Jew World Order

Palestinian political parties met in Cairo this week and agreed to a mechanism for holding Palestinian Authority legislative and presidential elections, to be held in May and July respectively. The two-day summit also vaguely committed to elections for the Palestinian National Council, the parliament of the PLO, which still serves as the international representative of the Palestinian people.

In a statement released by rivals Fatah and Hamas, and 12 more factions that attended the meeting, the groups promised to “abide by the timetable set by the decree on legislative and presidential elections, with emphasis on holding them in Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip without exception, and pledging to respect and accept their results.”

The emphasis is, obviously, on the legislative council and presidential elections in order to renew legitimacy of the existing institutions—albeit under Israel’s multi-tiered system on oppression. 

The 1996 and 2006 Palestinian elections

In 2006, a third of Palestinian voters in Gaza, the West Bank, and a limited number in East Jerusalem, cast ballots against the incumbent Palestinian Authority government, led by Fatah. Opposition against Fatah stemmed from the public increasingly viewing it as a pseudo-post-colonial government, which had failed to deliver promises, most importantly, independence and sovereignty. Instead, it had offered empty platitudes coupled with the rise of Palestinian security forces who engage in security coordination with Israel and are trained by the U.S. Corruption followed, and the national struggle for freedom was no longer a priority but an aesthetic, or “flag independence.”

Under Fatah’s tenure, the Palestinian Authority built new institutions, reflecting the supposed equality between the two parties, Israel and Palestine. These institutions sold the illusion of “independence” to the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.  Among these institutions was the Palestinian Legislative Council, which is the parliament of the Palestinian Authority and represents only residents of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. By comparison, the Palestinian National Council is the unicameral parliament of the PLO and represents Palestinians across the globe, including those living in refugee camps and in the diaspora.

When the first Palestinian Authority elections were held in 1996, it became clear that it was impossible to vote freely. Foremost, how are free, democratic elections held under occupation? The election result was known in advance. With the propaganda used to sell the Oslo Accords signed the year before, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for a political faction that had shown opposition to the agreements to win a majority of seats in the new legislative council.  Expectantly, “victory” went to Fatah , the party that had signed the accords, along with some seats for token friendly opposition to complete the picture. 

There was broader participation in the 2006 elections where voters were inspired by the possibility of change from within.  Islamist blocs in particular increased. The results of the legislative elections were a surprise, if not a blow to the Fatah party: Hamas won the legislative elections with 74 seats and Fatah won only 45 seats. Within a year the Palestinian government would split in two with Fatah running the West Bank and Hamas running Gaza.

During the apartheid era, South Africa was similarly partitioned into 10 Bantustans, four of which the apartheid government declared as “independent” states. The white apartheid government controlled 87% of the land and a majority of the resources, leaving little for the native black people.

Incidentally the Palestinian signatories of the Oslo Accords aspired to establish an a state on a similar land ratio: on 22 % of the land, compared to the Bantustan system which offered black South Africans 13% of the land.

The outcome of the 2006 elections carried a clear message against partition, and the results even came as a surprise to those who won the majority.

The surprise also echoed in Washington and in Israel. Palestinian voters had dared to take the spread of democracy in the Middle East seriously. Within two years, a long-lasting, horrific, and crippling blockade was imposed on the Gaza Strip, by land, sea, and air. 

Just as the 1996 elections did not lead to an independent Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital, the 2006 elections similarly did not lead to either independence, or liberation, despite its dramatically different outcome. On the contrary, each election birthed an authority that governs without sovereignty.

After the 2006 election, Hamas took on the role of prison warden, entrenching itself and regulating the lives of 2 million prisoners. Day by day, we have seen this authority shift from a stage of resistance to the siege, to coexisting with it, and finally reaching a stage of taking advantage of it.

What is on the ballot?

Today, as part of the falsely constructed binary between these two authorities in the West Bank and Gaza, comes the Cairo agreement, elections, and the groundwork for reconciliation. The candidates presently are a slate of choices between the religious right and the secular right, while a necessary alternative is absent from the field.

What is the desired outcome of these elections? And are they radically distinct from those of their predecessors? Are they meant to address the crucial mistakes that plagued the previous two elections, or the mistakes that resulted from them? This time, will the right to self-determination as defined by every Palestinian appear on the ballot? In other words, will the electoral process include all the sectors of the Palestinian people and their aspirations, or will it, like its predecessors, be exclusionary and limited? Will it help to deconstruct the fetish of “independence” away from foreign intervention? In other words, will they be free elections even though they will be held, once again, under the barrel of the gun of the occupier? Will they reflect the genuine desires of the colonized Palestinian people? What will happen if there is an upset, as with 2006?

Futile negotiations, lasting forever by design, if Fatah wins, or continued blockade and war if Hamas wins.

What is needed as an alternative that reflects the collective will of all of the Palestinian people, including refugees and Palestinian citizens of Israel. Only elections for the Palestinian National Council can achieve this. These elections can bring the Palestinian people closer to self-determination, as defined by international law, while restoring their legitimate right to multiple forms of resistance. Elections held under policies of occupation, colonization, and Israeli apartheid are not elections, but rather a reconstruction of the status quo.