Condemnation and collaboration on genocide

Recent statements by PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Chief Negotiator Saeb Erekat evoked the continuous contradictions reflected both in changes to Palestinian territory and demography. Despite invoking statistics of Palestinian civilians murdered in Gaza during Israel’s latest colonial massacre, the tone of complacency was evident in the remarks uttered, with both Abbas and Erekat attempting to derive legitimacy from imperialist-negotiated concessions and UN complicity; the predictable outcome being a continued emphasis on the two-state conspiracy to the detriment of Palestinians.

According to the Times of Israel’s report on a recent interview with Erekat, the main emphasis of negotiations on behalf of the PA was the acquiescence to the concept of Israel retaining massive swathes of Palestinian territory in a hypothetical two-state scenario. As reportedly stated by Erekat; compared to Israel’s “getting 78 per cent of mandatory Palestine; I’m getting 22 per cent”.

Erekat’s statement was reflected in Abbas’ insistence upon eliminating references to settler-colonialism in his discourse to the UN. “Israel refuses to end its occupation of the State of Palestine since 1967, but rather seeks its continuation and entrenchment, and rejects the Palestinian state and refuses to find a just solution to the plight of Palestinian refugees.”

With regards to genocide, Erekat said: “I know Israelis are provoked for the fact that someone is using the term genocide.” Again the emphasis seems to be on creating a source of appeasement for the oppressor resulting in the usual condemnation of Palestinian armed resistance, despite an earlier precise elaboration regarding the effects of Israel’s genocidal intent upon the indigenous population.

While allegedly creating a furore with some Israeli ministers, the statements uttered can hardly be considered excessive provocation or retaliation against the Zionist settler-colonial state. Heavy losses incurred by Palestinians in Gaza, while included as reference, are void of Palestinian narrative. Instead, the data is a reflection of the United Nations’ irrelevance – a mechanical dissemination of information based upon the imperialist organisation’s willingness to condone Israel’s murderous colonial expansion. The constant evocation of a departure point that depicts Palestine as an appendage, rather than the central issue, is further expressed in Abbas’ discussion of Israel’s “predetermination” within the context of the negotiations.

Abbas said: “There is neither credibility nor seriousness in negotiations in which Israel predetermines the results via settlement activities and the occupation’s brutalities.” Missing from the statement is the PA’s willing participation in various forms of political violence which also contributed to the massacres unleashed upon Palestinian civilians in Gaza, among other ramifications such as the dwindling territory, the exclusion of Palestinian refugees, ridiculing the right of return, as well as the insistence upon living “side by side” with a settler-colonial entity that requires absolute elimination if Palestine is to be reclaimed.

Predetermination, therefore, cannot be perceived as a characteristic pertaining solely to Israel. Rather, it is an additional issue of complicity, in which colonial and imperialist violence, in collaboration with the PA, have created a structure of deceit upon which narratives are internationally disseminated, in order to ensure a prolongation of oppression to fulfil the Zionist pursuits of both territory and ideology.

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