Extremist dictates
Negotiations over several weeks between all the Palestinian organizations in the territories, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, raised hopes that they would form an ideological basis for a new manner of political engagement. The draft document of Palestinian understandings, as published this week in the Lebanese newspaper As Safir, is far from an agreement. However, it is evidence of a world view, and as such it is disappointing, because it is difficult to find within it any elements with which it would be possible to develop a serious political dialogue.
On the practical side, Hamas and Islamic Jihad said they do not even accept the principles of the draft, and their spokesmen made clear they would continue the armed struggle and suicide bombings. But even without the rejection by these organizations of the main tenets of the document, it is doubtful that the Israeli public could accept principles that include, among other things, a right of return formulated in much more vehement language than that used during March's Arab League summit in Beirut.
No less problematic are the definitions of Palestinian goals - the establishment of a state on all the land occupied since 1967 and an uncompromising stand on the right of return - does not prevent anyone from regarding these as interim goals. The clarification means that the organizations that sign the agreement do not regard it as anything more than a temporary commitment, part of a doctrine of stages, in which everything that can be taken should be, but without giving up the final goal - a Palestinian state on all of the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan.
Principles such as these undermine the trust on which any negotiations - never mind agreements - must be based. The Palestinian Authority's goal is to bring all the factions under one roof, with the broadest possible public support. But it could, if these principles are accepted, foil the more important goal - to achieve a Palestinian state that lives in peace alongside Israel.
The positive elements in the draft, including the need for general institutional reform, and establishing a multi-party democratic state, free of corruption and based on the principles of equality, the rule of law, separation of powers, and guaranteed civil liberties for all, cannot be read separately from the combative elements in the document.
Israel has an interest in having as a neighbor an independent, sovereign, democratic state, with civil liberties for its citizens. But even without interfering in the type of regime to be established, Israel must be able to speak with a central Palestinian authority that can impose its policies on all the factions, including the Islamic extremists. Most Israelis would support dialogue with such an authority about setting up a state. But that same Israeli public cannot put up with the general threats that are present in the understandings as they have been published so far.
If the Palestinian Authority wants to construct an appropriate platform for political negotiations, it cannot allow the extremist organizations to continue dictating the agenda - not on the ground, and not at the negotiating table.
Dallo Ha'aretz del 15 agosto.




Rispondi Citando
