Tel Aviv/Ramallah - Israel Monday rejected a warning by the Palestinian top negotiator that the Palestinians could abandon efforts to reach a two-state solution to their decades-old conflict, if Israel continued "sabotaging" progress toward a peace deal. Ahmed Qureia, who heads the Palestinian negotiating team with Israel, said Sunday night the Palestinians might push for a "bi-national," joint Israeli-Palestinian state instead.
"The Palestinian leadership has been talking to its people and the world for over 30 years about an independent Palestinian state on the June 4, 1967 borders, but Israel keeps sabotaging this option," Qureia told top Fatah leaders in Ramallah.
"If Israel continues to reject this, then the alternative choice of the Palestinian people and its leadership is a bi-national state," he threatened.
He said the negotiations with Israel were "continuing" and "serious," but added, "We have not reached an agreement on any of the final status issues, which shows the difficulties we are facing."
Qureia's remarks were carried in a statement published on the Palpress news site, run by officials of his and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' secular Fatah party.
The notion of a bi-national state has been long popular with left-wing Palestinian intellectuals.
But the debate about it has intensified over the past months as many among them have grown increasingly frustrated at what they believe is a lack of progress in the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations on a two-state solution.
Some have accused Israel of dragging out the negotiations and putting off a solution.
Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Arye Mekel, however, denied the accusation.
"It takes two to tango and we are negotiating and we will continue to negotiate. It's not such a easy thing to solve, this problem. It's been around for 100 years," he told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa. "But it's a positive thing that we sit together and talk.
"Our policy is well known. We believe in the two-state solution: One state for the Palestinians living side by with Israel in peace according to the road map and according to the Annapolis programme," he added.
"The Palestinians also believe in that or they wouldn't be sitting with us day in and day out."
Israel has an Arab minority of almost 1.5 million, who live alongside 5.5 million Jews.
Most of them are Palestinians, who stayed when the Jewish state was founded in 1948 and given Israeli citizenship. Many others had fled to the West Bank, Gaza and neighbouring Arab countries.
Today, they would form nearly 5.3 million, combined with the 3.8 million Palestinians living in the occupied territories.
While in Israel, the debate on a bi-national state has been relegated to the fringes, it is supported by more than 23 per cent of the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza, according to the latest survey published in March by the Palestinian Jerusalem Media and Communications Centre (JMCC).
More Palestinians, however, (over 47 per cent) continue to support a two-state solution, according to the poll, which questioned nearly 1,200 Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza and had a margin of error of 3 per cent.
Some 12 per cent support a Palestinian state or an Islamic state on all of what is now Israel and the West Bank and Gaza, while the rest is undecided.
The radical Hamas movement ruling Gaza is the strongest advocate of an Islamic state in all of historic Palestine.
Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said Monday Qureia's remark "reflects the breakdown" of Abbas' Ramallah-based administration and the Fatah leadership.
"Hamas does not recognize Israel and does not accept its existence on an inch of the Palestinian land, and if this generation is not able to liberate the land, this does not mean we should give up on our right to the land," he said in a statement from Gaza.
Palestinian ‘gambit' could be prophetic
Omar Karmi, Foreign Correspondent
RAMALLAH // For the second time in four years, Ahmed Qurei, the chief Palestinian negotiator with Israel and a former prime minister, has wielded what can best be described as the bi-national weapon.
In a closed-door meeting on Sunday night with top Fatah leaders, Mr Qurei, a stalwart of the PLO, told those assembled that while the current round of negotiations was serious this did not mean that agreement was in sight.
In fact, he said, in remarks that were repeated in a subsequent statement issued by his office, "if Israel will not support our choice of an independent Palestinian state in the occupied territories including East Jerusalem, then the alternative demand of the Palestinian people and leadership will be a bi-national state".
His remarks would appear to be a bargaining gambit as Palestinian-Israeli negotiations perhaps enter a crucial phase.
