  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The Purpose Of Dialogue
Azmi Bishara Al-Hayat 2003/12/11
If the dialogue over a truce between Palestinians and Israelis is genuine, then it must contain elements of mutuality and compel both parties to abide by the rules of this ceasefire. And if Israel, which is the strongest in this equation as well as the occupying force, does not contribute in the dialogue of ceasefire, then this truce will not be implemented on the ground.
Nobody can negotiate with Israel, and Israel negotiates with no one over the rules of truce, and it is proud of this. Thus, there is no real dialogue of truce and it is the right of Palestinians to choose efficient means of struggle and avoid useless ones.
Currently, there are no apparent signs of a fair resolution for the Palestinian cause, and Sharon knows this. And because he knows it, he is asking Palestinians to either accept a preliminary long-term resolution, or be threatened with Israeli actions on one side, similar to the building of the racial discrimination wall.
And since the Palestinians do not accept a resolution of strict minimums, then the goal must be to protect the Palestinian unity in order to be able to accomplish the following basic missions:
1- Defining the goals of the national Palestinian struggle at each stage
2- Defining the means of the struggle and agreeing on maintaining its caliber and its general directions
3- Contributing in the operation of building the Palestinian society, and enabling it to survive
4- Deciding on a democratic national political discourse that could be addressed to the world public opinion
In order to be able to plan such actions at this stage, the Palestinian people must come together under the rule of a common national leadership. This national leadership must include the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and other parties that do not belong to this same organization.
The united national leadership is the only possible organization that could control the pace of the means of struggle in the absence of an Israeli truce approval. Thus, such leadership will be doing what is in the best interest of the Palestinian struggle itself. The choice will then become collective, which will lead to the legal punishment of those who participate in decision-making, and do not stick to these decisions that they made.
Those who think that the choice of peace presently exists, but is prevented by the division among Palestinians, are playing with the fire of civil war in a country that is under occupation.
The objective of the dialogue must be to gain political support enabling the building of a national unity, even if gradual, through the strategic frameworks and organizations agreement.
If the objective of the dialogue is to provide a period of calm that would enable the occurrence of negotiations with Israel and the U.S, or would give the Palestinian Authority a chance to score a few points, and therefore make it a member in the negotiations, then the outcome would be a lack of the trust necessary to the success of the dialogue.
The point is that dialogue enables the disregard of evaluating the means of struggle, while this is required for the Palestinian national best interest. Without the existence of a united national leadership, it becomes a waste of time to talk about a united strategy, and there is no guarantee that adequate efforts priorities are invested against principal battles, a current one of which is the fatal battle against the building of the wall of discrimination. This wall must be opposed with an absolute national unity, and this cannot be done while undertaking operations that target civilians.
Dialogue and Palestinian national unity are also unilateral steps that can confront all of Israel's unilateral measures, starting from the spreading of the occupation to the building of the wall.
 |