| 
 Al-Jazeerah History
 
 Archives
 
 Mission & Name
 
 Conflict Terminology
 
 Editorials
 
 Gaza Holocaust
 
 Gulf War
 
 Isdood
 
 Islam
 
 News
 
 News Photos
 
 Opinion  
	
	
	Editorials
 
 US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
 
 www.aljazeerah.info
 
	  
           |  | 
 Confronting the Obvious Truth: Erikat's 
	Palestinian Authority Vs. the People
 
 By Ramzy Baroud
 
 Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, November 2, 2015
 
 
 
 
		  
			  |  |  |  
			  |  |  |  ***Saeb Erekat is an enigmatic character. Despite minimal popularity 
	  among Palestinians, he is omnipresent, appears regularly on television and 
	  speaks with the moral authority of an accomplished leader whose legacy is 
	  rife with accolades and an astute, unwavering vision.
 
 When 
	  Palestinians were polled by the Jerusalem Media and Communications 
	  Center (JMCC) in August, just prior to the current Intifada, only 3 
	  percent approved of his leadership - compared with the still meagre 
	  approval rating of 16 percent of his boss, Palestinian Authority 
	  President, Mahmoud Abbas. Even those who are often cast as alternative 
	  leaders - Fatah leader, Marwan Barghouti, and former Gaza-based Hamas 
	  Government Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh - were nowhere near popular, 
	  achieving 10.5 and 9.8 percent of the vote respectively.
 
 It was 
	  as if Palestinians were telling us and their traditional leaderships, in 
	  particular, that they are fed up with the old rhetoric, the constant 
	  let-downs, the unabashed corruption and the very culture of defeat that 
	  has permeated the Palestinian political elite for an entire generation.
 
 Abbas has operated his political office on the assumption that, so 
	  long as Palestinians received their monthly salaries and are content with 
	  his empty promises and occasional threats – of resigning, 
	  resisting against Israel, lobbing bombshell speeches at the UN, etc. – 
	  then no one is likely to challenge his reign in Areas A and B - tiny 
	  cantons within the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Jerusalem.
 
 Erekat has been the primary enabler of that PA charade, for he is the 
	  ‘chief negotiator’, whose protracted term in that precarious post has 
	  negotiated nothing of value for the Palestinians.
 
 In 2002, I 
	  followed the Israeli invasion of the supposedly self-autonomous PA areas 
	  in the West Bank, when Erekat made an appeal on Al-Jazeera Arabic 
	  television to the Israeli Government to exercise sanity and common 
	  sense.  The entire display of the PA leadership was beyond tragic, proof 
	  that it had no real authority of its own and no control over the events on 
	  the ground as Palestinian fighters battled the re-invading Israeli army. 
	  He appealed to Israel as if he felt genuinely betrayed by its military 
	  onslaught.
 
 When Al 
	  Jazeera released thousands of secret documents in January 2011, 
	  revealing discussions behind closed doors between Israeli and Palestinian 
	  negotiators, Erekat held the lion’s 
	  share of blame. With a clear mandate from his superiors, he appeared 
	  uninterested in many Palestinian political aspirations, including 
	  Palestinian sovereignty in occupied East Jerusalem - the spark behind the 
	  current and previous Intifadas. He offered Israel the “biggest Yerushalaim 
	  in Jewish history, symbolic number of refugees return, demilitarised 
	  state… what more can I give?” he was quoted in the Palestine 
	  Papers.
 
 What is particularly interesting about Erekat, and 
	  equally applicable to most PA leaders and officials, is that, no matter 
	  how devastating their roles - which they continue to play out, whether 
	  through political incompetence or outright corruption - they do not seem 
	  to go away. They may change position, hover around the same circle of 
	  failed leadership, but they tend to resurface and repeatedly regurgitate 
	  the same old language, clichés, empty threats and promises.
 
 After retreating for a few weeks as Intifada youth took to the streets to 
	  protest the Israeli occupation, PA spokespersons, including Erekat, are 
	  now back on the scene, speaking of squandered opportunities for peace, two 
	  states and the entire inept discourse, as if peace was ever, indeed, at 
	  hand, and if the so-called ‘two state solution’ was ever a solution.
 
