى يُتّفَق عليها.

فإذا كانت الانتخابات مغالبة، واستطاعت «حماس» الفوز بالأكثرية، عندها نكون أمام تكرار سيناريو عام 2006 بحذافيره، طالما لا تغيير في المواقف الداخلية للأطراف ولا تبديل للمواقف الدولية كما ذكرنا. وأما إذا كانت الانتخابات بالمشاركة وارتضت «حماس» أن تكون أقلية، أو إذا ما فشلت في تحقيق الأغلبية بالمغالبة ففي الحالتين ستتحوّل إلى معارضة ضمن منظومة أوسلو، وعندها ستكون ملزمة باللعب وفق قواعدِه، وفي ظلّ وجود خطّين متوازيين على الساحة الفلسطينية لا يتقاطعان، أحدهما بات مرتبطاً بالاحتلال عضوياً وبالطبيعة لا يؤمِن بأيّ شكل من أشكال مجابهة الاحتلال حتى ولو كانت سلمية، والآخر يؤمِن بالمقاومة كسبيل لاستعادة الحقوق.

فستجد «حماس» وسائر فصائل المقاومة نفسها أمام ذات المعضلة الحالية، لكن هذه المرة ستكون قد منحت للطرف المقابل ذخيرة جديدة للاستقواء عليها، فهي ستكون مطالبة داخلياً ودولياً باحترام نتائج الانتخابات وتسليم قطاع غزة قبل أيّ تخفيف للحصار. وهنا لن ينفع التذاكي فالحصار مفتاحه مع الاحتلال والآخرون هم مجرد تفصيل كما جادلنا، وتسليم القطاع لدى الكيان الصهيوني يعني تسليم كلّ فصائل المقاومة لسلاحها الموجود فوق الأرض وتحت الأرض ولا شيء دون ذلك.

لكن يردُّ البعض بأنّ دخول الانتخابات يمكن أن يمنح «حماس» وسائر فصائل المقاومة وضعاً في الداخل الفلسطيني يماثل وضع حزب الله في لبنان، وهنا يمكن قول الآتي: من الصعب مقارنة وضع قطاع غزة وحال فصائله بالحالة اللبنانية، لا من ناحية وجود سوريا على الحدود اللبنانية التي لا تشارك في حصار لبنان، والتي فوق ذلك تشكّل خطّ إمداد لحزب الله منها وعبرها، ولا من ناحية قوة حزب الله الذي بلغ مرحلة من القدرة التسليحية يستطيع معها تبديل معادلات إقليمية. ومع هذا، يجب الانتباه إلى أنّ من يطْبِق الحصار على غزّة هو الكيان الصهيوني بشكل مباشر، بينما يعدّ الأميركي الوحيد الذي لديه قدرة على ممارسة أشكال من الحصار على لبنان. وكان الأميركي يتَّبِع في الفترات الماضية استراتيجية المساكنة في لبنان لحسابات معقّدة ومخاوف لديه لا مجال لذكرها هنا، بينما تخلّى اليوم عن فكرة المساكنة، وهذا ما يفسر الضغط الاقتصادي الذي يمرّ به لبنان بالأساس، بالإضافة إلى عوامل داخلية لبنانية أخرى مساعِدة. وخلاصة القول أنّ جميع قوى المقاومة في الإقليم تتعرّض، اليوم، لحصار مالي واقتصادي تتفاوت فعاليته وآثاره تبَعاً لظروف كلّ فصيل وجغرافياً موقع تواجده.

الخروج من حالة المراوحة

استعرضنا في ما سبق كيف أنّ دخول «حماس» الانتخابات لن يفضي إلى حلٍّ لحصار غزة، بل يرجّح أن يؤدّي إلى نتائج عكسية تعود بالضرر على المقاومة الفلسطينية. هذا ولم نفصل في المخاطر على المشروع الوطني الفلسطيني وثوابته وأهدافه لضيق المساحة. وقبل الخوض في الحلول، يجب الاعتراف بداية بأنّ إيجاد حلّ لأزمة غزة ليس بالأمر الهيّن كون الحصار مرتبطاً أولاً وأخيراً بالاحتلال ذاته وما هو إلّا أحد أعراضه، وهو ضريبة تدفعها قوى المقاومة إلى جانب ضرائب أخرى كثيرة يتحمّلها كلّ من يسعى إلى التحرير كما جادلنا. لكن يجب أيضاً الإشارة إلى أمر آخر جدير بالانتباه، وهو سماح كيان الاحتلال لقدر من المساعدات المالية بالوصول إلى سلطة رام الله، وحتى قطاع غزّة، كلّما أوشك الوضع على الانهيار، سواءً في الضفة أو قطاع غزة. وهذا يشير بوضوح إلى أنّ ما يخشاه العدو هو حصول انفجار في أيٍّ من هاتين الساحتين، ويبدو أنّ العدو بات مدركاً لمكامن ضعفه واختلال موازين القوى لغير مصلحته أكثر من إدراك بعض الفلسطينيين لهذه الوقائع، فنجد بنيامين نتنياهو يتراجع عن قراره الذي استثمر فيه كثيراً بإعلان ضمّ أراضي الضفة الغربية تحسّباً لانفجار الانتفاضة في أراضي الـ67، بناءً على تقديرات أجهزته الأمنية ولا شيء سوى ذلك، وهذا يدحض الفكرة القائلة بكون الضفة مترهّلة وغير حاضرة للتحرّك شعبياً. صحيح أنّ الحراك الشعبي دونه صعاب عديدة، أوّلها وجود جيش من مخبري أجهزة السلطة الذين باتوا يأتمرون بأمر الشاباك مباشرة، لكن هل يُعقل أن تعدم الفصائل الوسيلة في تحريك الشارع؟

وفي المقابل، فليس مردّ التذمّر الشعبي ضيق الحال المعيشي فقط، لكنّ حالتَي السكون والمراوحة اللتين يعيشهما الوضع الفلسطيني هما سببان لا يمكن تجاهلهما، حيث كون هذا الوضع يوحي بانسداد الأفق على الصعيد الوطني، وفي هذه الحالة تطفو المصاعب المعيشية على السطح لتأخذ موقع الصدارة على القضايا الوطنية الأخرى. وهذه ليست دعوة للهروب إلى الأمام كما ربما سيحاجج البعض، فأيّ حراك شعبي في الضفة هذه المرة ستكون حظوظه في فرض الانسحاب على كيان الاحتلال من أراضي الـ67 مرتفعة للغاية، بناءً على استقراء التوازنات الدولية والإقليمية وحالة التراجع التي يعيشها الكيان الصهيوني. ولا تغرّنكم حالة انهيار بعض الأعراب أمام هذا الكيان، فهؤلاء مصيرهم مرتبط بهذه المنظومة الاستعمارية وليس بمقدورهم تعديل موازين القوى بشكل حقيقي، ويصحّ فيهم القول الشعبي: «عصفور يسند زرزور».

بالإضافة إلى ما تَقدَّم، إذا ما وضعنا الحصار المفروض على قوى المقاومة الفلسطينية في إطاره الأوسع كجزء من الحرب المفروضة على كلّ قوى المقاومة في الإقليم أحزاباً ودولاً، كما نوّهنا في الفقرة السابقة، يصير فكّ الحصار عن غزة مصلحة مشتركة لكلّ هذه الأطراف مجتمعة، ويستدعي العمل من جهة الفصائل الإسلامية والوطنية الفلسطينية على محاولة صياغة استراتيجية موحّدة مع كلّ قوى المقاومة في الإقليم. ندرك كون هذا الأمر يلزمه جولات وجولات من التباحث، وكون أيّ استراتيجية لفكّ الحصار بالتوافق مع القوى الداعمة ستكون من طبيعة الاستراتيجيات المتوسّطة المدى، لكن هذا يظلّ أجدى من الدخول في مغامرات غير محسوبة العواقب كالانتخابات، التي لن تؤدي إلّا إلى المزيد من إضاعة الوقت بحسب أكثر التقديرات تفاؤلاً.

