Democratic Palestine : 10 (ص 10)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 10 (ص 10)
- المحتوى
-
Compromising on Details
The Palestinian right-wing lets the US Administration pick «acceptable» Palestinians, while hastening an
Arab summit.
In defiance of the objective lessons
of Palestinian experience and the cur-
rent balance of power, the Palestinian
right wing continues to seek a US-spon-
sored «solution». The rightist leader-
ship’s main preoccupation was clearly
articulated by Arafat's promise in mid-
May, that he would explicitly accept UN
Security Council resolution no.242 (i.e.
Israel's right to existence and security), if
the US explicitly recognizes the Palesti-
nian people's right to self-determination.
King Hussein's May visit to
Washington D.C. was intended to pave
the way for a joint Palestinian-Jordanian
delegation to meet with US Assistant
Secretary of State Murphy in Amman.
US officials were reportedly pleased
with what Hussein had to say, specifi-
cally about the prospect of Hussein gain-
ing PLO acceptance of 242. Moreover,
they were reassured that in Hussein's
plan the idea of an international confer-
ence is only «window dressing». «Ac-
cording to informed sources, Hussein
told administration officials that he is just
as opposed to Soviet participation as
they... Hussein suggested that the US
set stiff requirements, such as the estab-
lishment of diplomatic relations with
Israel, as a prerequisite for Soviet par-
ticipation.» («Middle East Policy Sur-
vey», May 31, 1985.)
In June, the illegitimate PLO Execu-
tive Committee, as well as Fatah’s Cen-
tral Committee, formally approved the
formation of a joint Palestinian-Jorda-
nian delegation. The Jordanian autho-
rities presented the US with a list of
Palestinians chosen by the right-wing
leadership to participate in the joint dele-
gation’s talks with Murphy.
Arafat lets Reagan do the
choosing
Thus from compromising on princi-
ples, Arafat and his followers have
moved to the predictable position of
compromising on details. They have
diluted the right of the Palestinian people
to choose their own representatives by
according to the US (and ultimately ‘Is-
rael’) the prerogative of determining
which Palestinians are acceptable for
negotiations. To back up the attempt to
10
woo US imperialism, a joint Palestinian-
Jordanian delegation visited a number
of European capitals in late June, for
talks with officials. '
Meanwhile the Palestinian right has
endeavored to exploit the tragedy that
befell the Palestinian people in May and
June when the refugee camps of Beirut
were under attack. On the Arab level,
Arafat has worked diligently for conven-
ing an Arab summit. On the Palestinian
level, Executive Committee member
Farouk Qaddoumi appealed to all Pales-
tinian forces to transform the unity in
struggle, that prevailed in the Beirut
camps, into political unity. However, this
appeal made no mention of addressing
the main issue causing division in the
PLO’s ranks: Arafat's February 11th
accord with King Hussein. This appeal
was thus not taken seriously by the
majority of resistance organizations that
have called for abrogation of this accord
as a prerequisite for reestablishing
Palestinian national unity. Some had
earlier hoped that there were Fatah
Central Committee members who had
reservations about the February 11th
accord, and would break ranks with the
right’s deviating policy. However, such
hopes have proved to be baseless.
Fatah's Central Committee is working in
a concerted, unified manner to imple-
ment the terms of the accord, despite the
steady emergence of concrete proof that
this undermines not only Palestinian
struggle but the essence of the PLO as
well.
US reserve and Israeli no’s
The right-wing policy is running into
other obstacles besides massive Pales-
tinian opposition. The joint delegation
visit to Europe showed clearly that these
governments have retreated from the
1980 Venice Declaration (which in itself
was unsatisfactory, but was hailed as an
advance by the Palestinian right at the
time). With the exception of Greece, no
West European government will chart a
course in the Middle East that differs in
more than appearance from that of the
US. Betting on a formula whereby West-
ern Europe would influence the US, who
in turn would pressure ‘Israel’, is but an
illusion. This remains true despite sec-
ondary contradictions between the
capitalist states, and between any of
them and ‘Israel’.
Playing its deceptive role as «arbit-
rator» in the Middle East, the US
administration received the Palestinian
list for study. The thing to watch is not
what might be said about certain names
on the list, but that the US hastened to
reaffirm that talks with the joint Palesti-
nian-Jordanian delegation were only as
a prelude to direct negotiations with ‘Is-
rael’ based on resolutions 242 and 338.
By supporting direct negotiations, the
US in fact supports the Israelis’ right to
choose which Palestinians to talk to.
As was to be expected, Shamir
rejected the list of Palestinians for the
joint negotiating team out of hand, and
said the US should do the same. Peres
also initially refused the list, for whom it
included and whom it omitted. Yet a
week later he had found two «accepta-
ble» names: Hanna Seniora (editor of
the Arabic daily A/ Fajr) and Faez Abu
Rahma (former head of the Gaza bar
association). One need not delve into
the personal or political history of these
two persons to see why Peres deemed
them «acceptable», for this is not the
point. The point is that they are resident
in the 1967 occupied _ territories.
Endeavoring to ignore not only the PLO - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 10
- تاريخ
- أغسطس ١٩٨٥
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed