– The Arafat Legacy

Different leader, same struggle
By Yousef Munayyer, Collegian editor

There is a fine line between having hope and being na?. Who ever believes that the recent election of Mahmoud Abbass will make a significant difference on the so called "peace process" undoubtedly falls on the na? side of that line.

Many believe the "peace process", which should be called the "piece process" since it has only entailed the incremental confiscation of greater portions of Palestinian lands, has suddenly been revitalized. A miracle of sorts was bestowed on the peace loving hawks of the Israeli government now that the roadblock on their mythical road map, Yasser Arafat, has passed. A new age is upon us, they claim; an age of democracy. This seems to be the theme of the year. Election under occupation, which is being force fed down the throats and into the minds of countless people, is the newly adopted perverse definition of democracy.

The situation for Palestinians has never been a struggle for democracy. Rather there has been an undoubted consensus among Palestinians; they were handed from one colonizer to the next, from the Ottomans to the British to the most recent Zionist oppressor and the only goal is national liberation. For Palestinians, the age of decolonization, which reached the rest of the Middle East, has passed them over like a dark angel over a bloodstained door.

Mahmood Abbass, Yasser Arafat or any other individual will not change the identity of the Palestinian. This is why Yasser Arafat was marginalized and also why Abbass will likely follow the same fate. Both leaders are in a difficult position. The fact that Arafat has died does not change the aspirations of the Palestinian people. They are not willing to give any more and the other side also has no new concessions to make.

Abbass, also known as Abu Mazen, is stuck between a rock and hard heads. The rock being the determination of hardened Palestinians, made callous and angry by their displacement in 1948 and 1967 and the ongoing illegal occupation. The hard heads being the leaders in Tel Aviv who want "peace" but are willing to give nothing for it, they are just willing to take less.

Pause to think of that for a moment. Say I take everything that belongs to you and then offer 22 percent of it back so that you will leave me alone. Would that satisfy you? Would 50 percent satisfy you? Not if you had dignity, not if you had an identity and not if you had any connection with what you have lost. Israel's attempt to silence Palestinians with their bogus "offer" only further fuels the fire of resistance. The failure to make any serious concessions only further prolongs the conflict and does an injustice to the human beings on both sides.

Israel is stuck with a tremendous problem. It is changing demographically. Half the people under the control of Israel do not have rights as citizens. Israel has to make a move but it knows it can not make an offer the Palestinians can accept and even worse, it can not make an offer its own people can accept. This Sunday, thousands of protesters took to the streets of Jerusalem to protest the removal of Zionist colonies in the West Bank and Gaza. These protesters prove two things: one, there exists a place on the Israeli political spectrum to the right of its current prime minister and two, and they could never live under Palestinian government. If the colonies are going to remain, Palestinian land in the prospective "two-state solution" would be smaller in area and further divided.

Still there remains no answer for Jerusalem and no answer for the right of return. Both of these are questions that have never been answered and cannot be answered so long as the status quo continues. Abu Mazen can not answer them. In fact Abu Mazen can contribute little if anything new to the peace process. What will most likely evolve in the coming months is the continued agitation by Israel of the Palestinian population for the same strategic purposes as it had last summer when it carried out illegal assassinations to provoke a response. At that point Abu Mazen, much like his predecessor, will step aside because there is no room for politicians in armed struggle. To me it seems Israel prefers armed struggle; it keeps working towards it, holds greater weapons and has only gained land from it in the past. The continued derailment of the "peace process" results in the "piece process", the goal of which is the elimination of Palestinian nationalism. Abu Mazen is a middle man whose constituents want what the Israelis refuse to offer.

An Israeli member of parliament spoke at UMass this past fall and said that Israel always held three things dear: one, democracy two, its Jewish character and three, the Occupied Territories as part of Israel. He then told the audience that the last part had to change if there would be a solution.

His analysis is flawed. With over 80 percent of the population living on less than 20 percent of the land, a bi-national state is the only solution which can end struggle. The question for Israel now i how much more of its "democratic" character is it willing to loose to a culture of oppression and apartheid before it realizes that its ethnocentric character is at the center of the problem?