خاتمة

حصار قوى المقاومة في غزة ليس بالأمر الثانوي ضمن استراتيجية العدو، لهذا لا يُتوقع أن تفلح الخطوات الملتوية ولا الهروب من حقيقة الأمر في فكّه، ويلزم لذلك خطوات من شأنها تبديل المعادلات على الأرض، ومشروع وطني متكامل. واليوم، أمام الشعب الفلسطيني فرصة واقعية لفرض الانسحاب على الكيان الصهيوني من أراضي الـ67 عبر انتفاضة ثالثة، وهذا من شأنه بلا شك تبديل كل التوازنات القائمة، وما تمّ طرحه في هذا المقال هو عبارة عن أفكار للنقاش والتداول كون الأمر يحتاج إلى العديد من العقول للخروج باستراتيجية مجدية. يقول المثل الإنكليزي: «يُغَلِّف الموت بالسُّكَّر»، كناية عن عدم مواجهة الأمور على حقيقتها، وهذا ما حاول هذا المقال تفاديه بدلاً من تبسيط الوضع القائم وتقديم حلول ظاهرها سهل وباطنها فشل، وتبقى هذه هي ضريبة التحرير والمقاومة التي لا مناص من دفعها.

* كاتب فلسطيني وباحث سياسي

⁨إصلاح “حماس”، عمرو علان يساجل أحمد يوسف

عمرو علان - Amro 🇵🇸 (@amrobilal77) | Twitter
*كاتب فلسطيني وباحث سياسي

إصلاح “حماس”، عمرو علان يساجل أحمد يوسف

عمرو علان

 عربي 21، الخميس 31 كانون الأول\ديسمبر 2020

نشر د. أحمد يوسف مؤخرا مقالا بعنوان “لأخي خالد مشعل، حماس وجدلية الإصلاح والتغيير”، وجاء المقال على صيغة نصيحة لحركة “حماس” ولرئيس مكتبها السياسي السابق السيد خالد مشعل بهدف تقويم المسار وسد الثغرات وتقوية الحركة حسب تصور د. أحمد. 

لكن جل ما عدَّه د. أحمد نصائح إصلاحية كانت في الحقيقة تساعد على زيادة اعوجاج المسار – إن كان مسار الحركة شابه اعوجاج – وتفتح الباب على مصراعيه للتنازلات في الثوابت عوضا عن سد الثغرات، وفيها مما يهدم قوة الحركة الحقيقية إذا ما استصاغتها قيادة الحركة.

ويبدو أن ما ورد في المقال المذكور يتجاوز كونه حالة فردية إلى كونه يمثل وجهة نظر شريحة معينة من أبناء حركة المقاومة الإسلامية “حماس”. 

ولا يدّعي كاتب هذه السطور أنه أحد أبناء هذه الحركة، لكن منطلقا من الحرص على كل فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية، التي تعد حماس عمودها الفقري، والتي باتت تشكل يد الشعب الفلسطيني الطولى وسنده الصلب، هو ما اقتضى هذا الرد.

حماس” والمعترك السياسي

يقول د. أحمد إنه كان من أوائل من دعوا إلى دخول معترك السياسة والحُكْم، ويتحسر على تأخر حركة حماس في اتخاذ هذه الخطوة، لكنه في الوقت نفسه يختلف مع السيد خالد مشعل على كون خوض حماس لانتخابات 2006 ودخولها معترك السلطة والحُكْم قد حمى ظهر المقاومة كما كان مرجوا، وهو محق في هذا التقييم، فكيف إذن لا تؤخذ هذه التجربة ونتائجها بالحسبان عند الدعوة إلى الغوص أكثر في دهاليز السياسة والحُكْم؟ 

