Tag Archives: democracy

Posted on by

Demonstrators call for Unity

March 15th 2011 (Nick Marouf)

March 15th 2011 (Nick Marouf)

Palestine Monitor, 16 March 2011
Demonstrators in Ramallah call for an end to partisanship.

A 2,000 strong crowd turned out in Ramallah today in support of unity between Fatah and Hamas. Fatah supporter, Loay Ghashash, emphasised the importance of overall Palestinian unity for reaching a conclusive solution to the occupation. ‘We cannot live divided, it weakens us’, he stated. ‘Unity will not end the occupation but it is the first step, after which we can work on other issues like the election process and reforming the PLO.’

Ghashash believes the ideological divergence between both parties is not insurmountable and is optimistic that a joint government can be achieved, ‘provided they meet in the middle; if not, they will find themselves isolated from the people.’ Ghashash went on to say that Hamas and Fatah should be talking about the rights of the Palestinian people rather than focusing on the political interests of the parties.’

Ghashash claims that Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have different perceptions on the importance of unity, with those in the West Bank viewing it as more pressing. ‘They have an interest in unity because they are the ones that have to deal with settlers, which is not the case in Gaza.’ The rallies for unity, staged in several West Bank towns and in Gaza today, are essential in order to bring about change, Ghashash asserted. ‘Demonstrations such as this will create a snowball effect.’

Another local Fatah supporter, Salah Hanieh said, ‘I think the will is there.’ Hanieh feels that the primary concern of the Palestinian people is in bringing an end to the fractured nature of their governments, pointing to the sea of Palestinian flags in the crowd, Hanieh said, ‘We are seeing Palestinian flags, not political ones, thus public opinion is clearly supporting unity’ he continued.

‘The roots for compromise are there in the Cairo agreement,’ Salah asserted. He believes the basis for reconciliation is in finding a common ground for both parties by utilising the terms of previous agreements. ‘We can then take steps from there’.

The protest was attended by Nabil Sha’ath, head of the International Affairs Department for Fatah. When asked about the paradox of calling for unity between the Gazan and West Bank governments while Hamas members are being arrested by Fatah security forces, Mr. Sha’ath, replied, ‘Unity will put an end to this. The only problem for Hamas is the Israelis, who will arrest or assassinate its members caught operating here.’

The chief motor behind today’s events, according to Mr. Sha’ath, is for Palestinians of all political stripes to stand under one banner. ‘The two main slogans here, “end separation” and “end the occupation,” have merged into one,’ he noted. ‘Unity is possible although today it is Hamas who is obstructing such an outcome. A year ago, you could have said that it was all of us.’

Muna Namura, member of the Palestinian Popular Front, agrees that raising the Palestinian flag is the main goal of the protest. ‘No one here has come to represent their own party. We don’t want any other agendas in Palestine apart from ending the occupation.’

When asked about Hamas’s stance on the promotion of unity, Mrs. Namura stated that ‘it is deeds, not words that matter. Authorities in Gaza, announcing that unity demonstrations were forbidden, arrived at a gathering today bearing the Hamas flag.’

With regard to the turnout at today’s demonstration, Sha’ath commented, ‘We have learned something from the Egyptians. With large numbers comes qualitative, as well as quantitative change. There are roughly one thousand supporters here today but we should have had five times as many.’ Most participants seemed to believe that partisan differences ought to be put aside in order to achieve the ultimate objective, which is the liberation of both Gaza and the West Bank. Sahal remarks that ‘We both want the same goal but are trying to reach it through different means.’

 

Posted on by

I am a Palestinian…with Nothing more to say

Yasser Arafat memorial (Majed Bamya)

Majed Bamya, 3 March 2011

As many Palestinians around the globe, I have spent the last few weeks following the uprisings in the Arab world on TV, overwhelmed with hope, enthusiasm, belief…and frustration. I grew up with the deep belief that our struggle for freedom was not only about territory. We were fighting to ensure a number of fundamental human values will prevail. We were fighting for justice, genuine democracy, dignity. In our quest, we aimed at freeing Palestine from the occupation but also allow it to rebuild the ties with its essence: pluralism, humanity, tolerance. We were fighting against zionism as an ideology that leads to exclusiveness, and exclusion, that spreads negation and destruction, discriminations and apartheid. And we thought that by fighting for pluralism in Palestine, and by accepting pluralism within the national movement, we were spreading the seeds of democracy in all of our region. We were democrats without a State, and we had a message to deliver. But years going by, and our house, the PLO, being neglected and weakened by divisions and competition, our pluralism was no longer a strength, as we were unable to dialogue respectfully and to speak with one voice. We doubted each others’ intentions and agendas, we criticized each others’ martyrs, and heroes. We forgot our common flag and fought each for our own colour. And from democracy we went to internal division. After the Nakba and the Naksa and Palestinian resurrection. After years of struggle, after Jordan, Lebanon, and two Intifadas. After imposing the Palestinian cause around the globe. After having lost so many of our historical leaders and so many of our resistants. We betrayed ourselves. We stopped believing. We lost faith in our own capacity to create miracles.

As I am watching these revolutions so close to us, and yet so far from us, I can not but ask myself, how come we became bystanders of a history we were at the forefront of. The Palestinian people fought for so long and made such sacrifices that it is normal to have fatigue or despair. It happened in the past and we always overcame. We disappeared from geography and we were on the verge of being erased from history. And defying all odds, we built a national movement that has changed all the past equations. But this time is different. People still fight every day for their dignity, their hopes and dreams, they continue demonstrating against the wall; in Jerusalem their fight for their homes is a fight for the Palestinian presence, and Palestinians remain in Palestine despite the siege in Gaza, and settlement activity and settlers’ harassment in the West Bank. And Palestinians in Israel continue fighting discriminations. And refugees continue to nourish their Palestinian identity even when the political bodies seem to have forgotten them. But where is our collective hope?

“Are you Gazan or West Banker, Jerusalemite or Israeli Palestinian, are you a refugee or not, are you…?” I am a Palestinian from Jaffa, my parents were Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, a country they left following the Israeli invasion in 1982. After 1948, some of my family went to Gaza, others to West Bank, other in exile. I was born in exile and grew up in Ramallah and studied in Jerusalem. I have been living for the last years in Europe. This is a typical Palestinian story. It shows that our identity is linked to a cause not to geography.

I am a Palestinian. Simple words that need to be embodied. We still have it in us. The hope, the willingness to fight once again despite decades of sacrifices, the capacity to overcome our divisions and to reshape our unity. But for all of this to be possible, we need to do what others have done in Tunisia and Egypt and elsewhere around the globe. Confront our fears, choose our fights, and empower the people. We need to do it now, as the wheels of history are turning and instead of being on the vehicle, we are under it!

There are ideas, and experiences and examples all over the globe of Palestinian resistance. There is so much to learn from other peoples who have risen up to defend their rights. Political leaders should stop thinking that populations can not understand, or are by definition unreasonable. A population that is invested in decision-making understands compromises, and efficiency, and result-oriented approach. A population that is not invested in decision-making turns to ideologies, and simplifications. Look how reasonable where the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt. Despite past and future difficulties, and uncertain transition periods, the peoples of these countries continue doing their utmost to preserve the fragile balance of a revolution that seeks hope and not chaos. And while making the impossible possible, they were ready to achieve compromises on the instruments, not on the goals.

The major question now is how to change the balance of power on the ground, how to better confront this occupation and the injustice imposed on us 6 decades ago? The first element of any equation is to restore our unity, not based on void speeches or slogans, but on a deep understanding of our common belonging, respect for Palestinian pluralism, upholding human rights, and working towards genuine democracy where power can not be seized or hijacked and all political bodies remain accountable to the people on a regular basis. Palestinians want to be fully involved in the decision-making process. As they offer huge sacrifices in their quest for freedom, they can not tolerate for this freedom to be diminished by people that are supposed to represent them and their struggle. Unity is too serious a matter to be left for political parties to discuss it behind closed doors, and with undeclared agendas, or focus on power sharing. Only peoples can be entrusted with unity and democracy, they should pursue and shield them, as they are essential conditions for the success of any struggle for justice, and any debate on these questions, and all decisions, should be made with the full involvement of the people.

