Returning all of Palestine to the negotiations

A few days ago, I spoke at the Palestinian Centre for Policy Research and Strategic Studies “Masarat” Conference held in al-Bireh, titled “The Future of Negotiations”. Also scheduled to speak at the conference was PLO Executive committee member Saeb Erekat, the senior Palestinian negotiator. Bassam As-Salhi, General Secretary of the Palestinian People’s Party, has also spoken about the same topic.

The paper I was going to present was the product of earlier work I had prepared as a draft for the Palestinian Strategic Thinking Group. It was discussed by many experts and politicians, which makes my paper more of a collective work. However, due to the fact that the latest round of talks have been going on for months, I decided that the paper needed to be updated. At first glance, the current impasse reached by the negotiations seems to be the main factor that necessitated an update, even though it does not change much in the negotiating process road map, as the current situation is neither surprising nor new. In fact, any scientific or intellectual consideration of the negotiation process does not require much following-up of the details, as they are repetitive and stem from rules and characteristics that control the negotiating process in a mundane and routine manner.

If the newest update in relations between Israel and the Palestinians over the past two years is the latter heading to international organisations and the internationalisation of the issue, then the truth of the matter is that the importance of such a move is diminishing as it is becoming merely a negotiating tactic, not a strategy for an alternative struggle. The indications suggest that the Palestinian strategy is simple: always be willing to back down or freeze demands in exchange for a political gain in the context of the talks only to resurrect them when they are upset that the negotiations reach an impasse. The Palestinian option remains the same old (Oslo) process and approaching it in different ways. There is no strategic decision regarding the approach, tools or negotiation, or alternative non-negotiation frameworks; instead, going to the UN may be frozen for the sake of certain issues, such as the release of prisoners.

What I find worth paying attention to are the growing calls from various Palestinian groups to re-define the Palestinian cause and review the goals of the negotiations. The Palestinian Authority created by Oslo has failed to renew the legitimacy and membership of the Palestinian National Council (since 1988, in fact) and, therefore, has failed to renew the legitimacy of the highest executive bodies, including the end of the Palestinian president’s term of office as well as the Legislative Council, and the Palestinian government. As such, it has now become necessary for the Palestinian position to be addressed in other contexts, including such popular forums as conferences and seminars.

On more than one occasion there has been a call for “redefining the Palestinian national project”, a review of the entire concept of the Palestinian state. I believe that this was apparent at the conference held by the Arab Centre for Research and Policy Studies at the end of last year in Doha, where hundreds of Palestinian writers, researchers and politicians met. The call was made to reconsider the position of all Palestinians, including those in the territories occupied in 1948 and in the diaspora, as well as making it a priority to involve all sectors of the Palestinian people before the resumption of negotiations or the adoption of any political vision for their future; I believe that there are similar calls still being made.

At the “Masarat” conference, Nadim Rouhana submitted a paper which was published recently by the Journal of Palestine Studies. In it Rouhana emphasised the importance of abandoning the national definition (associated with the idea of the state) in favour of the issue of liberation from colonialism. At the Israeli Apartheid Week conference in Akkah before “Masarat”, organised by the “Falasteeniyat” group, there was an emphasis on finding a unified national movement all over Palestine and for all the Palestinians.

I believe that the most significant change in the environment of negotiations is the growing popular doubt regarding the idea of establishing a Palestinian state on a small part of historic Palestine as the main focus of the political process. The belief is now in renewing the PLO and the Palestinian national movement as a priority in order for the project to express the views of and represent all Palestinians: those in the land occupied first in 1948; those occupied in 1967; and those in the diaspora. Such a movement would produce frameworks and leaders that will determine the negotiating options and reflect the interests of all Palestinians and all of Palestine in talks with the Israelis. It would, indeed, return all of Palestine to the negotiations.

Translated from Al Ghad newspaper, 15 April, 2014

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