وهنا يجدر التذكير بكون أول من عد انتخابات 2006 غير شرعية كانت أمريكا ومن لف لفها من دعاة الديمقراطية، رغم شهادة الجميع بنزاهة تلك الانتخابات بما في ذلك حركة فتح ذاتها. أليس في هذا عبرة لمن يَعدّ أن تلك الدول التي يرجى مخاطبتها في السياسة كخصم سياسي لن تعترف بحركات المقاومة كندّ سياسي حتى تتخلى عن الثوابت؟ ناهيك عن تخليها عن المقاومة المسلحة كمنهج وطريق للتحرير؟

وفي الواقع – ومع تقديرنا لكلام السيد خالد مشعل – فإن دخول حركة حماس انتخابات 2006 كان خطأ في التقدير، فهو أولا: لم يؤمّن للمقاومة وحركة حماس عموما أي حصانة، وثانيا: كان بمعنى أو بآخر اعترافا ضمنيا بأوسلو رغم تصريحات حماس بعكس ذلك، ورغم عدم رغبة حماس بالاعتراف بمسار أوسلو، فالسياسة ممارسة، لا مجرد مواقف تفقد قيمتها إذا ما اقترنت بالفعل، وعلى المرء أن يعترف بأن رفض مخرجات أوسلو ومن ثم دخول انتخابات للمشاركة في سلطة هي أحد مخرجات أوسلو فيه من التناقض ما لا يمكن تجاهله.

ومن ثم يذكر د. أحمد فيما ذَكَر لدعم وجهة نظره خذلان بعض الحركات الإسلامية والعروبية التي كانت حماس تعول عليها بما نراه من انبطاح واتفاقيات تطبيع مخزية. 

حسنا، أليس أحد أهداف هذه الاتفاقيات بث الوهن في عَضُد حركات المقاومة والضغط عليها نفسيا؟ وإيهامها بأنه لم يعد لها سند ولا نصيرعلها ترضخ للمسارات السياسية طريقا عوضا عن طريق المقاومة والكفاح المسلح؟ 

نعم يألم الجميع لما نراه من هرولة للارتماء في أحضان العدو، لكن هذا لا يغير شيئا على الأرض وفي الميدان، فلقد طورت حماس في ظل السنوات العجاف التي مرت من قدراتها التسليحية أضعافا، وحفرت عشرات الكيلومترات من الأنفاق، وتحولت المقاومة إلى جيش يحسب له ألف حساب، ولكم في المناورات المشتركة الأخيرة “الركن الشديد” مثالا، وإن هذا الطريق هو الذي يحبط أهداف العدو من إسقاط بعض الأنظمة والحركات في براثن التطبيع، وأما الغرق أكثر في بحور السلطة فلن يكون مصيره أفضل مما وصلت إليه السلطة الوطنية الفلسطينية، التي لم تصمد على قرار وقف التنسيق الأمني الشكلي سوى أسابيع، حتى خرج علينا حسين الشيخ ليعلن انتصار الشعب الفلسطيني وعودة الحال لما كان عليه بعد استلامه ورقة من مجرد ضابط مخابرات صهيوني، وبالمناسبة كان شح الأموال وضيق الحال الاقتصادي من أهم دوافع السلطة لإعلان عودة التنسيق الأمني والخروج علينا بتصريح حسين الشيخ المخزي بكل المعايير، وهذه نفس الظروف التي أشار إليها د. أحمد في مطلع مقاله، ولعله بهذا يقرأ في كتاب الرئيس محمود عباس.

