Occupied Jerusalem: Attorneys for Sheikh Jarrah families have so far not taken a final stance on the Israeli High Court proposal to settle the case on the residents’ forced expulsion from their homes. The proposal includes consideration of the residents as protected tenants with ownership rights.

Attorney Sami Irsheid, who is part of the families’ defense team, said the Israeli court proposal involves both the residents of Sheikh Jarrah and the “Nahalat Shimon” settlement group to which the residents have until November 2nd to respond to.

According to the proposal, Irsheid explains, the eviction orders would be cancelled for the four families, who would be considered protected tenants with ownership rights to the land guaranteed if proven in future settlement procedures in the neighborhood.

Irsheid notes the High Court decision ‘does not include any acknowledgment from the Sheikh Jarrah residents of Nahalat Shimon’s ownership of their homes or land, leaving the issue of ownership open so the residents could prove ownership in future procedures.

Attorney Medhat Deeba, meanwhile commented: “No doubt the Israeli High Court verdict on the Sheikh Jarrah case, made on October 4 and which includes an important and comfortable settlement proposal for the residents, buys them some time in their homes and properties, especially given the previous permanent eviction orders against them.”

However, Deeba warned that decision was designed to take the heat off Israel in the eyes of the world. “This is a very important point. The settlement decision takes the pressure off of Israel to the world and also removes the immediate threat of eviction for the residents, at least for the next 15 years. Ultimately, however, the proposal includes the right of Nahalat Shimon to evict the residents in accordance with Article 131 (7) and (10). This could happen if the case is closed by the property being registered in the name of the settlers as owners or with the passing of 15 years from the date the settlement was signed – whichever comes first.”

He explains, “If the settlement is finalized within five years and the land is registered in the company’s name, then they could file for eviction in accordance with the aforementioned provision, and if the settlement procedures are not finalized within 15 years, the company could also file for eviction of the residents according to this article.’

“Our hearts are with the people of Sheikh Jarrah since the decision is ultimately theirs. Without a doubt, this is a tough decision; they must choose the less of the two evils.”

Meanwhile, spokesperson for the Sheikh Jarrah residents’ committee, Yaacoub Arafa said after the committee met with the legal team, “It is clear the Israeli court system is stalling and avoiding a final decision on the expulsion of Sheikh Jarrah residents. This is the reason for the momentum in the media and in international political arenas, which called on Israeli authorities to halt this war crime of trying to uproot us from our home and land. We know that justice for the rightful owners will never come from Israeli courts, which are by nature, colonialist courts established to serve settlers and to facilitate Israeli settlement measures.”

Arafa continues, “We, as the residents of Sheikh Jarrah, are studying our future steps carefully because they must help maintain our presence in Jerusalem. One thing is for sure: we will never recognize the settlers’ ownership of our homes.” He says they are still reviewing the proposal and would deliberate with their lawyers again before giving the court their final response.

Jerusalemite activist and resident of Sheikh Jarrah, whose family is also threatened with expulsion, Muna Kurd, reiterated their refusal to concede ownership of their homes or land. “Rest assured, we will never accept any settlement that involves concession of our rights to our land and homes. The court’s recent proposal to consider us protected tenants is all so they could show the world they are trying to reach a settlement that is satisfactory to all sides. But this is actually what they want. Our position will not change; we will not relinquish any of our rights.”

The settler group, Nahalat Shimon, alleges the Sheikh Jarrah homes are built on land owned by Jews prior to 1948, a claim the residents refute, confirming they have been living in their homes according to a 1956 deal between the Jordanian government and UNRWA.

-The assassination of Nizar Banat exposed several issues, most importantly, political failure, the way people perceive security services and the absence of swift justice

-The absence of oversight and accountably from an independent and neutral party will turn the security services into a tool of oppression that lays the ground for an all-out dictatorship

-It is time to set a new date for elections,to reshape the PLO and to integrate youth in Palestinian public life. It is also time to formulate a serious mechanism of accountability for human rights violators

Introduction:

The recent assassination of activist Nizar Banat and the subsequent reactions and suppression of liberties by Palestinian security services, laid bare the reality of liberties in Palestine, in spite of the statements made by senior PA officials regarding the respect for citizens’ rights to freedom of expression and the preservation of their dignity. Human rights activists described the current deterioration of public freedoms as a grave threat to the Palestinian national and social fabric. They warned of the repercussions and consequences on the Palestinians in general in light of the increasing crackdown and military operations by Israeli occupation authorities, including their policy of settlements, land confiscation and daily arrests. The reality of public freedoms Human rights activist, Director General of Al Haq and Secretary General of the International Federation for Human Rights, Shawan Jabarin, spoke to “Hosted by MIFTAH” about the latest developments pertaining to public freedoms in Palestine, particularly after the assassination of Nizar Banat by Palestinian security forces.

Jabarin’s diagnosis of the situation is as follows: “There is a general rule that an increase of violence is a sign the system is weak and about to collapse. Here, we are talking about violence and oppression being exercised against our people by our people, who normally, should be representing them. The PA should be conducting its role in organizing and protecting the people. However, the PA failed on two basic points: the first is protection from violence and from injustice, poverty and fear. In other words, what is the point of your existence if you cannot protect your own citizens from the violence of the occupation? You can’t protect their lives, their properties, their homes or their land being confiscated by occupation authorities? You can’t even protect your own establishment.

Secondly, citizens look to the PA for protection from internal social violence and from the violence of the executive authority, including torture and mistreatment. They look to the PA to prevent any infringement on their dignity and to protect their privacy. If we look at all of these issues, we clearly see that Palestinian citizens are not protected at all. On the contrary, they are humiliated in the street when they express their opinions and themselves. Even their livelihood is at risk when they express these opinions; the PA persecutes vocal civil servants, issuing to them warnings, punitive measures or even dismissals.” He goes on to say: “There is a very important point any political or social pundit monitoring the social system and the global changes in the past 20 years should pay attention to, which is the technological revolution in social media and the media in general, which has had huge repercussions everywhere, not just on Palestine. There is now a generation with a perfect handle on these new methods, skills and knowledge. In turn, they share this knowledge and skills with others and have a very broad space to express themselves in. A new culture has taken shape.”

Galvanizing the role of youth

Jabarin says youth must be granted the space and role they deserve: “I think this is a reality we all live and feel in our homes, in school and in our social lives. It seems these things are lacking among officials, however. We are talking about an entire generation excluded from internal public politics, even though this sector is active, expressive and strong on the street. They actively participate in cyberspace but are prevented from entry into public life, their voices and liberties suppressed when expressing themselves through Facebook or other mediums. The natural thing would be to promote these values, not the opposite. Today, we are talking about a Palestinian political system in which judicial and legislative powers are in the hands of the executive authority. This is the perfect recipe for a dictatorial police state and hence, the perfect recipe for the collapse of this system. When you exclude active youths from participating in public political life, you have to expect that ultimately, you will clash with them. There are two options: either you clash with a reality represented in the people, their will and freedom and with a new generation that wants to lead or with the generation represented today, which includes those in their 80s. This generation was 25- years old when they joined the PLO while 33-year olds in the current generation in Palestine have never participated in general elections; they have never voted for their representatives in the PLO or otherwise.

The clash of generations

Jabarin says this condition reflects a clash between the old and new generations. “Another important point in the Palestinian context is that the 70’s generation handed over the leadership to the generation in the 1980’s and this generation handed the reins of power to the 1990’s generation. Since then, communication broke down, because we entered into a new phase, which is the Oslo Accords and the division. Hence, there is an entire generation far- removed from public life and which is now reaping the bitter harvest of this period: land is being confiscated and shared space is shrinking; even the stairs of Damascus Gate are off-limits to this generation. This is all a result of Oslo and the product of these accords, which also brought with them more settlements, land confiscation, oppression and closures.

This generation wants to take its place in political life and has not been granted this right. This is why we are now seeing a clash of generations, including a clash over space and programs. We have a very old mentality in terms of methods, discourse and tools, which has failed in the political sense. This generation clings to its positions and has shuttered its windows, preventing anyone from entering into its space. Perhaps this new generation will find its way in, who knows? So, we have two choices: either we are headed for a confrontation, because this would be the natural result in any society, or we take the peaceful, democratic option, which is elections.

Elections could include everyone and a movement could emerge that highlights the potentials of our youth and brings to the fore the issue of rights and freedoms, including a means of guaranteeing them, which is the PLC. In addition, it could produce a just and independent judiciary. In this way, we can rebuild the homeland and the system in a way that encompasses the new developments of our day and age. Today, there are still people who are operating outside this framework; they think the exercise of public freedoms will infringe on them personally and therefore call on the people to exercise their rights in silence rather than in the public sphere (the Manara) which is very dangerous.”

Strategically, where are we going?

“Unfortunately, we are headed towards a very, very dangerous space that none of us want for ourselves or for our children. We are headed towards more crackdowns even though nightsticks, guns and gas canisters do not sustain any authority. From this perspective, I look at things strategically,” Jabarin says. “When I discuss these things with the leadership, I say to them that this behavior, this discourse and this treatment [of their people] will put them on the wrong side of history. We are in a time that requires logic and new tools to understand and embody this generation. We must learn from them, which is what I personally try to do in my institution. I do not master the issues they master. The recent Gaza battle and the Sheikh Jarrah battle proved this generation is savvy, smart and capable of standing up for their rights and can impact the world. We need to trust them.”

The security doctrine and violent behavior

How problematic are the recent crackdowns and violation of freedoms? Why are the security services using such brute force? “At this stage, we have a security establishment limited to the members of a certain movement. This means you are talking about an ‘exclusive club’ governed by one ideology, personal friendships and one doctrine. Hence, it is not an institution, or at most, it is a private institution for one team. However, if it wants to be a security service for the homeland, there are three focal points that need attention: first, if you want to represent the homeland, you must rid yourself of the “factional cloak”, which means you must look through the eyes of the people and not a party or movement.

Unfortunately however, until now, they see themselves as a party and not as the people. Second, which is built on the first point, is that our tools of accountability are weak because of these friendships and personal relationships. The other thing is that the members of the security services have been mobilized to protect the political system and its project, represented in the Oslo Accords. And even though Oslo failed, these services are required to continue to protect this project. This means the doctrine of these services is linked to a political project that people criticize and will ultimately clash with. Hence, the security doctrine is no longer from the standpoint of a national perspective. When I was talking to them, I asked: is your doctrine about the homeland, dignity and rights? If it is, then there are other paths to take. In other words, I want to see citizens in the security services, I don’t want to see only factions or parties, because this is the most dangerous thing of all.

The other point is that the development, performance and capabilities within the security services basically depend on western assistance, whether in terms of training, capacity-building or funding, which I think is also extremely dangerous. Here, I am not casting doubt on loyalties per se, but I am saying that certain interests could arise within these services. There is also another point: Give me one country where the head of a security service remains in his position for two or three decades. Perhaps the two most dangerous things in the security world are: a lack of oversight from an independent and neutral party, which turns the security services into a monster that eats its own; and second, the absence of any political will to make a shift within the security services from their current state to a professional and effective security establishment. This begs the most important question of all: Who does this security establishment serve? And who does it target? This is a question being posed on the street, especially given that security services cannot protect citizens or their land in Area A and cannot prevent Israeli soldiers from raiding, arresting and demolishing homes, all while Palestinian security services disappear from the scene. All of this diminishes the status and veneration of the security services in the eyes of the people and their reaction to these services is opposite of what is intended – that is, these services are weak and they try to compensate for this weakness through violence against their own people.

Simply put, we do not exist in the world. We are a very strange, surreal case and the security services are a victim of a political project that has proven its failure but which still requires protection. In short, we have no unifying security establishment, which is dangerous for everyone, including Fatah, because conflating all of these bodies – the Authority, the security services and the legislature – reflects on Fatah itself from the people’s perspective. As for the absence of tools of accountability, for example, torture is globally criminalized. Palestine is a signatory of the Convention against Torture, but nothing from it was integrated in national law. They know very well that this crime constitutes a crime against humanity and that Palestine is a member of the International Criminal Court. In other words, the ICC will pursue us for this crime, especially since there are no internal investigations underway or other inquiry measures.

