Three scourges of the Palestinian movement


UNREALISTIC OPTIMISM.

Optimism is justified when

a) aims are defined for which
b) a realistic balance sheet is made of all the actual and potential friends
   and enemies
c) from which a strategy can be drawn based on a coalition of forces
   supporting those aims and
d) the strategy can be shown to have realistic chances of success

The success then exist only in potential. There is also an essential need
for a leadership with courage and vision capable of mobilising the
Palestinian people in support of the strategy. In its tactics, the
leadership must be able to recourse to politically daring moves capable of
transforming potential allies into actual allies.

However, some Palestinian groups have adopted objectives for which they can
draw no strategy having realistic chances of success. Since there exist
no successful strategy for those aims, it is replaced by wishful thinking
and by statements as to the rightfulness of the aims.

I defy any such group to develop an innovative, and potentially successful
strategy, to replace those which had failed for decades and which are
intended to realise the aim of a single Palestinian state over all of
Historic Palestine, and from which all post-1948 Jewish immigrants (and
their descendants) would be expelled.

If only because Israel does have an atomic capability, no such strategy
can ever exist. Cornered by the imminence of the realisation of such a
Palestinian aim, a Sharon would rather use the atomic bomb "on me and my
enemies" as the Biblical Samson is reported to have said. In addition,
such strategy doomed to failure, would also result in the utter isolation
of the Palestinian movement, and the total loss of sympathy of the
international public opinion.

The validity of an aim is not to be measured by its righteousness. It has
to be measured by the demonstrability of the possibility of it being
realised.

The tragedy is that this kind of unrealistic optimism leads to neglect the
possibility of realising a more modest aim. As a result, it can compromise
even that.

The belief that methods of action, that had consistently failed for decades,
somehow would suddenly bear fruits, is irresponsible. Leaders holding to
such belief should be accountable to the Palestinian people. It is not
enough to make bombastic nice declarations. One should not gamble the
future of the Palestinian people on strategies which have NO EVIDENCE OF
POSSIBILITY OF SUCCESS.

FEEDING THE PASSION FOR REVENGE

Humiliation is hard to bear. It is known that revenge alievates the hurt
of humiliation. However, it alievates it at a very low level, a level
detached from rational thinking, detached from consideration of
consequences, detached from the study of long-term objectives.

Revenge is a medicine addressing the short term pains, and increasing the
long term hurt. Revenge is an act of blindness losing sight of the main
objective, the creation of a Palestinian state on the pre-1967 boundaries,
which the Israeli army would have totally evacuated and from which the
Israeli settlers would have been withdrawn into the state of Israel.

Each act of revenge has been followed by a more murderous attack by the
Israeli military. The data of numbers, do prove that the policy of revenge
is costing the Palestinians much more than it costs the Israeli.

The Palestinian leaders organising acts of revenge may be considered heroes
by a section of the people. But the Palestinian people cannot afford its
heroes. Every such "heroic" act permit Sharon to implement still more
his repressive policy. A continuation of such acts, will result in an
extension of the lands occupied by the settlers, and an increase in the
barbarity of the Israeli occupation.

What is needed is not heroes. A Palestinian motivated by despair and a
desire for revenge can easily become an hero. However, what the
Palestinians are most in need of are cool heads, wisdom, and vision
to develop the policy designed not at satisfying a desire for revenge,
but designed to achieve the political aims of the Palestinian people. And
then, what the Palestinian people needs are leaders who have the courage
to present such policies, defend them and implement them. The Palestinian
people will certainly respond to such leaders, if they are able to make
their case with clarity and compelling evidence and arguments.

DEFEATISM

Of all the scourges, defeatism might be the worst. It characterises the
Palestinians who, overwhelmed by the military power at the disposal of
Israel, overwhelmed by the fact that decades of struggle did not result
in the obtaining by the Palestinians of their rights, have concluded
that Palestinians are indeed powerless. Some Palestinians, and many PLO
leaders among them, have therefore put their hopes in the possibility
of a change of attitude of the US versus Israel, as being the only
opening for the Palestinians to ever obtain some of their rights.

Defeatism is based on the impossibility for those people to imagine what
else can be done. They know that a policy of revenge is counter-productive,
they know they do not have the strength to oppose to the Israeli military,
and they can't see what else to do, except to ask the US to realise the
rightfulness of the Palestinian claims.

As we have shown before, such an attitude puts the fate of the Palestinians,
out of Palestinian hands.

A Palestinian leadership with vision and courage, could build a strategy
around the fact that the long term interests of the Israeli people and the
Palestinian people are very similar and consist in peace and prosperity.
This fact is disregarded by the Israeli people afraid as it is by false
fears, engendered and sustained by the Israeli leaders and by the lack of
vision of the Palestinian leaders. However, this fact points to the
possibility of introducing a serious wedge between the Israeli population
and their leaders. A strategy based on this vision can imagine ways of
influencing the Israeli population for the common good of the two people.
It can be done, but has not been seriously tried.

I have previously distributed the suggestion of two speeches Arafat should
have done to the Palestinian people and to the Israeli people. This could
be a very little start for the implementation of a new vision. Instead,
Arafat is risking more and more to become a puppet for the implementation
of Israeli policies.

Palestinian people! Palestinian leaders! Take back the fate of the
Palestinians into your own hands. Realise the possibilities resulting
from introducing a wedge between the Israeli leaders and the Israeli
people. To refuse to believe in its possibility, even without having
seriously started that way, is also a tragic act of defeatism.

Their are two ways indeed, one who passes through a reliance on the US,
which practically means on the Israeli leadership. The second way relies
on detaching the Israeli people from its leadership and recognising that
it is so much easier to come to terms with the Israeli people, after
you did your best to de-mystify them and un-brainwash them, than coming to
terms with their leaders.

If you think it is impossible, then you lack vision. A friendship between
Germany and France, an undefended border between them, was thought to be
impossible. It is now a reality.

Clement Leibovitz
#56, 3221-119 street
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada T6J 5K7

Phone: (780) 436 9883

e-mails: cleibovi@shawbiz.ca

websites:

http://cleibovi.shawbiz.ca
http://cleibovi.shawbiz.ca/appeasement