النظام الداخلي لحماس وحديث الهدنة

ويمضي د. أحمد في مقاله بعد ذلك لتعداد بعض النقاط التي يرى فيها خللا، ومن بينها على سبيل المثال: دعوته إلى تطوير النظام الداخلي لحركة حماس، ولعملية اختيار القيادات فيها، وهذا أمر مشروع ومحمود بالتأكيد، لكن مع مراعات منهج التطوير السليم، وإدراك كون حركة حماس حركة مقاومة وتحرير لا دولة، فصحيح أنه يجب بث الدماء الجديدة في صفوف القيادات والاستفادة من طاقات أبناء حركة حماس المخضرمين، لكن من الصحيح أيضا أن معيار اختيار القيادات الأساسي في حركات التحرير يبقى سِجِل تلك القيادات الجهادي والنضالي، وهذا نهج كل حركات المقاومة والتحرير عبر التاريخ، فلا تقاد حركات المقاومة (بالتكنوقراط) والاختصاصيين، ويُذكِّر هذا بما كانت تتداوله بعض قيادات فتح عن أبو عمار – رحمة الله عليه – بعد إنشاء السلطة، وبعد تصديقهم لأكذوبة أنه بات لنا دولة، فكانوا يتهامسون بأن أبا عمار ليس رجل المرحلة، حيث مقتضيات إدارة الدولة تختلف عن متطلبات إدارة حركة نضال وطني، والكل يعرف بقية القصة، وما آلت إليه حركة فتح بعد إقصاء كل من كان له تاريخ نضالي من صفوفها لصالح (التكنوقراط) على شاكلة سلام فياض وغيره.

ثم يقول د. أحمد إنه قد آن الأوان لعقد هدنة أو استراحة محارب، وليته وضح لنا مفهوم الهدنة التي يقترحها، ألم تعقد حماس عدة اتفاقيات تهدئة؟ لكن دائما كان العدو من يخرقها ولا ينفّذ ما التزم به، فالهدنة المقبولة من وجهة نظر العدو هي تلك التي تسلم المقاومة بمقتضاها سلاحها أو تتوقف عن الإعداد من زيادة السلاح كما ونوعا وحفر الأنفاق وغير ذلك، فهل هذا هو الثمن الذي يُقترَح على حركات المقاومة وحماس دفعه؟

المقاومة السلمية

 وفي نقطة أخرى متصلة يدعو د. أحمد إلى تبنّي منهج مقاوم يردع العدو ويكشف جرائمه، ملمحا إلى المقاومة السلمية، ويتعجب المرء من هكذا كلام وكأن المقاومة السلمية تردع عدوا أو تكبح مغتصبا، نعم المقاومة السلمية تعد أحد أشكال المقاومة لكن لا يجوز بحال تبنيها كمنهج وأساس للمقاومة، فالكفاح المسلح وحده من يردع العدو، ولو كانت مقاومة الشموع تردع محتلا لفلحت مقاومة من اتخذها نهجا من قبْل، فأي نصيحة هذه التي تؤدي إلى تسليم رقاب المقاومين للصهيوني كي يذبحهم على مذبح تجربة المجرب؟ وأما فضح جرائم الاحتلال، فليكن د. أحمد متأكدا بأن أولئك الذين يرغب بفضح العدو أمامهم هم ذاتهم شركاء حتى أخمص قدميهم في جرائم هذا العدو، ولا يلزمهم شرح ولا توضيح.

حزب سياسي للإسلاميين!


أما الطامة فكانت في قول د. أحمد “لقد آن الأوان لإنشاء حزب سياسي يتحدث باسم الإسلاميين في فلسطين، ويمثل رأس جسر لهم، بعيداً عن اتهامات التطرف والإرهاب”، عذرا لكن أيما تشويش في الأفكار هذا؟ هل يرضى د. أحمد وصول الحال بحماس بأن تشجب وتدين العمل المقاوم ليرضى عنها هؤلاء الذين يريد شرح جرائم الاحتلال لهم؟ ونربأ بالدكتور أحمد عن ذلك، وأيضا هل وصف حركة حماس وسائر حركات المقاومة بالإرهاب والتشدد لأنهم فعلا كذلك أم لكونهم متمسكين بحقهم وحق كل الشعب الفلسطيني في المقاومة والتحرير؟ 

وعليه ليس مفهوما ما المقصود من هذه النصيحة، وما هي طبيعة تلك الحركات الإسلامية “غير المتشددة”، ولعل مرد التشويش في الأفكار عند د. أحمد هو الإيمان بطريق السلطة والحُكْم، وإعلاء السياسة كأولوية على القوة والمقاومة اللتين تعدان مصدري صناعة السياسة ومرتكزاتها الأساسية، وبدونهما يصير العمل السياسي مجرد استجداء وحبر على ورق.

