"We offered them peace yet those damn
Palestinians don't want it, and prefer violence
because they are 'violent' people" is what we
usually get out of the Israeli/American
statements justifying the eruption of the
Al-Aqsa Intifada. Yet this 'peace' that
Israel/US are calling for is not a just peace,
it's merely a front to a more advanced type
of imperialism that forces the Palestinian
people into submission and himiliation.
'Peace' is Just a Word
Throughout the recent Al-Aqsa Intifada in the West Bank and Gaza
Strip, we have heard all sorts of media distortion and Israeli
propaganda in the West, especially in the pro-Israeli (in media and
foreign policy) United States. Yet one of the most illogical and distorted
-in my opinion- is the claim that Palestinians do not want peace, are
'violent' in their nature, and would rather 'pressure' Israel to give them
what they want; such claims and implications we often hear and read in
US media.
Before trying to understand the Palestinians' resort to the recent
Al-Aqsa Intifada (uprise) and the previous Intifada (1987), we have to
understand the value of 'land' and 'home' to Palestinians. For an
American saying that (Richmond, Indiana) is my home, for example,
does not mean the same as for a Palestinian saying that (Nablus,
Palestine) is my home. A Palestinian family could live in the same house
for generations, with each new generation of the family inheriting it from
their fathers and ancestors. Even the name of the house or land
becomes attached to that family, such as 'Beit Al-Far', which means the
house of the Al-Far family, or 'Beit Rima', which is a whole village from
which the big family 'Rimawi' descends ('Rimawi' is extracted from
'Rima'). A main reason for this strong attachment is that many of the
lands used to be, and still are, farming lands which are passed on from
one generation to another within the family, and is often a main source
of living and pride.
Now coming back to the focus of the article, and keeping the land-
attachment concept in our minds, one has to draw distinction between
just peace and the Israeli/American idea of peace. Deep in their hearts,
Palestinians want all of their land back (historical Palestine), and want
the 'strangers' out of it. Such a claim comes from a mix of nationalistic
feelings and their universal legal rights to their lands and homes.
Nevertheless, Palestinians realize that their only way of living in peace
is
to compromise, and to let go of their claim to the 70% of their land to
the 'stranger', Israel.
The current mainstream Palestinian demands are clear: (1) A just
settlement for the millions of Palestinian refugees, where there are more
Palestinians outside Palestine than inside. Israel refuses to accept
responsibility for the refugee problem till this day, despite the UN
Resolution 194 issued in 1948, which states that "...the [Palestinian]
refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their
neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date...
compensation should be paid for property of those choosing not to
return." (2) Establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state
on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem being its capital.
The West Bank and Gaza Strip should not be divided, whether by
settlements or Israeli roads, as it is the case right now. This is such
a big
compromise from Palestinians, since all of Jerusalem is considered
occupied land, and Israel is demanded to return all of Jerusalem back to
the Palestinians along with the West Bank and Gaza Strip according to
UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which Israel refuses to
accept and implement till this day. (3) The immediate release of the
several thousand Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, who have suffered
the worst types of brutalization and torture according to several human
rights organizations.
Despite the enormous amount of compromises that Palestinians have
made in exchange for peace, the Israeli/American idea of peace
according to the recent Camp David proposal is bluntly as follows: (1)
Concerning the refugees, Israel still "would not accept any legal or
civilian responsibility for their displacement", and suggests the return
of
only 100,000 out of the current registered 3.2 million refugees, and
considers that a fulfillment of UN Res. 194. (2) Concerning the
Palestinian state, there would be so many restraints for it that it ceases
to become a state, such as "the state would not make alliances with
other countries without Israel's approval", or "Israel would retain
management over water sources in the West Bank while approving a
limited quota to the Palestinians." (3) Concerning Jerusalem, "Palestine
would obtain sovereignty over suburbs in the north and the south of
Jerusalem that would be annexed to the West Bank, including Abu
Dees, Alezariye and eastern Sawahre." These are not even parts of
Jerusalem, they are 'suburbs' and villages of Jerusalem, and legally Israel
is required to return all of Jerusalem back.
Therefore, this 'peace' that the Americans and Israelis and proposing is
a foul and unjust peace. Without even mentioning other central issues
such as settlements, and the increasingly diminishing size of the West
Bank, I would hope it has already become clear to the reader that the
Palestinians have compromised more than anyone would have in their
place, and that they genuinely want a just peace. Still, Israel rudely
insists that it has given the Palestinians more than ever in Camp David,
and that the Palestinians are not willing to 'compromise'. Still, the
Palestinians do not have the right to throw a rock or burn a tire or even
shoot a bullet, whenever possible, to express their objections and anger
(which would be ignored if expressed otherwise), and to get their
message through to the rest of the world. And still, the Palestinians are
accused of being 'violent', and not 'wanting peace'. This is not peace,
this is merely a label that America and Israel try to stick on what, to
the
Palestinians, is utter humiliation and disgrace. Palestinians often describe
the American/Israeli idea of peace as 'rape', where they are forced to
accept it, yet if they object to it they'll immediately become 'violent',
'peace- rejecters' and even 'terrorists', not to mention exposing
themselves to the insanity of US-made Israeli tanks, anti-tank missiles
and Apache helicopters.
Rae'd Abu-Ghazaleh