+++ "A Palestinian state in 1999?" by Sherine Bahaa, Al -Ahram Weekly 30 July -
5 August 1998
EXCERPTS:
Some observers believe that Arafat's threat of declaring a Palestinian
state unilaterally is only a tactic to pressure Israeli Prime Minister
Binyamin Netanyahu to honour the Oslo Accords.AL-AHRAM:PALESTINIANS STATE IN 1999?, AGAINST EGYPT-ISRAEL NORMALIZATION
+++ "A Palestinian state in 1999?" by Sherine Bahaa, Al -Ahram Weekly 30 July -
5 August 1998
EXCERPTS:
Some observers believe that Arafat's threat of declaring a Palestinian
state unilaterally is only a tactic to pressure Israeli Prime Minister
Binyamin Netanyahu to honour the Oslo Accords. "Arafat is trying to
convince the Israelis to negotiate now," Palestinian analyst Ali Jarbawi
told Reuters. "He is telling them, 'Please don't make me do this.' ... He
wants to continue with the peace process until it yields a Palestinian
state [with the consent of the two parties]."
"If you are the underdog, if you try your best to accommodate, if you
accept concessions and then nothing happens but more Jewish settlements, it
might be a good strategy to blow it up, blow it up and wait until it
settles," Jarbawi said.
He added that, "Mr Arafat, who is not a healthy man, may choose to
declare a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza to complete his
life's work before he dies."
... The Israeli premier said recently that a unilateral declaration of a
Palestinian state would be "an act of war."
Israeli newspapers quoted officials as saying that among the options
Israel would consider in case Arafat declared a Palestinian state
unilaterally are: annex those areas in the West Bank that the Palestinians
do not control, set up a blockade of the new state or send Israeli troops
to recapture the self-rule areas in the West Bank and Gaza. In the worst
case scenario, every road intersection in the West Bank and Gaza would be a
potential clash point between Palestinian and Israeli troops.
. . .
Marwan Bishara, a Palestinian journalist and researcher, described the
idea of declaring statehood unilaterally as "unwise". ... The declaration
would be the pretext for Netanyahu to annex any territory that is not
currently under Palestinian self-rule, or almost 90 per cent of West Bank.
This would mark the end of the peace process and get him [Netanyahu] off
the hook."
However, Bishara said he did not expect Arafat to take such a move, given
his desire not to anger the US administration. "The immediate strategy of
the Palestinian Authority is to stick to the US role in the peace process,"
he said. "Palestinians think that however bad America's position may be, it
is still better than dealing directly with Israel."
Other analysts .. think Arafat should ... declare a Palestinian state.
. . .
Mahgoub Omar, an Egyptian expert on Palestinian affairs, told Al-Ahram
Weekly. "Such a move would change the current pattern of negotiations to
that between an occupying nation and a state striving against occupation."
According to Omar, if worst came to worst and clashes erupted in the
Palestinian territories, Israel would be the losing party . . . "Imposing a
[tougher] siege on Palestinians would not make much difference because they
are already living under siege. In short, there is nothing new which
Netanyahu can do to the Palestinians."
. . .
Bishara added that it was untenable to declare a state in a few months
when all that is under Palestinian control right now is nothing but
isolated and small pockets or cantons. . . . "Even Arafat would not be able
to fly his helicopter from Nablus to Hebron anymore," Bishara said. "He
would simply be locked in Gaza for an unlimited time."
Hamas, the PA's main opposition in the self-rule areas, also opposes
Arafat's intention to declare a state unilaterally. "There is a big
difference between words and down-to-earth procedures," Mahmoud Zahhar,
Hamas' Gaza spokesman, told the Weekly from his home in Gaza. "We
[Palestinians] should first agree on the main principles of the
constitution of the future state, if it is ever declared."
Zahhar repeated Hamas' opposition to the Oslo Accords and called for the
unconditional release of all detainees in Palestinian jails. He added that
it was necessary for the Palestinian factions to come together to discuss
possible options of resisting occupation and the expansion of Jewish
settlements. "We also need to adopt a democratic, multi-party system which
should wipe out the left-overs of the past five years of corruption and
mismanagement," Zahar said in reference to the PA.
Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin had earlier said he was opposed to the
declaration of a Palestinian state while Israel remains an occupation power
in the West Bank and Gaza. He wondered what use a Palestinian state would
be if Israel continued to control the movement of Palestinians and if they
were not able to enjoy any of their rights as citizens of an independent
state.
+++ Soapbox:"A people's peace", by Salah Issa *, Al-Ahram Weekly 30 July-5
August 1998
*This week's Soapbox speaker is a columnist and a leading figure of the
Egyptian left.
FULL ARTICLE:
The grassroots movement that sprang up in the aftermath of the 1979 Camp
David Accord in support of a continued boycott of Israel, has wide appeal.
Its ranks include intellectuals, trade unions and federations whose members
vary widely in terms of ideology and orientation: right- and left-wing,
nationalist and Islamist, ruling party and opposition, proponents and
opponents of Camp David, advocates of coexistence with Israel and those who
believe such coexistence is unlikely. Despite these differences, however,
there is a general underlying consensus opposed to the normalisation of
relations with Israeli civil society until a fair and comprehensive peace
agreement is reached, resulting in Israel's withdrawal from all occupied
land and the establishment of a Palestinian state with its capital in
Jerusalem. This movement is, therefore, a peaceful one, aimed at bringing
pressure to bear on Israeli negotiators to respond to Arab demands. Its
thrust is strictly opposed to the goals of those who advocate the
normalisation of relations with Israel at the grassroots level, who are
prepared to pay the price of peace { IMRA note: The writer assumes there
aren't mutual gains in normalization} before securing it, and who are
encouraging Netanyahu's policies, which have recreated a belligerent
environment in the Middle East. As careful observation shows, the call to
boycott Israel at the popular level is in fact a step on the path to peace,
while the efforts to speed up normalisation at the popular level can only
lead to war.
Dr. Joseph Lerner, Co-Director
IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)(mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-9-7411645
INTERNET ADDRESS: imra@netvision.net.il
pager 03-6750750 subscriber 4811
|
