47th Anniversary of the Palestinian Revolution: From Landless Revolution to Circumscribed Authority
Jan. 2nd, 2012
January 1, 1965 was the official start of the contemporary
Palestinian revolution. On a Friday night December 31, 1964, small group
of fighters attacked an Israeli military target, leaving behind the
first martyr on the long march towards recognizing the usurped rights of
Palestinian refugees.
The first military operation of Fatah, or “Conquest in English” was
in the making for at least a decade before the official spark on January
1, 1965. Interestingly enough though, the main founders of Fatah were
working professionals living in Arabian Gulf Countries, including Yasser
Arafat and current Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas, among
others.
In 1965, Fatah’s project represented a paradigm shift in reframing
the Palestinian story from hapless refugees to revolutionary fighters
feared and respected by friends and foes alike. After 17 years of
waiting in abject refugee camps, the new leadership envisaged a direct
and independent Palestinian role in shaping the nature and the future of
the Arab Israeli conflict. Short years later, Fatah succeeded in
turning a penniless, landless movement into a strong, vibrant and global
revolutionary symbol.
In a public communiqué six years earlier, the nascent Fatah declared
“Life in the tent has become as miserable as death… We, the sons of the
catastrophe, are no longer willing to live this dirty, despicable life,
this life which has destroyed our cultural, moral and political
existence and destroyed our human dignity.”
Following the Israeli attack and disastrous Arab defeat of 1967 and
the occupation of all of Palestine, other Palestinian political groups,
who earlier repudiated Fatah’s approach and foresaw their fight for the
liberation of Palestine as part of a larger pan Arab emancipation,
abjured their theory and joined the battle for Palestine.
In late 1967, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
(PFLP), emerged from the womb of the Pan Arab Nationalist Movement
(ANA), primarily a Palestinian party established in 1951 by the late Dr.
George Habash. Later, at least two other smaller organizations were
instigated or sponsored by Arab regimes, like Syria and Iraq.
Palestinian refugee camps in the diaspora, towns and villages under
Israeli occupation became readily recruitment breeding grounds for the
new organizations. Being at the vanguard of the modern Palestinian armed
struggle, Fatah became the most prominent organization dominating
Palestinian Politics for years to come.
In addition to their armed mission, and to fulfill acute community
needs in refugee camps, the new organizations established medical
clinics, social services, sport and youth centers. Ideologically, the
groups were mixture of Pan Arab groups, internationalist, secular and
nationalist organizations.
Considering the elevated level of sectarian politics dominating Arab
and Palestinian environment today, none of the rebel organizations had
any direct religious affiliation or sectarian propensity; to the
contrary, at least two became Marxist inclined.
The first major direct confrontation between Fatah rebels and Israeli
forces took place in the Jordanian village of Karama on March 21, 1968.
The battle resulted in a symbolic victory forcing the Israeli army to
retreat leaving behind destroyed military gear. The Karama battle became
a turning point in Fatah’s evolution receiving official Arab
approbation and wide public affirmation. Financial support poured in and
its membership grew exponentially.
In 1969, Arafat became to head of the Palestine Liberation
organization, an umbrella group, presiding over a national council
representing a wide range of Palestinian civilian and rebel
organizations.
By 1974, the PLO was recognized as the “sole legitimate
representative of the Palestinian people” enjoying a permanent observer
status at the UN General Assembly and established diplomatic relations
with over 100 countries, more than Israel did.
Despite major setbacks in 1970 conflict in Jordan, the Lebanese civil
war in the mid-seventies, internal divisions and the forced evacuation
from Beirut 1982, the PLO remained the undisputed power to account for
in the Arab Israeli conflict. Its late leader, Arafat, proved to be an
adroit political survival leading the PLO from an exiled liberation
movement to a new home based Palestinian Authority in 1994.
From Landless revolution to circumscribed Authority
For almost 20 of its 47 years life, Fatah led PLO in endless
protracted peace negotiation marathons with its sworn enemy, Israel.
Yet, it is not any much closer today to realizing the rights of
Palestinian refugees than on January 1, 1965.
While negotiation with Israel is at standstill, Israel persists on
violating UN resolutions and all peace accords by building more illegal
Jewish only settlements on the same land designated for the future
Palestinian state.
Concomitantly, the occupation has created two separate unequal
communities: ensconced illegal Jewish only settlements with dedicated
infrastructure road systems and services; and Native Palestinian
community whose movement is hindered by a web of impinging military
check points and is inadequately served by a powerless Palestinian
Authority.
After 20 years of failed negotiations, the Palestinian leadership had
limited its options by placing all their “eggs” in the negotiation
basket. They don’t have the military power to challenge Israel, and with
a timid emblematic official Arab support, Palestinians can’t muster the
diplomatic clout to achieve just peace in an unfavorable balance of
power environment.
In order not become an apathetic docile observer to Israel’s land
expropriations for the benefit of Jewish only settlements, and its
lackadaisical attitude towards the peace process. The Palestinian
Authority must consider calculated bold initiatives to counter Israel’s
temporizing subterfuge intended to change the demographics for the
remaining 22 per cent of historical Palestine.
Peace must be reciprocal necessity for both Palestinians and
Israelis. Israel should not enjoy de facto peace while Palestinians are
denied their rudimentary rights of living normal human life. Israel
economy must not prosper while stifling the Palestinian economy. Israel
must not be able to continue maintaining an iniquitous occupation with
impunity.
Since the signed Oslo Peace Accord, Israel’s only fully implemented
part was to turn over public obligations to the Palestinian Authority;
hence, making the Israeli occupation of Palestine, the least costly
military occupation ever. While Israel retained complete control over
land, water and absolute military fiat, the Palestinian Authority had
become, unwillingly, an occupation “service provider” taxed with
performing tiresome municipal public services, at its own expense.
The Palestinian Authority must work harder to restore the unity
government. This is essential to undercut claims that Palestine was not
ready for statehood; ironically, by the same powers which instigated the
division in the first place when they rejected the results of
Palestinian democracy.
A united Palestinian government must then seriously reassess the
peace process. While negotiations could not continue with no end in
sight, stalemate should not become the inert alternative either.
In addition to its international diplomatic efforts, the Palestinian
unity government must promote and coordinate current haphazard isolated
civil protests throughout the West Bank and Jerusalem. Protestations
against the separation wall, perverse military checkpoints, demolishing
of Palestinian homes, and quotidian expansion or building of new illegal
Jewish only settlements, must become part of an organized collective
civil disobedience movement to paralyze the Israeli occupation and
disrupt the life of illegal settlers.
The blooming Arab spring is an opportune moment to expose US and
Europe’s fallacious affection towards Arab democracy as they cosset the
most anti-democratic racialist system in this region.
A united Palestinian Authority must initiate a new Palestinian spring
to force Israel to choose between: being a Jewish only democracy,
becoming a bi-national state, or give up on subjugating the Palestinian
people and their land. |