The assassination of Nizar Banat: an accumulation of political failure and the people’s perception of the security services

In regards to the assassination of Nizar Banat, Shawan believes this was not an event in and of itself but an eruption of several issues at once. He said it was the result of a buildup over time, resulting from political failure, the people’s perception of the security forces, a lack of trust in the PA and the lack of due justice in this regard. These issues accumulated and led to this buildup and mistrust among the people, culminating in the Nizar Banat killing, a man who had a loud voice heard among many. “Agreeing or disagreeing with his opinions was not the problem,” Shawan maintains. “Nizar’s killing raised a very critical question: have we entered into the dark tunnel of political assassinations? I think Nizar’s murder has huge implications and must be evaluated and analyzed through another, broader, deeper lens”.

Until this day, the PA’s perspective on current events is very short-sighted and is only through a security lens. There are those who think that by brutally cracking down on the people, this will intimidate them. We need a new perspective and a complete change in this entire stage, which is nearly over. We will need new people, a new discourse, tools and institutions.

Also, where is the unifying establishment for the Palestinian people, which is the PLO? This is a fundamental and critical issue. Hence, Nizar Banat’s assassination is a turning point; things have accumulated but this incident cannot just pass us by. The people do not trust the PA’s investigations and have called for an independent and neutral probe even though in any democratic society, it is for the public prosecutor to investigate. However, there is no trust in the prosecution, the judiciary, the security services or even the political leadership. There is actually a huge gap between the PA and the street. The PA is a failed entity in the eyes of the people, its existence revolving only around nightsticks, guns and money. It is time we seriously reassess our condition. The dignity of citizens and their public freedoms in official discourse

Jabarin continues, “I recently met with the Prime Minister in a closed-door meeting and we talked about a lot of things. What I took away from the meeting is that he has a certain understanding of reality . He recently made a clear statement about the dignity of citizens and their right to expression. However, the big question is this: Were these just words for public consumption or did he really mean what he said?” I actually think he meant what he said. But if you ask me just hours later about what happened in Ramallah, I can only tell you this: he told me that he did not know what was going on at the Al Bireh police station. He did not know about the crackdowns and the arrests. If he really did not know, this is very dangerous. He is the interior minister, and the police fall under his jurisdiction, so if he didn’t know then who did? The question then is: who is behind what happened? This needs an answer because what happened was a crime, plain and simple. This was an attack on ordinary citizens, on the families of detainees who were there taking a stance any Palestinian would be proud of. The wife of Ubai Aboudi was shouting out a slogan we all agree with: “To you, the state of freedoms: No more political arrests!”

Then, when I went as a representative of a human rights institution to visit the detainees and give reassurance to their families, I was barred access to them. I contacted the central command of the police to help me in this regard and also bring his attention to the danger of these attacks on people. I urged them not to make a mistake and I tried to convince Ramallah’s police command not to attack journalists or drag women on the ground. I saw how ugly these violations were and I saw how the crackdowns continued unabated. There is something awful happening, which is the growing sense that these security services are not services for the people. This is how dangerous the situation has become, where the people look at them as the enemy. Red lights should be going off.

Respect for rights and freedoms

Jabarin says the issue of rights and freedoms is actually very simple. That is why, he maintains, it is time to implement a few basic things, first and foremost, we must set a new date for real and serious elections, so the people can express their will and democratically elect their representatives. He also says it is time for rebuilding the PLO through elections and through pumping new blood into it as the representative of the Palestinian people. “I think it is time to say that torture is a crime and those who commit it, give orders or cover it up must be held accountable, something that should be included in the penal code”. What’s more, Jabarin says it is high time to develop tools for real and serious accountability against those who commit human rights violations. “We need to free ourselves from this mentality and culture of concealment.” Jabarin concluded with this: “I think the recent violations, crackdowns and oppression of freedoms marks a split in society and weakening of its social fabric. This is extremely dangerous for civic peace. There is a ticking time bomb deeply embedded in the Palestinian body. It is the biggest threat to Palestinian strength and immunity and to our national fabric.”

Arab member of Knesset, Sami Abu Shehadeh, representing the Joint List in the National Democratic Alliance, “Balad,” warned against the political discourse of Arabs within Zionist parties, which has reemerged after years of struggle from the national movement among Palestinians inside the Green Line, citing the participation of the southern Islamic movement under Abbas Mansour, in the new Israeli coalition government.