Although little tangible progress has been made in the current round of negotiations that started in November at Annapolis, some analysts are convinced that with Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, and George W Bush, the US president, all reaching the end of their tenures at the same time, a concerted attempt at reaching at least a framework agreement will be made in the next month or two.
A failure to do so, many predict, will fatally undermine those on the Palestinian side who still advocate negotiations as the most effective means by which to secure Palestinian aspirations. That, in turn, will usher in a period of uncertainty, perhaps a sustained flare-up of violence and could see a return to full Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. From there, the best option from a Palestinian perspective would be to simply strive for a bi-national state.
The bi-national state, the solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict favoured by Palestinian intellectuals and exiles, notably the late Edward Said, as well as the PLO until 1988, calls for a single secular state for both Palestinians and Jews. There are variants on how such a state would look, from limited autonomy for both peoples within the state to a simple democratic one-man, one-vote system. In all cases, the bi-national state solution is vehemently rejected by most Israelis as spelling the end of the Zionist project that calls for a Jewish state.
The PLO gave up its pursuit of a bi-national state in 1988 in favour of a two-state solution that would see a Palestinian state created alongside Israel on territories occupied by Israel in 1967 and along the pre-1967 armistice lines. That goal has framed all negotiation efforts since, including the current Annapolis process.
But as Israeli settlement building has continued apace, especially in and around occupied East Jerusalem, which is envisaged to become the capital of a future Palestinian state, more and more Palestinian voices are heard calling for the PLO to abandon the two-state solution and revert to a one-state formula.
"Israel has in effect presented us only with a third option after its bantustan-isation of the occupied territories," said Ali Jarbawi a Palestinian analyst. "That is to accept a state of ‘leftovers'. But this is simply not acceptable. If Israel does not agree to a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders, we have to ask for a one-state solution."
This threat, Mr Jarbawi said, is effective because it involves disbanding the Palestinian Authority to leave populated Palestinian areas without rule of law.
The ensuing chaos, he said, will force Israel to take back full control over Palestinians. With the overall Palestinian population in historic Palestine fast reaching parity with the Jewish population, Israel will soon be faced with a majority non-Jewish population under its rule.
"It's a threat because it basically waves the demographic issue in Israel's face," said Gerald Steinberg, an Israeli analyst. However, "it's a mistaken threat, it's overused. The last time, it led to the unilateral Israeli disengagement process and most Israelis are still in favour of unilateral disengagement. If this threat turns into more than a threat, the Israeli response would be more unilateralism."
Mr Steinberg rejected the notion Israel would have to re-occupy areas of the West Bank and said if Palestinians go down this route, Israel will do what it wants and wash its hands of the rest. He also said it is more likely that Mr Qurei's comments came in the context of a bargaining process, though he would not venture a guess as to how critical a stage negotiations had reached.
"It's very hard for outsiders to gauge. We've seen statements that say they're making good progress and statements to the opposite effect. All of these are tactics designed by both sides to create pressure. But I think the general issue that has to be faced is that both leaderships are extremely weak," Mr Steinberg said.
Mr Jarbawi said Mr Qurei's statement is an admission that the two-state solution is going nowhere.
"[The statement] means one of two things, either Qurei wants something more in negotiations or he wants a completely new Israeli position. Regardless, the positions are very far apart on all issues, on borders, on Jerusalem, on refugees. I don't think the Israelis are going to give in on these issues to meet minimum Palestinian demands."
With Israel - in public at least - ruling out discussing Jerusalem, one of the major final status issues, it is hard to see how even a framework agreement can be reached.
But without any agreement from the current round of negotiations by the end of the year, all options would seem open again. In Washington, a new administration will take time to settle in. Israel will at the very least have a new prime minister and very likely will be preparing for early elections. The Palestinians, too, are due to vote for a president in January, and without any agreement, it is not clear what Mr Abbas will take to his people to counter the inevitable charge by Hamas that negotiations lead nowhere.
Mr Qurei's words may only be intended as a negotiating gambit. But they could turn out to be prophetic.
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|