ويدعو د. أحمد إلى ضرورة إعطاء أولوية الإنفاق للمحتاجين، ولتوجيه دعم الدول العربية والإسلامية لوكالة الأونروا، مجددا القصد غير واضح تماما من هذه النصيحة ومن استخدام كلمة “أولوية” في هذا المقام،بالطبع يقع على عاتق حركة حماس مسؤولية اتجاه المحتاجين من شعبنا، كونها أحد الفصيلين الأكبرين في الساحة الفلسطينية، وكونها ارتضت تسلم السلطة في قطاع غزة، فإن كان القصد هو إيلاء هذه المسؤولية المزيد من الاهتمام عبر سد أبواب الهدر التي باتت وبصراحة كثيرة في نشاطات فروع حركة حماس في خارج فلسطين، عبر كثرة المؤتمرات الخطابية التي لا تقدم ولا تؤخر كثيرا، والتي تتسم في الكثير من الأحيان بالبذخ غير المقبول نهائيا، وصارت مصدر استرزاق للبعض وللزبائنية، وحيث صار جزء لا يستهان به من كوادر حركة حماس في الخارج عبء على كاهل الحركة بدلا من أن يكونوا رافدا لها.

فإذا كان المقصود هو سد هذا الباب وتحويل جزء من هذا الهدر لدعم المحتاجين من شعبنا فلا غبار على ذلك، وأما إن كان المقصود تحويل حركة حماس لجمعية خيرية، وتقزيم القضية الفلسطينية لتصبح قضية محتاجين ففي هذا انحراف كبير، فمسؤولية حركة حماس الأساسية مع باقي حركات المقاومة العمل على تحرير الأرض، والتحرير له أولوياته المعروفة، وهذا ما يحل مشكلة المحتاجين من أصلها التي ما هي إلا أحد أعراض الاحتلال وضياع الأرض، وإلا سيظل شعبنا محتاجا ومحروما إلى ما شاء الله، ومع الفوارق في الفداحة وقدر المعاناة، يظل حال الشعب الفلسطيني كحال غيره من شعوب المنطقة التي اتخذت من المقاومة والصمود طريقا، فها هي الجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران ترزح تحت حصار خانق منذ قرابة الأربعين عاما، ولبنان يتحمل من الحصار والضغوط الأمريكيين بسبب تمسك حزب الله بالثوابت الدينية والوطنية وحقوق لبنان في أرضه وثرواته من غاز وغيره، وتتعرض سوريا لحرب كونية ضروس منذ عشر سنوات بسبب مواقفها الوطنية والقومية الداعمة للمقاومات في لبنان وفلسطين على حد سواء، واليوم جاؤوها بقانون قيصر الظالم ليستكمل الحصار الاقتصادي على شعبها الصامد، فهذا هو حال شعبنا وهذه هي ضريبة التحرير، وإلا فلنرتضي أن تصير حركة حماس تنتظر الفتات من تحويلات مالية “إسرائيلية” كما السلطة الوطنية الفلسطينية العتيدة.

خاتمة


الحديث يطول فيما ورد في المقال من نقاط “ونصائح”، لكن ملخص القول إن د. أحمد دعا في غير موضع من مقاله إلى استخلاص العبر والدروس من تجارب الماضي، لكن الظاهر أن د. أحمد لم يستخلص العبر من المثال الشاخص أمامنا ممثلا في مسار منظمة التحرير وما وصلت إليه، ناهيكم عن مسارات المتخاذلين الآخرين من حركات ونظام عربي متهالك، فإذا كان هذا هو المنهج فلا لوم على الذين سقطوا سقوطا مدويا في عامنا هذا الذي يصح وصفه بعام الخيانات.

*كاتب فلسطيني وباحث سياسي

%d bloggers like this: