|
18 August 2010 By Mshari Al-Zaydi Away from the channels of indirect and direct
negotiations between the Palestinians and the
Israelis, whether this is above or below the table;
the "eternal" Palestinian Cause has remained central
to Arab politics since 1948, the year of the Israeli
declaration of independence – or perhaps a little
before this [date] – until today. It is because of the Palestinian Cause – in
addition to other reasons of course – that King Farouk
was dethroned and expelled from Egypt, transferred to
a ship to take him to the beaches of Italy. King Idris
I of Libya was also overthrown by military officers
who adhered to the same revolutionary rhetoric as
those followed by Jamal Abdul-Nasser and the Free
Officer's Movement. As a result of the Palestinian
Cause, a series of minor and major wars broke out in
Egypt, leading to the signing of the Camp David
Accords between Egypt and Israel, and President
Sadat's visit to Jerusalem; a visit which deeply
divided the Arab world. Violent Islamist groups emerged as a result of the
Palestinian Cause, and prior to this left-wing and
revolutionary groups emerged [as a result of the
Palestinian Cause] like the groups led by George
Habash and Wadie Haddad [the Popular Front for the
Liberation of Palestine], Abu Nidal [Abu Nidal
Organization], Abu Daoud [Black September], Ahmed
Jibril [Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
– General Command], as well as the Fatah al-Intifada,
the Fatah Revolutionary Council, and Fatah al-Islam.
It was because of the Palestinian Cause that Hezbollah
was able to expand to the point that its weapons are
now overflowing Lebanon. The question that remains: will it be possible to
solve the Palestinian issue one day? Many Arabs and Muslims cannot imagine the
possibility of this ever happening. They cannot
imagine by what means, and in what period, and under
what conditions this issue can ever be solved? How
will we live if the Palestinian cause came to an end?
Will the new generations hold the same enthusiasm
and desire to make the Palestinian Cause the pivotal
issue in their lives and political beliefs? This is a difficult question to answer in an
accurate and certain manner. Is the image of the
Palestinian Cause as portrayed in the Arab and Muslim
orientated media precisely what the Palestinians
living this reality themselves see? I am talking about those Arabs and Muslims who live
outside of Palestine and might be viewing the
situation in an exaggerated and inflated fashion that
is not in line with the reality, and not in light with
how those who are directly affected by this situation
view it. For in the end, this person [who is affected
by the Palestinian Cause] is just a human being that
ultimately wants to live as best as he can with
regards to clothes, food, and shelter, and most
importantly of all, without wars or military
oppression. As Mahmoud Darwish, the most notable poet
of the Palestinian Cause wrote, "on this land
[Palestine] is what makes life worth living." The most dangerous thing is for others to treat you
as if you are on a pedestal; an incomparable hero, or
a wailing wall for people to cry over, and you believe
that these tears are for you, however if this river of
tears does not stop it may choke those who are trying
to deal with the Palestinian Cause, and prevent others
from seeing the reality of the situation with clear
eyes. Whether others view you as an angel or a devil, in
either case you lose the ability to deal with the
situation realistically, and to force others to deal
with the reality of what is going on. In reality,
nobody is an unrepentant devil or an untainted angel.
In other words, why have we lost the capacity to
deal with the Palestinian issue in a realistic and
normal manner? The Arab analysis of the situation
constantly repast that it is the Israeli side that is
afraid – to its very core – of the consequences of
peace, and normalization of relations with the Arab
world. This is a correct analysis, to a large extent,
at least with regards to the Israeli right-wing who
supports the current state of affairs. Peace means a
re-imagining of the Israeli mentality, removing it
from the strangleholds of isolation, panic and [the
mentality of] the Jewish ghetto. This analysis is true, but what is not mentioned is
this: Do some Arab intellectuals and politicians also
fear a peace agreement being signed, finally resolving
the Palestinian Cause? This question is one that must be contemplated,
regardless of the reality in Israel. Can the Arab
public awareness accept that one day it will wake up
without the Palestinian Cause, which is the issue that
causes us to weep and wail every day? We all know the highlights of negotiations between
the Palestinians and Arabs with Israel, such as when
Yasser Arafat acknowledged the two-state solution in
1988 and recognized UN Security Council resolution
242. Since that pivotal moment, we have been taking
one step forwards and two steps back. Whenever there
is any progress of breakthrough [in negotiations] this
is either hampered by the Arabs or Palestinians, or by
Israel. This was the case with the assassination of
[Yitzhak] Rabin, and with the current Netanyahu
government. Is it possible to deal with the Palestinian issue
as a dispute that has a solution? Or is this a dispute
that is intrinsically unsolvable? If a solution is
impossible, why are we chasing after a mirage? Are the Arabs as serious about fighting Israeli and
ending the Israeli presence in Palestinian lands, as
we always hear? If this was the case – and of course,
it is not – why aren't Arab policies formulated on the
basis of war, rather than peace? We want war, and we want peace and development at
the same time! This is not possible, and this current
chaos only serves to benefit those who want to milk
the issue to gain public support. Perhaps a number of groups and figures in the Arab
media will lose their purpose if the Palestinian Cause
is resolved in a manner similar to previously resolved
international conflicts. Many people will feel somewhat depressed [if the
Palestinian issue is resolved]. Their situation is
similar to that of Abu Laila al Muhalhal who is better
known as Al Zeir Salim, who fought the forty year
Basus war [famous conflict in medieval Arabia between
two rival clans] to avenge the death of his brother at
the hands of Jassas. Al-Zeir Salem could have ended
the war much more quickly by simply killing Jassas
himself, however had he done so, he would have lost
his sense of purpose to that which he dedicated his
entire life to, namely, revenge. Therefore, it is no coincidence that Amal Donkol's
renowned poem "Do not Reconcile" which became an Arab
slogan, rejecting any possibility for negotiation or
peaceful solution to the Palestinian issue. This poem
is derived from al-Zeir Salem's story and its theme is
that of burning revenge, which ultimately consumes the
avenger rather than his target. According to Amal Donkol's poem, the Palestinian
Cause should not be treated as if it were solvable. No
solution should be sought, for this would undermine
the Cause in the same manner that al-Zir Salem always
believed that killing Jassas would not reconcile his
issue. Amal Donkol’s poem reads: "Do not reconcile… Even if they granted you gold. What if they gouged out your eyes, And then placed two jewels instead, Would you be able to see? There are things that cannot be purchased." So the Palestinian Cause is something that cannot
be seen or purchased, and therefore it cannot be
touched or addressed or examined in a realistic
manner… I recently read Saudi Arabian politician and
intellectual [and Saudi Minister of Labor] Ghazi
Algosaibi's book entitled "The Accompanying Minister"
in which he highlighted his memories and his
impressions of a number of politicians and heads of
state whom he met, accompanied or spoke with. He recalled important details of the twelfth Arab
Summit that was held in Fez in November 1981, where
then Crown Prince Fahd Bin Abdulaziz launched his
8-point initiative to solve the Palestinian issue. The
proposal was agreed upon by a majority of Arab states,
with Saudi Arabia shouldering the responsibility for
implementing this. The Fez Initiative, which was also
called the Fahd Plan, called for a complete Israeli
withdrawal, and the establishment of an independent
Palestinian state, with regional coexistence. Numerous
Arab leaders supported the initiative; even President
Arafat did not reject it although his support was
vague, due to the presence of the Palestinian and Arab
groups who rejected this. What was important in this was a dangerous phrase
that was uttered during the Fez Summit, when the
debate over the Fahd Plan reached its peak. Saudi
Arabia and other countries supporting the initiative
put forward their opinion, whilst other countries gave
theirs. Crown Prince Fahd was disturbed by the
defamation that his country was being subject to, and
so he announced that he was withdrawing the
initiative. The summit was suspended, and the then
Crown Prince left for Spain. Ghazi Algosaibi, who
witnessed this himself, wrote that the then Crown
Prince "was depressed and disappointed. He spent the
entire time in the palace, only leaving on one
occasion." Algosaibi wrote that Crown Prince Fahd
"talked about the Arab position with a sense of
despair, he said 'our land is not occupied and our
people were not displaced, we have done all of this
for their sake, and what was the result? We were hurt
and insulted!'" In addition to this, a member of the Palestinian
delegation, speaking outside the Arab Summit, said:
“Why should Saudi Arabia interfere? We accept seeing
our sons homeless and our land being occupied. We
accept this and do not want peace”. King Fahd wondered "How can we have an
understanding with such people?" (Ghazi Algosaibi's book the Attendant Minister,
page 192, 193.) The point of all this is to say that the moment we
start dealing with the [Palestinian] issue in a way
outside of its normal framework, but rather view it as
an issue that cannot be solved, we transcend from the
realm of intellect, to the realm of sentiment and
emotion. As a result of this, understanding is lost
because there is a lack of a logical link between
issues. |