DFLP Site
The Web
 
 
 

Articles & Analyses

 
About the Promised "Regional Solution"
By: Moatasem Hamadeh
May 24, 2017
 

The regional solution is presented to be as a substitute for the international conference and dropping the resolutions of international legitimacy, reinforcing the American patronage and normalizing of the Arab-Israeli relations at the expense of the Palestinian rights.

In the next few hours, we will arrive at a very important political station, which is the visit of US President Trump to Riyadh.

The agenda of the visit is unusual. It will not be limited to an American meeting with the leadership of the Saudi Arabia. Besides this meeting, there will be an American-Gulf summit, and an Arab-American summit, that will be practiced by some Muslim countries, and perhaps an Arab- American regional summit, including along with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait.

In these summits several files will be discussed, one of them the US cooperation with Saudi Arabia, and with the Gulf cooperation Council (GCC), which will raise the issue of relations with Iran, as well as the issues of «terrorism», which will raise the issue of Hezbollah, and the most important , is that one of these meetings will discuss the Arab-Israeli «peace deal», that Trump has confirmed his intention to accomplish it and end the conflict in the region for the benefit of full-time to serve the American interests, through the Arab- Israeli cooperation, against the «terrorism» as the first threat to the region. So if we go back to the reports that were circulated in the US Congress; Iran is "the first state that sponsors the terrorism in the world." The meaning of this regional cooperation against terrorism is therefore largely understood.

But the important question that remains for us, without underestimating the other questions:

Why reaching to an Arab-Israeli deal in a "regional solution" paves the way for an Israeli-Palestinian solution?

The Arab summit's initiative in Beirut (2002), which the recent Amman summit reaffirmed it, Firstly, talks about an Arab- Israeli solution, followed by Western- Israeli normalization, as well as an Israeli normalization with Muslim countries secondly and thirdly as the next US project in the Trump's case reflects the mechanism. This therefore puts us before a new formula with certain functions.

The regional solution that discussed the conflict with Israel would be an alternative to an international conference sponsored by the United Nations and the five permanent members of the Security Council.

• The regional solution will keep the negotiations and the solutions under the exclusive care of United States, which insists on the sole hold of Arab region.

• The regional solution will be based on the American «ideas» alone, as a legal hostage for any solution (substitute for the international reference) and the mechanisms by the United States with the Israeli side (an alternative to mechanisms that ensure the legitimate national rights of the Palestinian people).

• The regional solution would open the lines of the Arab-Israeli normalization before reaching to the solution for the Palestinian issue, which would mean emptying the Beirut initiative of its content and canceling the positions of Arab summits, in favor of the commitment to Israel's decisions at the time of Sharon, Olmert and Netanyahu, the Arab-Israeli normalization first, then the solution with Palestinians.

This is a part of the issue.

The other side, is no less important than the previous one.

As the American administration conducted is in-depth studies for the Palestinian file, whether through the rounds of the head of the US intelligence in Ramallah, and the American envoy Jason Greenblatt, or the US ambassador's reports in Tel Aviv, or through the US consulate in occupied Jerusalem, or in summoning the head of Palestinian intelligence to Washington, or the preliminary rounds with more than one Palestinian delegation.

The American administration has come out with a big conclusion which says: Abu Mazen, whose popularity has recently deteriorated and is so weak even in uniting Fatah under his leadership, who has failed to resolve his conflict with Hamas, does not have the strength to do what is required from him, as a requirement to reach to a solution with the Israeli side, and in order to respond to the US calls, he urgently needs to a political cover that can be provided only by the Arab countries, especially Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, and also he needs an Islamic cover, which can be provided by Turkey and maybe Morocco.

In addition to the nine conditions which were conveyed to him by Greenblatt (which is basically an Israeli conditions), which talk about: «not to stop the settlement», stopping the incitement, re-formulating the educational programs, stopping the martyrs' and prisoners' families salaries, and to stop the flow of funds into Gaza strip ... (all of these are conditions that affect the formulation of the internal Palestinian situation and the rehabilitation it to meet the entitlements of the American deal). There are other requirements at the regional and international level, which Abu Mazen should qualify himself to comfort them, including the issue of Jerusalem, and its future (a unified and eternal capital of the State of Israel even if not transferred the US Embassy to it at this stage ). In the same context , are the fate of the holy shrine and other Islamic sanctuaries in the occupied city.

Also there is Including the issue of Palestinian refugee which the Beirut initiative(2002) dropped their rights to return and called for a "compatible solution" with the Israeli side. in addition to that there is the issue of borders and the security measures, with Jordan on the one hand, and with Egypt on the other, including the decision on the fate of the Dead Sea, where Israel is working to share it with Jordan only, and to annex the occupied Palestinian areas to remove the Palestinian entity (whatever its name) ) out of the equation. Under these titles, there will be others, but they are fundamental and even central, such as economic cooperation, and the future of Palestinian economy, the movement of travelers, and, last but not least, the features of the "new Palestinian entity", especially as Israel calls for a complex solution in which Gaza strip is "the heart of the Palestinian state", and the Palestinian West Bank to be a self-governing territory, in a bilateral relationship that links it to Jordan.

Does this absolve the official Palestinian political leadership from its responsibilities, that it evades from its responsibilities and cast them on Arab countries, which are consistent with American-Israeli ideas.

In one word, we say that we are not exempting the official political leadership from its responsibility for were the scenarios of the solutions and their projects have reached to.

*Which it is the PA pointed out, and expressed its willingness to give up the refugees' right to return to their homes and property, and it only adhered to the right of compensation and to "return" to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as a final solution.

*It which agreed in Oslo, to consider that solving the permanent status issues would be as a final solution, so that it would have no other demands, specifically, the right of refugees to return.

*It is, it which wrote off the issue of our people in the 48 regions as a part of the Palestinian issue and considered them as "Israeli citizens".

* It is, it which agreed on the principle of land exchange, which dropped the 4th June borders as a basis for drawing state borders in the interim framework.

* It is, it which agreed on Jerusalem, as the "capital of two states" in a form that allows Israel to take over most parts of East Jerusalem, without the Palestinian side to have sovereignty over the rest of the neighborhoods.

* It is ,it which accepted a foreigner existence on the borders of Palestinian entity, to monitor the movement of transients, so that the Palestinians of the diaspora will not be able to return to the West Bank and Gaza without prior Israeli consent, which deletes even the idea of "return to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."

Let's think a bit.

• Why was the official Palestinian leadership in Ramallah delighted which President Trump and considered his meeting with Abu Mazen to be very successful?

• Why does the Palestinian leadership show its willingness, without a condition for a trilateral summit with Netanyahu and (Trump)?

• Why the official leadership is praising the consultations with Amman, Cairo and Riyadh on cooperation with Washington in solving the Palestinian issue in the framework of a "peace deal", which is often referred to as a suspicious optimism?

Last but not least, to what basis was the Palestinian presidency relying on, in its assertion that 2017 would be the year to resolve the Palestinian issue?

There must be adequate answers.

To be continued…

 
Notes:Moatasem Hamadeh is a member of the Political Bureau of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine
Translated by: Manal Mansour
Revised by: Ibrahim Motlaq
 

Share |
dflp-palestine[at]dflp-palestine.net
copyright © 2004 - dflp-palestine.net