We Run After America and It Runs After Israel

If America is unable or unwilling to convince Israel to freeze settlement for 90 days, excluding Jerusalem, then who would believe that it will be able or willing to solve the final condition issues such as the borders, the dismantlement of settlements, Jerusalem, water issues, refugees and other issues? America is trying to sell us such illusions right now.

Not only does Washington declare its inability to convince Israel, but it also adopts Israeli stands. It opposes other states’ recognition of the Palestinian State within the borders of 1967 or the discussion of the issue in the U.N., whether in the Security Council or the General Assembly. It voted against the decision of one of the international committees that considered the natural resources in the Bank, including water, as part of the Palestinian sovereignty. It should’ve supported such stands if it really opposes the Israeli policy.

From the American point of view, this stand is justified, because Israel and its supporters are capable of shaking the American administration and the ruling party, and they are capable of turning the public opinion against them, just like what we saw in the midterm elections for Congress. That is why any American administration will run after satisfying Israel and meeting its demands. While we see our Arab states or our regimes and leaders running after America and responding to everything it wants in order to gain its support, guaranteeing its continuation in power and bequeathing it. We also protect the interests of the ruling family, such as wealth and power, even at the expense of suppressing the opposition and killing democracy, in addition to oppressing and frustrating the simple citizen and inventing foreign threats — such as Iran and the domestic fragmentation policy, just like what’s happening in Iraq, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen and other countries. This inverted equation is because of the American bias to the Israeli stands. Had the condition been different, then Washington would’ve had to pressure Israel — and it is capable of doing so — but instead, it just tries to convince and pressure us.

Today, the picture is clearer. We sent the chief negotiator to Washington at America’s invitation. They sent messages to President Abu Mazen through the chief negotiator. The Arab Follow-Up Committee postponed its meeting pending the consultation’s outcome, but as for what they are waiting for or expecting to hear, that is not known in spite of the clear American stand.

We will meet and make a decision, and then we will go to the Follow-Up Committee so that it will be — as usual — an Arab decision. We have two options: either to give the United States a new chance, which is what’s likely to happen, or resort to other options like the Security Council, General Assembly, the Quarter or such cards that are expired and ineffective despite their moral importance. We will ask the countries of the world to acknowledge — again — the independent Palestinian State on 1967 borders, just as Argentina, Brazil and other countries did when they acknowledged the independency Statement announced by Abu Ammar in 1988 during the meeting of the National Council in Algeria on Nov. 11, which we consider a national holiday.

We should not continue to go on a wild goose chase and must acknowledge that the peace we aspire to is no longer possible with this Arab impotence. We should acknowledge that the American patron is not neutral. We, as Palestinians, who are the first people involved in this case, have to make the right decision in response to this situation. According to most of the observers, the appropriate response is to seriously dissolve the Palestinian Authority, or threaten to dissolve it, and go back to the original Liberation Organization and the spirit of the first peaceful Intifada, the anniversary of which we are celebrating these days.

Before the first Intifada, the economic individual condition was good and tens of thousands were working in Israel. We were in political relaxation, and no one expected the change in conditions that led to that Intifada. I believe that the conditions today look similar to the conditions of that period, based on Israel’s policy of expansion and the American stance.