Weekly Commentary: Palestinian conditional non-violence - denying the
fundamental basis of the game

Aaron Lerner Date: 8 December 2005

"We [me and Marwan Barghouti] support negotiations and other peaceful means
with Israel as long as Palestinian aspirations may be realized through
negotiations. If Palestinian aspirations can't be realized through
peaceful means then the aspirations will be realized via resistance."
Palestinian "moderate" PLC representative Qadura Fares on Israel Radio 27
November 2005

"The PLO commits itself to the Middle East peace process, and to a peaceful
resolution of the conflict between the two sides and declares that all
outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be resolved through
negotiations. ... the PLO renounces the use of terrorism and other acts of
violence and will assume responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel
in order to assure their compliance, prevent violations and discipline
violators."

So wrote Yasser Arafat in his September 9, 1993 letter to Yitzhak Rabin, the
Prime Minister of Israel.

And it wasn't easy to get Arafat, acting as the representative of the
Palestinian people, to sign off on those phrases. Words that forfeited any
possible legal claim to the right to continue employing terrorism and other
acts of violence in what he and his supporters called a "liberation
struggle".

Take a look at the phrase: Arafat didn't just renounce the use of
"terrorism" - a word that the Arabs claim cannot ever be applied to their
murderous activity - he also renounced the use of "other acts of violence".
Arafat didn't want to sign off on the phrases, but Yitzhak Rabin made it
clear that this was his red line.

So there was Yasser Arafat in the summer of 1993: Arafat, essentially an
aging has-been exiled to Tunis from Beirut, watching as each month Israeli
security forces continued to whittle down their dwindling "wanted list" of
terrorists.

No. Contrary to what has become the story line in some quarters, it wasn't
the "children of the stones" that raised Arafat from the dung heap of
history, it was a group of Israeli ideologues seeking a way to facilitate an
Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Oslo was Arafat's lifeline. Israel could take it or leave it. So Arafat
blinked first.

It wasn't a minor matter then. And it shouldn't be a minor matter today.

Let's be clear about this: when the entire Palestinian leadership - from
White House Lawn "man of peace" Mahmoud Abbas on down - explain that their
commitment to nonviolence is conditioned on their getting what they want,
they are trashing this fundamental Palestinian commitment.

That's not to say that Arafat's letter and the agreements that followed it
stripped the Palestinians of the ability to struggle for their interests.
It just limited them to pursuing them via non-violent means - both on the
domestic and the international front.

Arafat's September 9, 1993 letter to Yitzhak Rabin committing to "a peaceful
resolution of the conflict. . . resolved through negotiations" and assuming
"responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel in order to assure their
compliance, prevent violations and discipline violators" was supposed to be
a watershed event.

But it wasn't.

Because from day one that commitment has been ignored and forgotten.

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-3-7255730
INTERNET ADDRESS: imra@netvision.net.il
Website: http://www.imra.org.il