After the death of Yassir Arafat and Abu Mazen’s election, I was still relatively pessimistic. At the first sign of trouble, Sharon immediately cut off contacts and resorted to his usual macho blustering. And Abu Mazen himself has a very gray and slightly shady past. I thought we were just going through another repetition of the usual up and down cycles.
Recent events however, have changed my mind. I am now on the “cautiously optimistic” side of the fence.
From the moment he took office, Abu Mazen has acted like a man with a plan. Oblivious to Israeli blustering, he has followed the principles he clearly laid out in his election platform. Curb all Palestinian violence to pave the way for negotiations with Israel on an equal footing.
One can’t ignore the political integrity and ingenuity of Abu Mazen’s actions. He is calling Sharon and Bush’s bluff. He is taking control, deploying security forces, curbing violence, doing everything the U.S. and Israel have demanded the Palestinians do as a pre-requisite for negotiations. Equally important, no matter how flawed the process, he was put into power by an election that Bush himself is holding up as an exemplar of democracy in the Middle East.
By his actions and election, it seems now that the day is not far off when Abu Mazen sits down to the negotiating table with Sharon. And since he has already shown himself a man of his word, he will lay out the basic Palestinian demands he declared as part of his platform: Israel’s return to the ’67 borders with minor adjustment, East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital, and recognizing the right of return as a moral principle. When he does, what can Sharon, or more importantly Bush, say then? They can’t accuse him of being an extremist. They can’t accuse him of being a despot. They can’t deny that he is working for peace and an end to violence. Their hemming and hawing will lay bare the moral bankruptcy of their positions. People often say Sharon is a tactical genius. It looks like the wiley old man may have finally met his match.
Of course, nothing is guaranteed and there are many obstacles along the way. Nonetheless, this is the first time in four years where at least one political leader has the courage to say: “The old ways have failed. It is time to take a new path.” Not only said it, but acted on it as well.
What follows is a recent op-ed piece from Ha’aretz, that discusses the same points from a slightly different angle.
The attempt to present Abu Mazen’s actions as an achievement resulting from Israeli pressure has negative, possibly destructive implications for the entire process. Abu Mazen is not an Israeli collaborator, and should not be seen as such.
By Nazir Majali
Israel’s threats against Mahmoud Abbas seemed to have achieved their purpose. That’s certainly how it appears to Israel: It presented the three military options at its disposal – a limited operation, a broader operation or an overall operation, and the security cabinet approved in principle a plan to take over the areas in northern Gaza from where the Qassams are launched – if the Palestinian Authority chairman did not move quickly to end the shooting at the Israeli settlements. And then the new leader of the Palestinian people pulled himself together and did everything he could to satisfy Israel: He deployed police, threatened the various factions and ordered the police to stop any shooting at Israeli settlements, even if it means shooting.
But the truth is there is no greater illusion.
Abu Mazen is known for his clear and decisive position not only against the Qassams but against any use of violence in the struggle against Israel. His position on the matter has been known since the start of the intifada, and he did not hesitate to express it in public. The position was not derived then – or now – from naivete but rather from a sober reading of the situation and an awareness that the armed struggle no longer serves the Palestinian interests and out of consideration toward the people of Israel – but irrespective of the actions of the Israeli government and its threats.
Abu Mazen’s acquaintances in Israel, on the right and left, can testify that in the last 20 years, he has led a new and brave political line that has directly influenced Palestinian thought and behavior. He discovered another Israel, which wants peace; he follows all the events in Israel, reads translations of the Hebrew press and studies the conclusions of the public opinion polls done in Israel. As a pragmatic leader, he made the conscious decision to choose the path of peace with the goal being to liberate his people from the yoke of occupation and to achieve a political agreement that will guarantee his people’s legitimate rights in an independent state. And when he encountered obstacles placed by Israel, he did not give up and not for a moment changed his positions. Even when he was forced to resign as prime minister, when he was suffering the bitterest criticism, when his house was fired upon in Ramallah, he continued to stick to positions that have become principles.
Now, after winning the presidency in a model of Palestinian democratic elections, his new position grants him a platform and the strength with which to advance his principles. Indeed, he did not delay a minute and began operating immediately. But he did so his way, and just as the prime minister of Israel makes controversial decisions and tries to pass them without driving Israeli society into civil war and bloodshed, so is Abu Mazen, as a responsible, balanced leader, trying to take a path that will not split the Palestinian people and achieve its goals without bloodshed. Needless to say, this will only strengthen him in the Palestinian public.
But the Israeli government decided that what the Palestinian leader was doing had better look like an Israeli achievement. Maybe because of an inflated ego, maybe because of domestic political considerations and maybe because of a desire to foil the man who is leading his people in a manner that inspires international admiration and which for some reason is not wanted in Jerusalem.
In any case, the attempt to present Abu Mazen’s actions as an achievement resulting from Israeli pressure has negative, possibly destructive implications for the entire process. Abu Mazen is not an Israeli collaborator, and should not be seen as such. He is a leader who has accepted the historic role to try to settle the conflict between the two peoples, and he is doing so with a deep understanding of the mood in the Palestinian street and without ignoring the needs of Israel. Therefore, he is a partner who should not be forsaken nor embarrassed nor harassed and of course, not threatened. His success is an Israeli interest no less than a Palestinian one. And the same is true for his failure.