Nakba is back on the Palestinian agenda. For nearly three decades, Palestinians
were told that Nakba – or catastrophe – is a thing of the past. That real peace
requires compromises and sacrifices, therefore, the original sin that led to
the destruction of their historic homeland should be entirely removed from any
“pragmatic” political discourse. They were urged to move on.
اضافة اعلان
The consequences of that shift in narrative were
dire. Disowning Nakba, the single most important event that shaped modern
Palestinian history, resulted in more than political division between the
so-called radicals and the supposedly peace-loving pragmatists, the likes of
Mahmoud Abbas and his Palestinian Authority; it divided Palestinian communities
in Palestine and across the world along political, ideological and class lines.
Following the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993,
it became clear that the Palestinian struggle for freedom was being entirely
redefined and reframed. It was no longer a Palestinian fight against Zionism
and Israeli settler colonialism that goes back to the start of the 20th
century, but a “conflict” between two equal parties, with equally legitimate
territorial claims that can only be resolved through “painful concessions”.
The first such concession was relegating the core
issue of the right of return of Palestinian refugees who were driven out of
their villages and cities in 1947-48. That Palestinian Nakba paved the way for
Israel’s “independence”, which was declared atop the rubble and smoke of nearly
500 destroyed and burnt Palestinian villages and towns.
At the start of the “peace process”, Israel was
asked to honor the right of return of Palestinians, although symbolically.
Israel refused. Palestinians were then pushed to relegate that fundamental
issue to the “final status negotiations”, which never took place. This meant
that millions of Palestinian refugees – many of whom are still living in
refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan, as well as in the occupied
Palestinian territories – were dropped from the political conversation
altogether.
If it were not for the continued social and cultural
activities of the refugees themselves, insisting on their rights and teaching
their children to do the same, terms such as Nakba and right of return would
have been completely dropped out of the Palestinian political lexicon.
While some Palestinians rejected the marginalization
of the refugees, insisting that the subject is also a political, not merely a
humanitarian, one, others were willing to move on as if this right were of no
consequence.
Various Palestinian officials affiliated the
now defunct peace process have made clear that the right of return was no
longer a Palestinian priority. But none came even close to the way PA President
Abbas, himself, framed the Palestinian position in a 2012 interview with
Israeli Channel 2.
“Palestine now for me is the ’67 borders, with East
Jerusalem as its capital. This is now and forever …. This is Palestine for me.
I am [a] refugee, but I am living in Ramallah,” he said.
Abbas had it completely wrong, of course. Whether he
wished to exercise his right of return or not, that right, according to UN General Assembly Resolution 194, is simply “inalienable”, meaning that
neither Israel, nor the Palestinians themselves can deny or forfeit it.
Let alone the lack of intellectual integrity of
separating the tragic reality of the present from its main root cause, Abbas
lacked political wisdom as well. With his “peace process” floundering, and with
the lack of any tangible political solution, he simply decided to abandon
millions of refugees, denying them the very hope of having their homes, land
and dignity restored.
Since then, Israel, along with the US, has fought
Palestinians on two different fronts: through denying them any political
horizon and by attempting to dismantle their historically enshrined rights,
mainly their right of return.
Washington’s war on the Palestinian refugee agency
UNRWA falls under the latter category as the aim was, and remains, the
destruction of the very legal and humanitarian infrastructures that allow
Palestinian refugees to see themselves as a collective of people seeking
repatriation, reparations and justice.
… with the Palestinian reality worsening under the deepening system of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid, Palestinians now understand that they have no possible alternative but their unity, their resistance and the return to the fundamentals of their struggle.
Yet, all such efforts continue to fail. Far more
important than Abbas’ personal concessions to Israel, UNRWA’s ever-shrinking
budget or the failure of the international community to restore Palestinians’
rights is the fact that the Palestinian people are, once again, unifying around
the Nakba anniversary, thus insisting on the right of return of the seven
million refugees in Palestine and the shattat (diaspora).
Ironically, it was Israel that has unwittingly
reunified Palestinians around Nakba. By refusing to concede an inch of
Palestine, let alone allow Palestinians to claim any victory, a state of their
own – demilitarized or otherwise – or allow a single refugee to go home, Israel
forced Palestinians to abandon Oslo and its numerous illusions. The
once-popular argument that the right of return was simply “impractical” no
longer matters, not to ordinary Palestinians and not to their intellectual or
political elites.
In political logic, for something to be impossible,
an alternative would have to be attainable. However, with the Palestinian
reality worsening under the deepening system of Israeli settler colonialism and
apartheid, Palestinians now understand that they have no possible alternative
but their unity, their resistance and the return to the fundamentals of their
struggle.
The Unity Intifada of last May was a culmination of
this new realization. Moreover, the rallies marking Nakba and events throughout
historic Palestine and the world on May 15 further helped crystallize the new
discourse that Nakba is no longer symbolic and the right of return is the
collective, core demand of most Palestinians.
Israel is now an apartheid state in the real meaning
of the word. Israeli apartheid, like any such system of racial separation, aims
at protecting the gains of nearly 74 years of unhinged colonialism, land theft
and military dominance. Palestinians, whether in Haifa, Gaza or Jerusalem, now
fully understand this and are increasingly fighting back as one nation.
And since Nakba and the subsequent ethnic cleansing
of Palestinian refugees are the common denominator behind all Palestinian
suffering, the term and its underpinnings are back at center stage in any
meaningful conversation on Palestine, as should have always been the case.
The writer is a journalist and the editor of The Palestine
Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest, co-edited with Ilan
Pappé, is “Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and
Intellectuals Speak out”. He is a non-resident senior research fellow at the
Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA).
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
