SPHR: Only free people can negotiate

BY OMAR CHAABAN & DINA EL-KASSABY

CONTRIBUTORS

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 12TH, 2009

Original Post: http://ubyssey.ca/ideas/?p=9069

During a recent news conference, Chief Palestinian Negotiator Saeb Erekat declared that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has to “tell his people the truth, that with the continuation of settlement activities, the two-state solution is no longer an option.”

But Erekat, Abbas and his associates in the Palestinian Authority did not consult with the Palestinian people when they first opted to negotiate a “two-state solution.” In fact, the views of the majority of Palestinians in the Diaspora were dismissed and their concerns were ignored.

The Palestinian refugees (who, at around six million, form the largest segment of the Palestinian population) do not wish to continue living in refugee camps as second- or third-class human beings, nor are they interested in resettlement or living in the isolated and segregated ghettos of the Israel-created West Bank.

Nobody can logically assert that an occupied and oppressed people must converse and negotiate with their occupier/oppressor. As the acclaimed South African anti-Apartheid leader Nelson Mandela declared, “Only free men can negotiate,” and the Palestinian people are most certainly not free. For over six decades, they have been subjected to brutal policies of ethnic cleansing, occupation, dehumanization, segregation, land confiscation, collective punishment, mass arrest, systematic torture and house demolition.

Nonetheless, the Palestinian “leadership” ignored Mandela’s principle and decided to negotiate “peace” with their victimizer. In a famous speech given in front of the UN, Yasser Arafat, late chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), said, “Today I have come bearing an olive branch and a freedom-fighter’s gun. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat: Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand.”

Arafat was willing to follow the path of non-violence and negotiate peace with the Israel on behalf of his people. It was his first option.

Exploiting the military weakness of the Palestinians and the PLO, Israel conned Arafat and his associates, dragging them from one peace conference to the other in order to demonstrate their “interest in peace.”

In 1991, with the blessing of the US, Arafat went to the Madrid Conference in good faith, only to encounter Israel’s demands that he unconditionally grant unprecedented concessions. In 1993, he succumbed to international pressure and signed the infamous Oslo Accords, which led to the creation of the Palestinian Authority and formalized his 1988 recognition of Israel’s right to exist. In 2000, he was offered considerably less than 50 per cent of the West Bank for a Palestinian state, with Abu Dis (a little town in the suburbs of Jerusalem) as its capital. No mention of UN resolutions, no reference to the Geneva Convention, no consideration of the Palestinian refugees, and absolutely no sovereignty over Muslim and Christian holy sites in historic East Jerusalem.

As salt to the wound, Israel Prime Minister Ehud Barak also demanded that Arafat sign an “end of conflict” clause that would bypass all international legal rulings, UN resolutions and other “inconveniences” in exchange for minor concessions on Israel’s side—Palestinians could have sovereignty over, but not independence in, certain areas of the West Bank and Gaza.

Peace will not be realized because it is being orchestrated outside the realm of international law and contrary to the consensus of the international community. Only by granting the Palestinians their inalienable right to national self-determination and pressuring Israel to adhere to International Humanitarian Law can there be solution. Israel’s conception of peace is based on amoral considerations and, as it has become clear in the past few decades, is doomed to fail.

Omar Chaaban is the president of Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR) and Dina El-Kassaby is SPHR’s VP of public relations.