IMEU Logo
The Institute for Middle East Understanding offers journalists and editors quick access to information about Palestine and the Palestinians, as well as expert sources — both in the U.S. and in the Middle East. Read our Background Briefings. Contact us for story assistance. Sign up for e-briefings.
Institute for Middle East UnderstandingAnalysis
Donate to IMEU
Home
News & Analysis
Commentary
From the MediaLife & Culture
Cuisine
Customs & Traditions
Film
Literature
Performing Arts
Visual Arts
Palestine in Photos
Art & Culture
Business & Economy
Daily Life
People
Politics
Palestinian Americans
Background Briefings
Documents & Reports
Development & Economy
Historical Documents
Human Rights
Politics & Democracy
Misc.
Maps
Links
Media Inquiries
About IMEU
Donate
Contact

Get E-mail News
Journalists & Editors: Sign up for e-mail briefings here.
EDITOR'S PICKS

Checkpoint Charlie at Rafah
The Palestine Chronicle


Too much damage already done
Bitterlemons.org


Where's healthy debate on Israel?
George Bisharat, Chron.com


SEARCH
Advanced Search
Home > News & Analysis > Analysis
One state, not two
Khaled Amayreh, Palestine Times, May 4, 2007
Print This PageE-mail This PageBookmark This PageIMEU Life and Culture RSS


This article was originally published by Palestine Times and is republished with permission.

Palestinians cross an Israeli military checkpoint at the entrance to the northern West Bank city of Qalqilia. (Maan Images)
Palestinians cross an Israeli military checkpoint at the entrance to the northern West Bank city of Qalqilia. (Maan Images)
Palestinian Authority (PA) Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh was quoted as saying on Tuesday that there was no intention of “dissolving the national unity government.” Haniyeh’s remarks coincided with the remarks of his own deputy, Azzam al-Ahmad, who warned that “the government won’t survive more than three months” if the American-backed, Israeli-enforced, blockade persists.

Earlier in the week, both Haniyeh and Hamas’ politburo, Chief Khalid Mash’al, issued a plethora of statements warning that “Palestinians would resort to alternatives” if the West continued to coerce and shun the Palestinian national unity government.

The two leaders didn’t clarify what the contemplated “other alternatives” would be. However, it was amply clear that both were alluding to ending the already fragile ceasefire with Israel (which Israel itself is threatening to end, anyway) or perhaps embarking on a fully-fledged new intifada.

It is abundantly clear though that the statements reflect profound indignation, stemming from the failure of the national unity government to end the hermetic blockade which has already pushed numerous Palestinian families to the brink of starvation.

True, the crisis is occasionally mitigated by some irregular and noncommittal financial aid from some oil-rich Arab countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar. But this gives Palestinians only false-hope for a breakthrough that doesn’t seem likely to be coming anytime soon.

In other words, there is no light at the end of the tunnel, and the reasons are clear.

First, Israel, which is undergoing a severe political crisis as a result of the Winograd Report, is not willing to allow the Palestinians to have a truly viable and territorially-continuous state.

Related stories






Indeed, the continued expansion of Jewish-only settlements on confiscated Arab land in the West Bank, especially in Occupied East Jerusalem, is more reflective of Israel’s true stance than a hundred statements by Israeli officials expressing a desire for peace. Actions, after all, speak louder than words.

More to the point, Israeli society itself is drifting menacingly toward right-wing jingoism, if not outright fascism. Furthermore, the backbone of Israeli society – its army – is on its way to becoming a “national-religious army” as an increasingly high and disproportionate percentage of its officers are affiliated with the extreme religious parties and/or settler camps. This is demonstrated through the existing ratio of 4 soldiers to each settler in Hebron, for protecting the settlers, in spite of their actions.

Second, it is manifestly clear that the Bush administration is preoccupied with the Iraqi quagmire as well as with the political and constitutional showdown with the Democrats on the domestic front, so much so that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is becoming of secondary importance.

True, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice keeps visiting the region every few weeks. But her visits have produced virtually nothing. In fact, Rice’s visits have only served to deepen frustration on both sides, frustration at the failure to revive the moribund peace process and also at America’s enduring inability to do what it takes to make the promise of peace more realistic, namely to pressure Israel to give up the spoils of the 1967 war.

Third, the European Union, who’s rotating presidency is now assumed by Germany – the most pro-Israel European state – clearly holds an overall position that is more-or-less a carbon copy of American policy. This nearly totally negative approach toward Palestinians is expressed through the E.U.’s constant refusal to lift the blockade of the Palestinian government, along with the E.U.’s reluctance to pressure Israel to unfreeze more than $700 million of Palestinian tax money unjustly held by Israel.

Finally, the Arab sates don’t lag far behind Europe, US and Israel in tormenting Palestinians. This is clear from the persistent refusal of these states to allow national banks to transfer aid money to the cash-strapped PA, despite rhetorical claims to the contrary.

In light, one doesn’t have to be a great prognosticator to predict that the crisis facing the Palestinian people and its enduring just cause will exacerbate even further as Israel continues to blackmail us into giving up our national rights, including the right of return for Palestinian refugees uprooted from their ancestral homeland in 1948 and 1967.

Hence, the PA and various Palestinian factions should be facing the hour of truth since the present situation is untenable.

Indeed, if the goal of creating a Palestinian state on 100% of the occupied land is no longer possible, as seems to be the case, the Palestinian leadership should immediately declare the death of the Oslo Accords and the two-state solution and opt for the one-state solution whereby Jews and Arabs would live in a democratic, unitary and civic state extending from the River Jordan to the Mediterranean as equal citizens.

True, Israel would vehemently object to this solution for ideological and other reasons. However, Israel, which has virtually and irreversibly killed the two-state solution, must bear full responsibility for its own actions.

Palestinians have remained steadfast in their committal to remain on their land, despite their living in claustrophobic townships and hapless enclaves which are sadly similar to detention camps.


Print This PageE-mail This PageBookmark This PageIMEU Life and Culture RSS

FEATURES
Untold stories: Dr. Hatim Kanaaneh
IMEU
The general of onions and garlic
Haaretz
Shows of strength
Al-Ahram Weekly

Home > News & Analysis > Analysis > One state, not two

All content ©2006-2008 Institute for Middle East Understanding

site designed by nigelparry.net