In Palestine and abroad, it is time for the people to take action and nobody should stop it. A power that fears its own people does not deserve to last and this is something that all political entities and all states should understand. We are ready once again to rise against the Israeli occupation, under its different forms: siege, settlements, exile, checkpoints, house demolitions, discriminations. We are ready to fight once more to protect our cause, to be faithful to the past, and to pave the way for another future. We are ready…and we await a signal to go beyond a fragmented destiny, land and resistance, and to launch a common fight for freedom! But looking closer, I think I saw a signal.

I look at my TV and I see crowds of people in the streets chanting and demonstrating peacefully. They have little slogans, many jokes and an unbreakable will. They carry one flag and one cause despite their differences. They defied their fear and overcame their divisions to ensure freedom will prevail. In a few weeks they have done what nobody else was able to do in decades. They did not wait for reforms, or political parties, trade unions or NGOs to set their game straight. The people went to the streets and knew everybody would have to follow.

I have nothing more to say…and there is so much left for us to do!

Yasser Arafat memorial (Majed Bamya)

Yasser Arafat memorial (Majed Bamya)

Posted on by

Palestinians Cheer Egypt

Palestinians Cheer Egypt (Nick Marouf, Feb 11 2010, Manara Circle)

Palestinians Cheer Egypt (Nick Marouf, Feb 11 2010, Manara Circle)

Palestinians Cheer Egypt (Nick Marouf, Feb 11 2010, Manara Circle)

Nick Marouf, 11 Feb 2011

Mabrook Egypt. Congratulations Egypt. Palestinians and Citizens worldwide cheer and celebrate this great day in history. The fall of President Mubarak’s 30 year rule is refreshing, invigorating, and is a sign of a new beginning for the Middle East.

Approximately 500 Palestinians celebrated at the Manra Circle cheering, singing and praising Egyptians on their historic achievement towards freedom. We look onward with high optimism that many more Arab nations will continue to stand up for justice, dignity, and democracy. Yes,  this is change that we believe in, Yes, the Middle East can have democracy, and Yes, the Middle East will have democracy!

Nick Marouf is a Palestinian-American Information Technology consultant living the Occupied Territories. You can visit his sites Maroufinc.com & RamallahOnline.com.

Posted on by

Palestine is the Key to Arab Democracy

Palestine Flag

Palestine Flag

Palestine Flag

Sam Bahour, 8 Feb 2011

Current events in Egypt and Tunisia have the entire region and beyond glued to their television sets. The all-too-spoken-about Arab street has risen, seemingly from the dead. But while it is satisfying to see a dictatorial head of state being ousted by his own people, it is far too early to rejoice.

What we are witnessing is the removal and replacement of leaders, not an upgrading of the political systems that allowed someone like the Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak to remain in power for 30 years and then have the audacity to position his son to succeed him, while the Egyptian people sank into deepening poverty. Unrest across the region will force these reactionary regimes to make some minimal changes, such as introducing term limits, which should have been done decades ago. But these knee-jerk legislative changes are solely aimed at persuading the demonstrators to go home.

Likewise, no one should belittle the fact that hundreds of thousands of average citizens are challenging their governments in the streets. This is not like demonstrations as we know them in western countries. It is the real thing. Serious conviction – and sustained repression – is the prerequisite to get many people to challenge a police state that ignores even the most basic human rights.

In the Arab world, civil uprisings – or intifadas, as they are frequently called – were coined in the Palestinian context. However, the context of the first Palestinian intifada was very different to what we are seeing today. Back in 1987 Palestinians genuinely became fed up with the foreign military occupation that Israel maintains to this day. Communities across the West Bank and Gaza took to the streets and sustained their efforts for nearly six years. Demonstrations were only part of the story. The real ingredient to the Palestinians’ ability to remain steadfast was much more complicated. Palestinians are highly political, and they organised themselves in a decentralised fashion and knew how to operate out of Israel’s sight.

But the first intifada was aimed solely at a foreign entity, Israel, and ended with the signing of the infamous Oslo peace accords, which have failed multiple times over the past two decades. The Palestinian leadership tried to pick the fruits of their intifada prematurely and paid a dear price in human, political, economic and social loss.

Egyptians would be well advised to learn from the Palestinians that the window of opportunity for real change comes all too infrequently. They should therefore be very clear on what they desire from this historic episode. I’d guess that the US state department already has more than a few scenarios in place and dealing with these is what the Egyptian people will really be up against in the coming weeks.

The second Palestinian intifada in 2000 had many more similar elements to today’s upheavals in Tunisia and Egypt. Following the collapse of the Camp David II talks and continuing Israeli provocations, the Palestinian street erupted. Although this second uprising was quickly steered to target Israel, the undercurrent at the time was boiling against a Palestinian leadership that was seriously corrupt and refused to shift gear politically, opting instead for a never-ending US-sponsored peace process.

The Palestinian president at the time, Yasser Arafat, knew that the second intifada had the potential to turn on him and the house of cards that he had created, the Palestinian Authority. Arafat knew how to shrewdly get his people to vent their anger elsewhere – towards Israel, the foreign occupier. Arafat thought, like today’s Mubarak and the many other leaders of his generation, that the US would come to his rescue and make things happen. He was wrong. Every major Palestinian political crisis witnessed the traditional Palestinian leadership taking minute steps forward to keep the masses at a distance. Often these steps meant rearranging the cabinet while paying lip service to the demanded structural reforms. Expect the same in Egypt and Tunisia.

Over the years, Palestinians have been able to maintain pressure on their occupier and keep their own quasi-government in check because they were organised at the grassroots level for many years beforehand. This level of deep, sustained organising has been weak to non-existent in most of the Arab world. The police-state governments in Egypt, Tunisia and across the Middle East made sure civil society remained obedient – as the media and the private sector were made to be.

The obvious question is: if Palestinians are so experienced in taking to the streets, why then are there so few serious demonstrations in Nablus, Ramallah, Bethlehem or Gaza in solidarity with the Egyptian people? The reason is that the Palestinian Authority has been co-opted by a US-dominated and foreign-funded agenda which, in times of crisis, understands a single tool: force. The same applies to the Palestinian government in Gaza, for different reasons. Since the last Palestinian elections, which ended in infighting, the US has equipped, trained and led a new generation of Palestinian security services to serve their old model of Arab world governance – police states and banana republics. Expect the US not to embrace real democracy in the Arab world, but rather to put a new, younger facade on an old and corrupt system of governance.

If you want a barometer for today’s Middle East political temperature, follow Egypt; however, if you want a barometer for tomorrow’s possibilities for serious, sustainable reform, keep your eye on the Palestinian people who are in a dual struggle – one to shed themselves from 43 years of a brutal Israeli occupation and one to create the first Arab model of truly representative and accountable governance. The main factor preventing the Palestinians from continuing on their path to structural reform, following their first genuine elections in 2006, is the refusal of the US to accept the results of those elections. Expect a similar US veto on any forthcoming Egyptian move towards electoral reform that encompasses true representation.

Until the people of the Middle East take reforms seriously and transform their mass demonstrations into sustained, organised efforts that address all aspects of society – political, legislative, economic and social – then the blood and tears invested in this latest round of civil outcry will be wasted.

Sam Bahour

Sam Bahour

Sam Bahour is a Palestinian-American freelance business consultant and serves as a Board of Trustees member at Birzeit University. He is also a Director at the Arab Islamic Bank and the community foundation Dalia Association. He contributed this article to RamallahOnline.com. Visit: www.epalestine.com. (This article was first published on guardian.co.uk, February 7, 2011.)

Posted on by

Out with the collaborators. In with honest unity

Stuart Littlewood

Stuart Littlewood, 4 February 2011

Meanwhile in the prison called Palestine, where the West killed off democracy because it was the wrong ‘flavour’…

Out with the collaborators. In with honest unity

Nima Shirazi’s recent article ‘How to Say Nothing without Really Trying’
nicely exposed the drivel spouted by US State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley in his attempt to block a draft United Nations Security Council resolution criticising Israel’s settlement building. And it reminded us of the sharp political observations of that remarkable Victorian writer Charles Dickens.

To illustrate his point Shirazi selected this quote:

“It is true that How not to do it was the great study and object of all public departments and professional politicians all round the Circumlocution Office.” (Charles Dickens, ‘Little Dorritt’, Chapter10)

Dickens was able to anticipate, 150 years ahead of his time, the gobbledygook uttered by Western leaders like Clinton, Obama, Blair, Brown and now Cameron solemnly pledging peace in the Middle East while pursuing behind-scenes policies to achieve the exact opposite, in order to perpetuate the conflict for Israel’s benefit.

In ‘The Circumlocution Office’ Dickens wrote:


“It is true that every new premier and every new government, coming in because they had upheld a certain thing as necessary to be done, were no sooner come in than they applied their utmost faculties to discovering How not to do it. It is true that from the moment when a general election was over, every returned man who had been raving on hustings because it hadn’t been done, and who had been asking the friends of the honourable gentleman in the opposite interest on pain of impeachment to tell him why it hadn’t been done, and who had been asserting that it must be done, and who had been pledging himself that it should be done, began to devise, How it was not to be done.”

Circumlocution is a posh word for talking bollox. The British Foreign Office has been specially trained in circumlocution.

“We are encouraged by the recent decision by the Israeli Government to facilitate exports out of Gaza,” said Foreign Office minister and Israel admirer Alistair Burt last month. “It is certainly important that this leads to a positive change on the ground. We look forward to working with Israel to achieve this through the resumption of access for Gaza exports to all their traditional markets, and helping achieve Israel’s stated target of reaching pre-summer 2007 export levels by the middle of next year. We will continue to work closely with EU partners to press for further progress in Gaza.”

Note that it’s Israel’s totally inadequate target for Gaza’s exports that matters to the minister, rather than the Gazans’. And everyone knows by now that Israel’s policy – and Britain’s, thanks to the “unbreakable bond” – is to keep Gaza on the brink of economic collapse.

Back in June, Burt was writing: “It has long been the view of the Government that restrictions on Gaza should be lifted; a view confirmed by UN Security Council Resolution 1860 which called for the sustained delivery of humanitarian aid and called on states to alleviate the humanitarian and economic situation persisting there. It is essential that there be unfettered access not only to meet the humanitarian needs of the people of Gaza, but to enable the reconstruction of homes and livelihoods and permit trade to take place.”

“Unfettered access”… Sounds good, but these powerful words are meaningless.

This time last year the Foreign Office was saying: “The UK continues to put enormous effort into achieving a Middle East Peace Process, taking forward UNSCRs 1850 and 1860 to help achieve that aim.” Six months earlier it had been saying: “We regularly remind the Israeli government of its obligations under international law on a variety of issues, including humanitarian access to Gaza as well as Israel’s control of Gaza’s waters and the effect it has on Gaza’s fishing industry… The UK has been unequivocal in its calls to Israel to lessen restrictions at the Gaza crossings, allowing the legitimate flow of humanitarian aid, trade and reconstruction goods, and the movement of people. This is essential…”

And in the aftermath of Israel’s ‘Cast Lead’ blitzkrieg on Gaza the Foreign Office wrote to me: “The UK will continue to make the case for a comprehensive approach to resolving the conflicts in the Middle East, comprehensive in the sense that real peace will only come when Israel and the whole Arab world are at peace.”

How can you keep a straight face? The British government, where Israel is concerned, is “all mouth and trousers”, as some would say. There’s no sign whatsoever of 1860 or any of the mile-high stack of fine words being implemented even though Britain and her friends, individually or collectively, have all the levers necessary to force Israel’s compliance.

Dickens’s Circumlocution Office is indeed alive and well and operating at full blast in London and other major centres in the West so as not to upset delinquent Israel and to make it appear that positive action, like sanctions, is not an option.

Even the Palestinian Embassy in London has caught the circumlocution bug, as shown in this statement by Ambassador Hassassian in response to the Wikileaks revelations.

“Al Jazeera’s attempt to imitate Wikileaks has propagated documents that allegedly were developed from our negotiations with Israel. Even if such documents are factual, they represent discussions of hypothetical scenarios with no concrete or absolute agreements. Concessions can only be made, and an agreement can only be reached, when signed and sealed through public referendum.”

But some of these discussions focused on assets that were definitely not for discussion, not negotiable, not for sale and not up for referendum, did they not?

“Negotiations with Israel require considering and debating their point of view, their conditions and their agenda even if it’s at the far-right of one’s belief and position,” continues the Ambassador. “Negotiating and challenging these does not mean conciliation on our side, but in fact, an understanding of the issues and obstacles that face us as an authority and governance under occupation. We have tried the path of overt defiance and no-negotiations with Israel which was explicated by the latter to delegitimise the Palestinians.

“Knowing what the state of Israel seeks only brings us closer to understanding that only a viable solution for the Palestinian leadership is the key to stability in the region. If these documents are authentic then this scandal has served only to prove that Israel is no partner for peace.”


“I am against law – international law in particular”

Elsewhere in the statement there’s this nugget of information: “The PNA’s position speaks for itself grounded in the principles of international law with the respect to the rights of the Palestinian people. In 2007, Israel’s then foreign minister Tzipi Livni said to the negotiators that she was against international law and insisted that it could not be included in terms for reference in the talk ‘I was the minister of justice’, she said, ‘But I am against law – international law in particular’.”

Knowing that the Israelis regard themselves to be above international law and that normal codes of conduct don’t apply, what was the point of the Palestinians sitting down to obviously futile negotiations in the first place?

If ever there was a need for regime change, this is it. The Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority, after putting off elections indefinitely, now sees the bravery and determination of Egypt’s freedom movement with alarm and promises local elections “soon” and a general election afterwards. Hamas says it will boycott elections until a proper reconciliation is reached. Besides, many Hamas supporters in the West Bank have been rounded up by Fatah’s thugs, thrown in jail and probably been tortured. Furthermore barmy Fatah is calling for an uprising in Gaza against democratically-elected Hamas.

Given Fatah’s track record who can trust them to organize fair elections or abide by the result if it goes against them?

The Washington Post reports: “For years… US officials have engaged in back-channel talks with Egyptian members of the [Muslim Brotherhood] movement in recognition of its substantial popular support. The unofficial contacts have taken place sporadically since the 1990s but became more frequent after members of the Brotherhood were elected to the Egyptian Parliament in 2005. Afterward, US diplomats and lawmakers held several meetings with Brotherhood leaders… US officials justified the meetings by saying they were merely speaking with duly-elected members of the Egyptian legislature.”http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/02/AR2011020206283.html

In which case the US has no excuse for refusing to talk with the Brotherhood’s offshoot, Hamas. Ditto Britain and the EU. Including Hamas at long last will speed reconciliation, which the West claims it wants to see.

But are Western powers brave enough – just half as brave as, say, a young Egyptian democracy campaigner in Tahrir Square – to do this off their own bat? Or will they have to run to Tel Aviv and ask permission?

Stuart Littlewood

Stuart Littlewood

Stuart Littlewood is an industrial marketing specialist turned writer-photographer. In 2005 he was invited to write and shoot pictures for a book about the plight of the Palestinians under occupation. ‘Radio Free Palestine’ was published in 2007. For details please see www.radiofreepalestine.co.uk.

  • The Author is a regular contributor to RamallahOnline.com. Find more Articles by Stuart Littlewood on RamallahOnline.