No more games that subvert peace

Originally, we thought negotiations with Israel were a viable means of achieving peace. At present, many of us no longer think so.

Since the start of the Arab-Israeli conflict, which in reality means since the Israeli occupation of Palestinian and Arab lands by force, the Arab position has always been simple and straightforward: Israel should withdraw from all occupied lands in accordance with international laws and resolutions.

To avoid implementation of such laws and resolutions, Israel came up with the idea of negotiations.

Several Arab sides to the conflict rejected the notion of negotiations outright, seeing it both as incorrect and a deviant tactic for avoiding withdrawal from occupied lands, and for gaining time to prolong and enforce occupation.

Over the years, the Arabs changed their mind.

Due to a mixture of international persuasion and pressure and to a lurking thought that perhaps Israel was serious about peace, they accepted negotiations as a means of resolving the conflict.

At various junctures, negotiations yielded some results, especially when the US and some other partners played an active role.

This was the case with respect to the Camp David Accords in 1978, the Madrid Conference in 1991, the Oslo agreement in 1993, and the Jordan-Israeli peace treaty in 1994.

These agreements have yielded some results, but not all the results or peace that Palestinians and Arabs hoped for.

Since 1994, the Arabs have found themselves entangled in the labyrinth of negotiating with Israel.

There were a couple of moments when concrete results looked possible. In reality, however, nothing materialised.

In reality, also, Arabs found, to their dismay, that Israel is in fact using negotiations as a delaying tactic and as a means of buying time, cementing occupation and expanding the borders of the “Jewish” state.

And there were many other games: recognising not just Israel, but Israel as a “Jewish” state, discourse on the freezing of settlements rather than their dismantling, negotiations on Palestinian autonomy rather than full statehood, etc.

Israel now wants Palestinians and Arabs to bypass the two-state solution. More games and tactics to buy time and subvert peace.

The moral of the story — many of us have realised and many should be realising — is that negotiations are no longer relevant or viable, and engagement with Israeli games about settlements, Jerusalem, the “Jewish” state, one-state or two-state solutions, the Golan Heights, etc. is a pure waste of time.

What the Palestinians and Arabs, therefore, should adopt is a reversal of tactics and a rejection of all these games, and insistence on the original simple and straightforward demand: that Israel withdraws from all occupied Arab and Palestinian territories, in accordance with UN resolutions and international law.