An important step that requires a comprehensive vision

Actions such as signing the Rome Statute, applying to join the International Criminal Court and preparing to make a declaration determining the period during which prosecution for the crimes committed by Israel from 13 June last year (including Israel’s latest attack on Gaza), will be executed are qualitative and courageous; they deserve appreciation, although there is no need to thank anyone for doing what is their duty. These actions will also include prosecuting Israel for its illegal settlements; they are regarded as an ongoing crime for which Israel can be held accountable retroactively because there is no statute of limitations in this respect.

The Palestinian performance before joining the ICC did not inspire confidence that this would actually take place, because President Mahmoud Abbas and his aides did not give priority to unity; instead, they submitted a unilateral project with a low ceiling but no national consensus. Even in its latest version, the project harmed a number of national rights regarding key issues, the most important of which are Jerusalem, borders and refugees. Those who want to confront the occupation and be victorious must surely prepare and arrange internal Palestinian affairs, as that is the first condition for victory.

It seems that the Palestinian leadership relied on European support for the draft resolution, especially from France, and hoped that America would say yes or abstain, rather than use its veto once it looked like the resolution would get the required nine votes in favour. Although the French representative at the UN Security Council said that his country voted in favour in order to prevent Palestine’s accession to the International Criminal Court, this meant that France recognised one right at the expense of another. America again showed its true colours by revealing itself to be more pro-Israel than most Israelis by making great efforts to persuade countries not to vote in favour of the resolution; Nigeria obliged and helped to swing the vote against the Palestinians.

For the US, the Palestinian Authority’s ICC application crosses all red lines. Washington wants the Palestinian negotiators to resume the sterile talks without any guarantees or commitments, giving Israel the complete freedom to implement its own aggressive and racist policies as well as settlement expansion.

America, Europe and some Arab countries demanded that the draft resolution should be postponed until after the Israeli General Election. The Palestinian leadership hinted that it might consider this if the major European capitals pledged to recognise the State of Palestinian in the event that the resolution was not passed and if it did not lead to the resumption of negotiations on the basis of a new set of references. However, the governments in question would not make such a pledge.

If the Palestinians did accept the postponement request in order to give negotiations another opportunity for the Israelis to use them as a cover to expand its settlements without making any promises or assurances, it would eliminate what little credibility the Palestinian Authority has left. It has already lost the confidence and trust of the people after chasing after the so-called peace process for so long and failing to achieve anything; it also delayed submitting the draft resolution and did not present it to the PLO Executive Committee, the Fatah Central Committee or any other Palestinian institution, in order to please the US. These negotiations only brought disappointment to the Palestinians and various other political forces. America’s stubbornness and inflexibility reached the point of John Kerry threatening to use the veto against any draft resolution that sets a deadline for ending the occupation, regardless of its wording.

We are now facing a new situation, whether or not the Palestinian leadership wanted it; in any case, they must behave differently because the ICC membership application will be approved automatically after 60 days. This will change the position drastically as the leadership can no longer decline or stop the process; if it tries, it will lose everything. As a member of the ICC, legal matters will be in the hands of its officials and subject to various forces, human rights activists and organisations in particular. Every Palestinian will be able to file a lawsuit and request the prosecution of Israeli officials and individuals for crimes committed by the state. They will be able to do so retrospectively from the date of the establishment of the court on 1 July 2002.

Membership of the ICC may be a deterrent for Israel committing crimes in the future. To get some idea of the extent of how this might be a situation changer, consider the fact that hundreds of Israeli soldiers have apparently signed a petition to their government expressing their fear of being prosecuted for the crimes they committed in last summer’s attack on the Gaza Strip.

This explains US and Israeli anger, threats and retaliatory measures, and the counter-claims that they will file lawsuits against Palestinian officials. However, Israel is not a member of the ICC (nor is the US), but it has committed all kinds of crimes and will not go unpunished; the means for this will lie in the hands of every Palestinian.

The move towards membership of the ICC will mark the beginning of the PA’s escape from the Oslo straitjacket, even if it is very late and a reluctant reaction to Israeli and US intransigence. It will also be beneficial if it is coupled with a comprehensive vision that takes into consideration the need to review past experiences and change the ground rules of the whole conflict, at least since Oslo.

Seeking to internationalise the Palestinian cause by obtaining a UN resolution, being recognised by individual countries and parliaments, including the European Parliament, and joining international organisations are all important steps. However, internationalisation alone and requests to join the ICC and other international institutions are merely qualitative steps that are insufficient if they are not accompanied by other measures, such as making Palestinian unity a priority. To do this the leadership and the Palestinian Legislative Council must be activated as well as other institutions; elections should be held at all levels; a common interests programme must be developed; a truly national unity government should be created; and the obligations determined by the Oslo Accords (including political, security and economic requirements) must be reconsidered. The latter is especially important given Oslo’s complete failure and the Israeli government’s violations and failure to fulfil its obligations.

The strategies to reinforce and strengthen the people’s resilience and human presence in Palestine do not end with restoring the Arab, Islamic, liberal and humanitarian dimensions to the issue. There is a need to organise the resistance, engage in a multi-faceted boycott of Israeli goods and activate international resolutions, especially The Hague’s advisory opinion on the Apartheid Wall and the UN’s Goldstone Report. The Palestinians’ case is based on its justice and moral superiority as well as the presence of half of the total Palestinian population in their homeland and their determination to fight in order to restore their national rights no matter how many sacrifices they have to make or how long it takes. The diplomatic strategy alone is not enough, while resistance on its own is fighting for the sake of it. All needs to take place within a broad vision.

There are still concerns, because the leadership seems to be hesitant and has the intention of re-presenting the draft resolution to the Security Council in its original format, according to PA Foreign Minister Riyad Al-Malki. This would be very serious because, although the resolution was revised and amended, it still severely restricts the Palestinians’ national rights and was adopted unilaterally without any consultation with legitimate institutions or factions. Moreover, an insistence on proposing the flawed resolution creates more differences, strife and division. It also encourages the US, Israel and others to intensify their pressure on the PA to support an initiative that may remove what is left of the draft resolution. Although this is called “the Arab draft” it is in fact a French version which includes a lot of the draft resolution proposed by France which has somehow turned into an “Arab” project.

It is inevitable that the rules of the game will change radically; there will be no resumption of bilateral negotiations under American sponsorship, even if it is done under false international cover. The path that needs to be taken begins with Palestinian unity based on nationalism, democracy and genuine partnership as well change in the power matrix. The path will end with negotiations in the context of an international conference based on international law and UN resolutions in which all concerned regional and international partners are present. At that point, talks will be held to implement the legitimate international resolutions rather than to negotiate them away.

Translated from the Arabic published by the Palestinian Center for Policy Research and Strategic Studies – Masarat – 6 January, 2015

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