 In a recent interview with Al-Jazeera’s ‘UpFront’, Erekat 
	  warned that the PA was on the verge of shutting down, as if the very 
	  existence of the PA was a virtue in itself. Established in 1994 as a 
	  transitional political body that would guide the process of Palestinian 
	  independence, the PA morphed to become a security arm that served as a 
	  first line of defense for the Israeli army, in addition to guarding its 
	  own interests.  Billions of dollars later, and after intensive military 
	  training provided by the US, the UK, Italy, and other western and 
	  ‘moderate’ Arab countries, the PA security forces have done a splendid job 
	  of cracking down on any dissent among Palestinians.
 
 So why is 
	  Erekat warning of the PA collapse as if the sorry leadership in Ramallah 
	  is the center of everything that Palestinians have ever aspired for? “Soon 
	  enough Netanyahu will find himself the only [one] responsible between the 
	  River Jordan and the Mediterranean because he is destroying the 
	  Palestinian Authority,” Erekat said.  So what?  According to the Geneva 
	  Conventions which designate Israel as the Occupying Power, Netanyahu is, 
	  indeed, responsible for the welfare, security and well-being of the 
	  occupied Palestinians, until a just political solution is assured and 
	  enforced by the international community.
 
 Using the same tactic 
	  which, along with Abbas and other PA officials, was utilized repeatedly in 
	  the past, he vowed that “soon, very soon, you’re going to hear some 
	  decisions” about disbanding the PA.
 
 It matters little what Erekat 
	  and his Ramallah circle determine as the proper course of action. Not only 
	  has his language become obsolete and his references irrelevant, but the 
	  entire Oslo ‘peace process’ travesty – which delivered nothing but more 
	  illegal settlements and military torment - was dead a long time ago. In 
	  fact, it was the Al-Aqsa Intifada in 2000 that killed Oslo and the ten 
	  years between the end of that uprising and the advent of a new one were 
	  filled with mere haggling and desperate attempts at breathing life into a 
	  ‘process’ that made some corrupt Palestinians a whole lot richer.
 
 The hope is that the current Intifada will cleanse the residue of that 
	  dead process, and surpass the PA altogether, not through acts of violence 
	  and vengeance, but rather through the establishment of a new leadership 
	  manned by good women and men who are born in the heart of Palestinian 
	  Resistance, in the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem. The new leadership 
	  cannot be imposed from above, or achieved after deliberation with 
	  ‘moderate’ Arabs, but selected through an organic, grassroots process that 
	  is blind to factional allegiances, religion, gender and family lineage.
 
 Palestinian Intifadas do not liberate land but liberate people who 
	  assume their role in the struggle for national liberation. The 1936 
	  Intifada liberated the fellahin peasants from the confines of the dominant 
	  clans and their allegiances to Arab regimes so that they could face up to 
	  the British and the Zionists; the 1987 Stone Intifada liberated the people 
	  from the grip of Tunisia-based factions, thus the establishment of the 
	  Unified National Leadership of the Intifada along with Hamas; the 2000 
	  Intifada was a thwarted attempt at escaping the sins of Oslo and its 
	  empowered elite. For the current Intifada to achieve a degree of initial 
	  success, it must find a way to entirely dismiss those who took it upon 
	  themselves to negotiate Palestinian rights and to enrich themselves at the 
	  expense of the impoverished and oppressed Palestinian people.
 
 If 
	  the Intifada is to be true to itself, it must seek to break not just the 
	  hegemony over the Palestinian political discourse which is unfairly 
	  championed by Erekat and his peers, but to break political boundaries as 
	  well, uniting all Palestinians around a whole new political agenda.
 
 There are many opportunists who are ready to pounce upon the current 
	  mobilization in Palestine, to use the people’s sacrifices as they see fit 
	  and, ultimately, return to the status quo as if no blood has been shed and 
	  no oppression still in place.
 
 After reiterating his support for 
	  the two-state solution which is now but a fading mirage, Erekat told 
	  Al-Jazeera, “We are fully supporting our people and their cry for 
	  freedom.”
 I think not, Mr. Erekat. Twenty years is long enough to 
	  show that those who have taken part in their people’s oppression, cannot 
	  possibly be the advocates of their people’s freedom.
 
 – Dr. Ramzy 
	  Baroud has been writing about the Middle East for over 20 years. He is an 
	  internationally-syndicated columnist, a media consultant, an author of 
	  several books and the founder of PalestineChronicle.com. His books include 
	  ‘Searching Jenin’, ‘The Second Palestinian Intifada’ and his latest ‘My 
	  Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story’. His website is: www.ramzybaroud.net.
 
 Share this article with your facebook friends
 
 
 
 |  |  |