Former Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad was solicited to contribute to the New York Times "Turning Points/The Big Debate" edition on the question, "Who are the moral leaders for these times?" Dr. Fayyad contributed this commentary on the power of justice, peace, Palestinian rights and the inspiration of Nelson Mandela. |
http://www.americantaskforce.org/former_pm_fayyad_and_aftp_senior_fellow_ibish_moral_need_palestinian_state
Freedom and equality are at the core of the Palestinians’ struggle
Writing recently in the New York Times, former Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad cited Nelson Mandela as his personal inspiration and the embodiment of the essential attributes of the Palestinian cause. It was a perfect choice.
Mr Mandela, he
wrote, has become a “universal symbol of the struggle for
self-determination and human equality”. The essence of the Palestinian
struggle is exactly that: a quest for establishing that Palestinians are
equal human beings to all others. They are no better and no worse, but equal.
The only viable means for
Palestinians to attain and assert this equality is through the
establishment of a fully sovereign, independent Palestinian state.
Through this state, Palestinians will be first-class citizens in a
country of their own for the first time in their modern history. For the
first time, they will be able to exercise self-determination. And, for
the first time, they will be equal to Jewish Israelis, and all of their
Arab neighbours, as citizens of equally sovereign, independent states that will have to coexist in peace and security.
Equality of the kind
envisaged by Mr Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr, Mohandas K Gandhi, and
invoked by Mr Fayyad, doesn’t involve a highly regimented, nihilistic
vision of non-differentiation, such has been advocated by some radical
Maoist and other extreme utopian groups. It understands that each
individual is different, and that there will be many differences between
societies as well. It doesn’t seek to smash everyone into a tiny
cubbyhole of conformity and standardisation.
Instead, it seeks to free the
creative and self-empowering energies of every individual and society.
For a national collectivity like the Palestinians, this means freedom
from occupation and for the equal right – along with all other peoples –
to establish their own state and pursue their independence as they see
fit.
It does not and it cannot in
the real world mean perfect justice, which is, by definition,
unattainable. But it does mean relieving an extreme form of injustice:
the occupation that leaves over four million Palestinians stateless in
their own land.
Mr Fayyad and other serious Palestinians understand that this means compromises with Israel. Israel, too, must rein in the overweening ambitions of its settler and annexationist
movements and make serious compromises on politically difficult issues
such as Jerusalem, which will have to be a shared city if the conflict
is to end.
Mr Fayyad is absolutely right
when he points to “the fundamental asymmetry in the balance of power
between occupier and occupied” as the primary obstacle to
Israeli-Palestinian peace. It is simply too easy for the Israeli public
to ignore the problem of the occupation and pretend, in effect, as it
did in its last election, that it simply doesn’t exist.
But the world has a stake in
resolving the conflict by ending the occupation, and the two-state
solution is the stated policy of virtually every government in the
world, the preference of the majority of Israelis and Palestinians in
every survey and the only outcome explicitly endorsed by international
law. The global consensus is practically unanimous: Palestinians deserve
a state alongside Israel, which is already a United Nations member
state....
No comments:
Post a Comment