An Arab member of the Israeli parliament, Azmi Bishara, recently called for the PLO leadership to take the reins of the ?national resistance?. As for tactics, Bishara writes, ?The national liberation movement should, in my opinion, combine political action and legitimate resistance against the occupation.? What does this ?legitimate resistance? consist of? He is not explicit, but he does complain that the current PLO leadership is ?doing little or no leading, practically abandoning the initiative to young Palestinians who engage in martyrdom operations?? In calling suicide-murder attacks on civilians playing pool or shopping for vegetables ?martyrdom?, MK Bishara implies, as did PLO leader Yasser Arafat, that the suicide bombings are wrong only insofar as they indicate an independence from the Palestinian Authority.
The context of MK Azmi Bishara?s inflammatory statement is an article in the Egyptian Al-Ahram Weekly from two weeks ago. In it, Bishara tackles the issue, which he says is the source of ?heated debate? on the Palestinian scene since Israel lifted its siege on President Yasir Arafat,? of reform in the Palestinian Authority. But, asks Bishara, what kind of reform? ?Some reform advocates believe that the Palestinian leadership should have accepted what was offered in Camp David and avoided the intifadah. Others believe that Camp David left the Palestinians with no other choice but resistance, but what course of resistance?? In the past, Bishara notes, such calls for reform ?ended once its advocates were allowed to edge slightly closer to the centre of Palestinian decision-making.?
While such issues as democratic decision-making, lines of command, the role of Fatah, etc., are important, the article states, ?these are not the questions uppermost on Palestinian minds. Average Palestinians are wondering about the future of confrontation with the occupation forces, the political solutions at hand, and the political intentions of their leaders.?
To frame the debate, the Arab Israeli MK poses three questions: ?Is ours a national liberation movement or a state-in-waiting? 2) What is the strategy of the Palestinian national liberation movement in the present circumstances? 3) Can this be achieved in the absence of a unified political leadership?? The first question is the central one, which determines the answers to the others. Bishara writes, ?If the answer is in favour of a national liberation movement, then the debate should focus on the resistance strategy. If the answer is in favour of the state-in-waiting, then we are ready to believe that a graduated political process would bring about an independent Palestinian states - based on what was offered in Camp David, or on a combination of Camp David and the Saudi initiative.? Israeli MK Bishara answers, ?I am personally convinced that the recent Israeli offensive leaves the Palestinians with no other alternative but national resistance.? This ?resistance? is to encompass a combination of politics and violence, while ?resistance operations should be appraised, not piecemeal, but as a contextual endeavour toward a well-defined political goal. The success of the resistance should be gauged by how far it brings the nation closer to viable statehood.? Finally, he advises the PA leadership that ?The Palestinian resistance cannot perform tactical manoeuvring with any degree of success so long as there are divisions and bickering among its top echelons. In order for the resistance to succeed, the movement should have a central leadership capable of making - defensive and offensive - decisions and imposing them.?
The context of MK Azmi Bishara?s inflammatory statement is an article in the Egyptian Al-Ahram Weekly from two weeks ago. In it, Bishara tackles the issue, which he says is the source of ?heated debate? on the Palestinian scene since Israel lifted its siege on President Yasir Arafat,? of reform in the Palestinian Authority. But, asks Bishara, what kind of reform? ?Some reform advocates believe that the Palestinian leadership should have accepted what was offered in Camp David and avoided the intifadah. Others believe that Camp David left the Palestinians with no other choice but resistance, but what course of resistance?? In the past, Bishara notes, such calls for reform ?ended once its advocates were allowed to edge slightly closer to the centre of Palestinian decision-making.?
While such issues as democratic decision-making, lines of command, the role of Fatah, etc., are important, the article states, ?these are not the questions uppermost on Palestinian minds. Average Palestinians are wondering about the future of confrontation with the occupation forces, the political solutions at hand, and the political intentions of their leaders.?
To frame the debate, the Arab Israeli MK poses three questions: ?Is ours a national liberation movement or a state-in-waiting? 2) What is the strategy of the Palestinian national liberation movement in the present circumstances? 3) Can this be achieved in the absence of a unified political leadership?? The first question is the central one, which determines the answers to the others. Bishara writes, ?If the answer is in favour of a national liberation movement, then the debate should focus on the resistance strategy. If the answer is in favour of the state-in-waiting, then we are ready to believe that a graduated political process would bring about an independent Palestinian states - based on what was offered in Camp David, or on a combination of Camp David and the Saudi initiative.? Israeli MK Bishara answers, ?I am personally convinced that the recent Israeli offensive leaves the Palestinians with no other alternative but national resistance.? This ?resistance? is to encompass a combination of politics and violence, while ?resistance operations should be appraised, not piecemeal, but as a contextual endeavour toward a well-defined political goal. The success of the resistance should be gauged by how far it brings the nation closer to viable statehood.? Finally, he advises the PA leadership that ?The Palestinian resistance cannot perform tactical manoeuvring with any degree of success so long as there are divisions and bickering among its top echelons. In order for the resistance to succeed, the movement should have a central leadership capable of making - defensive and offensive - decisions and imposing them.?