In February of this year in an article published in The New York Times Mr Arafat put forward the Palestinian vision of peace. That of an independent and viable Palestinian state on the territories occupied by Israel in 1967, living as an equal partner alongside Israel with peace and security for both the Israeli and Palestinian peoples. The Palestinians recognized Israel's right to exist on 78 percent of historical Palestine with the understanding that we would be allowed to live in freedom on the remaining 22 percent, which has been under Israeli occupation since 1967. Our commitment to that two-state solution remains unchanged, but unfortunately, also remains unanswered. By accepting a peace based on 1967, we are the ones who are essentially sacrificing 1948. Israel must acknowledge this sacrifice--it's not just loss during a war but a major concession as the UN partition of Palestine is the only recognized international framework where true justice would be served.
We seek true liberty and full sovereignty: the right to control our own airspace, water resources and borders; to build up our own economy, to have healthy commercial relations with our neighbors, and to travel freely. In short, we seek only what the free world now enjoys and only what Israel insists on for itself: the right to control our own destiny and to take our place among free nations. The case for a Palestinian state is simple and compelling and rests on two elementary principles. One we choose just like any other human beings and are entitled to the same equality of treatment as any free and independent people of the world. The second principle is that this has always been and will always remain our country. We are here of right and not on the strength of the Oslo Accords or any other favors granted.
In addition, we seek a fair and just solution to the plight of Palestinian refugees who for 54 years have not been permitted to return to their homes. We understand Israel's demographic concerns and understand that the right of return of Palestinian refugees, a right guaranteed under international law and United Nations Resolution 194, must be implemented in a way that takes into account such concerns. However, just as we Palestinians must be realistic with respect to Israel's demographic desires, Israelis too must be realistic in understanding that there can be no solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict if the legitimate rights of these innocent civilians continue to be ignored. Left unresolved, the refugee issue has the potential to undermine any permanent peace agreement between Palestinians and Israelis. Israel must also be concerned with our demographic realities. How could we leave our brethren scattered in refugee camps? We are a united people, we must account for every soul. If Jews cannot be expected to forget about the holocaust how can we ignore the "nakba", the forced fight of Palestinians from their lands. We have sacrificed our vision of a return to the United Nations partition plan of 1948, a plan that certainly is more just than what was currently on offer for the sake of a solution. Our vision of peace is based on the complete end of the occupation and a return to Israel's 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as one city and as the capital of two states, Palestine and Israel.
We believe that dialogue is the means through which we achieve that peace, and we will negotiate without fear and fear not to negotiate. There can be no military solution; however, if confrontation is the only way to attain peace then we stand shoulder to shoulder with our brethren as one, united in cause and goal, prepared to defend what we hold precious.
If there is equity and justice in the peace accords, then any Palestinian can sign with the knowledge that every decent citizen would defend its implementation. If not, then no one can nor should they. We have suffered far too much to swap our shackles for a paper liberty. Israel must understand that peace is a process not an event.
Mr Arafat has tried and failed. It is as simple as that. That is why we need change. Failure should not be rewarded. Further more The Palestinian Authority's mandate expired in May 1999. Since then Mr Arafat has usurped the powers of his office illegally.
Mr Arafat now is simply interested in saving himself. He has had almost ten years of freedom to run his fiefdom and has succeeded essentially in bringing disdain and contempt on himself and most of his gang; the Authority became synonymous with brutality, autocracy lawlessness and unimaginable corruption. Mr Arafat has in effect created a "Rentier State." We aim to create a modern economy. With free markets, a high level of productivity, and we want to produce goods and services. We want to empower our citizens with the economic wherewithal to be truly independent.
We want to develop our education system so that they become centers of excellence in order that our children can compete in an ever globalized world economy. A new chapter is beginning in the history of the Middle East, which faces unprecedented economic, political and social challenges - not least in the wake of the events of 11 September. We need to be prepared to accept these challenges and a proper educational system would better prepare us for the turbulent times ahead.
Have you ever heard Mr. Arafat talk about what sort of education system or economy he would prefer, what sort of constitution he wants? No, because Mr. Arafat is not interested in the content of a Palestinian state, only the trappings of power, brass bands and red carpets; contours not substance.
As Mr Arafat hoards his bank accounts overseas Hamas have stepped into the social vacuum left by the Palestinian Authority. They're doing what the Palestinian Authority should have been doing: they've started to fund schools and clinics; they're giving out social security to the needy. Mr Arafat by his negligence has allowed the fundamentalists to hijack the political agenda.
The recent reshuffle by Mr. Arafat in the name of reform is no more than a cosmetic attempt to relieve himself of international and local pressure.
It defies logic to think that the Palestinian Authority has suddenly discovered the virtues of reform or democracy or that Mr.Arafat surrounding himself with the same old faces of failure and corruption to implement these changes will bring about any alleviation to the Palestinian peoples suffering.
A parliamentary system, with power vested in a Prime Minister, would be welcome and has many benefits. Foremost it would provide a civilized forum so that all points of view can be discussed in a peaceful manner and if term limits were imposed it would restrict the ability of any one person to dominate the political arena for any substantial length of time.
Power in the hands of a parliament should speed up the transformation of the independent militias into parties which would then demand from the government accountability and transparency two elements that are sorely missing in the current régime. The various different parties would need to form coalitions in order to vie for power and this theoretically would lead to moderation. It is time to give the Palestinian people a leadership that is worthy of them one that would serve the Palestinian people instead of themselves.
Let not the land of milk and honey be the land of blood and tears.
(Tawfiq Al-Ghussein, has just announced that he will stand against Yasser Arafat in January's elections. A graduate of Georgetown University’s School of Foreign service and London's School of Oriental and African Studies, a Palestinian nationalist he represents The Committee For A Free And Democratic Palestine. His father, Jaweed Al-Ghussein, was chairman of the Palestinian National Fund, running the PLO's finances for l3 years. In l996, he resigned having been critical of Arafat. Now he is under house arrest in Gaza. No charges have ever been made against him by the Palestinian Authority.)
