The Web

Articles & Analyses

The Death of Oslo and Two State Solution
By: Moatasem Hamadeh
February 19, 2018

The Executive Committee and its chairman responded to the pressures of the Palestinian street, and its national and democratic forces, abandoned the American "two-state solution" and reaffirmed its adherence to the right of the Palestinian people to an independent and sovereign Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital on borders before June 4, 1967; and the refugee right of return under resolution 194. This move assumes the disengagement from the American solution and its requirements.

In return, this step has its requirements and obligations, as It is not a replacement of statement in other one, but a replacement of strategy and program, with alternative ones, which are the national strategy based on the completion of the national program (as approved by the Palestinian national institutions) that has formed an example of the unity of Palestinian political parties, (as stated in the National Accord Document, for example, 2006), and in the Cairo Declaration of 22 November 2017.

Thus, this program is a title for the unity of the people, its political forces, its rights, and its struggle in all places of its existence.

The formulation of this unity is not a rhetorical issue, but a political straggling one of the first class, which assumes the execution of the required alterations, both in the official leadership policy and in the policies of the Palestinian Authority, at the national level, and at the programmatic level.

The American "two-state solution", which the Palestinian official leadership has bet on, since President GW Bush launched it in 2001 and was adopted by the 2003 road map plan, is based on a strategy that adopts the bilateral negotiations as a single option, under the sponsorship of the United States, to establish two states, a Palestinian state, as a national homeland for the Palestinians, and the State of Israel, as a national homeland for the so-called Jewish people, that are supposed to live side by side in peace, with: a cancelation for the right of return, an ambiguous solution to the question of Jerusalem, security obligations and economic dependence that would cancel the signs of Palestinian state’s sovereignty over its people and land, by a series of obstacles, Imposed on it, under the pretext of ensuring the security and safety of Israel.

Now we have returned to the clear and frank words, as stipulated by the Palestinian national program. This requires the restoration of the unity of the people, as we have said, and the unity of its political forces to ensure the unity of its rights, destiny and future.

Unity is not only by the building of national institutions on a coalition basis, in which all forces participate without exception, as one of the great foundations of national unity, at the level of national institutions, is the institutionalization of the principle of partnership, under the banner of a sacred motto launched by the Democratic Front «Partners in the blood... partners in the decision».

Partnership here doesn’t mean sharing power and distributing it to political forces. This is a power-sharing policy, based on the principle of exclusivity that is not just for one party, but also for two parties or more.

Partnership means drawing up mechanisms for the struggle of the Palestinian people, respecting these decisions and mechanisms and working under them, so that the experiences of the Palestinian situation, will not be repeated, with the decisions of the Central Council on March 5, 2015, and so that the fate of the decisions of January 15, 2018, to not be as the same fate of them, which is ignoring them by referring them to the study and planning committees, which are committees that don’t study or plan, and if they do, the results of their study will not be taken into consideration, in the light of the policy of ignoring and marginalizing institutions, in favor of an individual power and the “kitchen” authority.

This entrance is a must, to ensure that things take their proper course under the national program, as this is not the first time that national consensus positions have return the consideration to the national program (this was achieved in 2006, and was repeated in Cairo on November 22, 2017) without respecting these positions and their resulted decisions and adopted programs.

The withdrawal from the American "two-state solution" in favor of the national program assumes, first and foremost, the complete disengagement from the Oslo Accords, and stop betting on some margins, which could allow some groups to sneak back into some Oslo formulas in twisted ways; as there is no link, at all, between the national program and the Oslo Accords.

The withdrawal from the American "two-state solution" in favor of the national program, also means the reconsideration to the national movement of the Palestinian people, as a national liberation movement for national rights against occupation and settlement, thus moving through awareness and practice from the claim of partnership with the Israeli occupation, to the admission that we are a people and an authority who are under occupation and who have been exposed to all forms of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity, with all the implications of this concept of slogans, mechanisms and methods of struggle. Thus moving away from the illusion that we “negotiate with hand, and build authority by the other one”, as by the admission of the PA officials themselves, the PA has become an agent for occupation, that is constrained politically, security and economically, and not a project intended to build an independent and fully sovereign state; which supposes to reformulate the structure and functions of the PA, and the objectives of its existence.

There is a big difference between being an "authority", bound by the Oslo Accords and the Paris Economic Protocol, and an authority of a national liberation movement to resist the occupation and build the foundations for the establishment of an independent state.

We do not believe that the restructuring of the PA and its functions and mechanisms of work, is a matter of administration, but it is a political and struggling issue, which necessitates redrawing its political program, to serve the general national political program, and redrawing its social program, to serve wider Palestinian social groups, involved in the struggle, after it has become a tool of the powerful and ruling bureaucratic class, and it has extended its partnership to a group of businessmen, at the expense of its national partnership with the people and its national and democratic political forces.

Restoring the position of the liberation movement also assumes the mobilization of the energies of the entire Palestinian people as one people with one issue, who has unified national rights, and who is struggling in different ways against one enemy, the Zionist project, with its various manifestations, in 1948, Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza Strip and the areas of asylum and diaspora.

Thus, as the Palestinian Arabs inside Israel, on March 30, 1976 (which became a national day for the Palestinian land), raised their motto: the PLO is their sole legitimate representative, the organization is supposed to restore this position, in both sections: the program and the struggle, so that the entire people to restore this motto, regardless of the place of its residence and the circumstances of its struggle, with the full realization that the Palestinian national program, in its original form, presented itself as a program for all the people, and under its roof the Palestinian people is united after a time of dispersion and rupture.

Thus, disengaging from the Oslo Accords, withdrawing from the American "two-state solution", and the reconsideration to the national program, assumes to reconsider the Palestinian institution, the PLO, as the sole legal representative of the Palestinian people with what this imposes of reformation for the relation with Palestinians in Israel, as well as the reconsideration to the refugees' right to return, with all what means, in order to disengage from all alternative solutions, projects and initiatives for this right.

The national battle after the Central Committee's decisions on January 15, 2018, oversteps the issue of the disengagement from Oslo and their commitments, towards the disengagement completely from a political strategy that has revealed its failure by the "Century Deal", in favor of return to the Palestinian struggle program, the program of return, self-determination and independence, which means all Palestinian people’s program.

Moatasem Hamadeh is a member of the Political Bureau of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine
Translated by: Rasha Abo Allan
Revised by: Ibrahim Motlaq

Share |
copyright © 2004 - dflp-palestine.net