Speaking to “Hosted by MIFTAH”, Abu Shehadeh said it was incorrect to believe there was anything new about Abbas and the southern Islamic movement’s participation in the new Israeli coalition government. He maintains that everything happening today is similar to the political discourse used by Arabs in Zionist parties over many years.

Even in the 50s, Abu Shehadeh says there were Arab parties affiliated with Zionist ones. In order to win Arab votes, the ruling party at the time, Mapai, worked towards creating Arabs lists associated with it. “I even think it had the same name: the Unified Arab List. In practical terms, this type of political discourse, which alleges that there can only be political impact from within the coalition, was really just a classic line used by Arabs in Zionist parties.”

He adds, “In my opinion, the mentality, political language and discourse are similar. What’s new is that the southern Islamic movement adopted this discourse, thus somewhat departing even from its own political discourse without an explanation as to why. When they were part of the Joint List, they said they were adopting a new approach. When we spoke to Mansour Abbas to get an explanation and why this new approach had crossed every red line he refused to give one.

“The truth is,” Abu Shehadeh says, “there is a new approach largely based on old premises adopted by Arabs in Zionist parties. For us in the Joint List, this approach is unclear. One member of Mansour Abbas’ list, Saeed Kharrum, from the Negev, refused to vote for the Bennet/Lapid government. It is important to remind people that we thought this discourse was over and done with after the long battle of the national movement inside [the Green Line], but it is now being brought back by the southern branch of the Islamic movement.”

Challenges at hand

MK Abu Shehadeh says there are many challenges imposed by this new reality, the most jarring one being the departure from a consensus over national principles and the problematic political discourse being presented. The first challenge he maintains, which is the most important, is that it targets the history of our struggle over the past 73 years. “This is why they keep repeating the same line: You have had 73 years and what have you done?” This is a process that holds contempt for and marginalization of everything the Palestinian national movement on the inside accomplished since the Nakba and this is extremely dangerous. The other thing is the claim that political influence can only be within the coalition; that is, you must adopt the broad guidelines of the government even though it is clear to them and to the community at large that this coalition is against you and against the interests of your people. “We have always worked towards raising the ceiling and have tried to break the boundaries the Zionist movement has set for us,” Abu Shehadeh says. “The southern branch of the Islamic movement crossed the boundaries we set for ourselves and adopted the nation-state law, stooping that low and accepting Jewish supremacy. It also accepted the rules of this racist game. In reality, this divides us into moderate Arabs and extremist Arabs – that is, moderate Arabs who accept the Jewish state and the extremist Arabs who fight for equality.”

Building national unity for Palestinians on the inside

Abu Shehadeh believes the uprising brought attention back to the importance of reorganizing the national movement on the inside [of the Green Line] “and this is the most significant achievement, because now there is an opportunity for us as a leadership of the Arab Palestinian people to sit down together and review the political program of all forces and parties, whether Balad, Abna Al Balad or national and independent figures. What unites these groups is more than what divides them and we are capable of rallying around a unified resistance strategy through a united political program. I have said it time and again that one of the disputes is whether to be part of the Knesset or not. We can sit and discuss this issue and we are willing to reconsider it and take a collective decision on it; if there is a majority in the national movement, Balad will be part of it.”

He adds, “Another thing I would like to point out is that we have a lot of small movements. Unfortunately, in order for these movements to legitimize their existence, they tend to highlight every dispute and dismiss the points we agree on 99% of the time. Today, these groups want to justify their existence so they go one step further, distancing us from our political discourse or any objective political discussion. All of us – parties and movements – and anyone who sees themselves as part of the national movement inside the Green Line must put everything on the table and agree on a political program. I plan to hold a meeting for intellectuals from all the movements so we can exchange viewpoints on what’s going on, so we can hopefully unite the Palestinian national movement inside.”

The relationship with youth movements

Abu Shehadeh says that the relationship with youth movements is part of their struggle and history, one of which he was part. “As a son of these movements, I grew up with them and helped establish some, including the Jaffa Youth Movement and the “Jafra” student movement in Tel Aviv University. Hence, I see hope in these movements for our national project even if I know there are many problems with them, first and foremost that they are outside of any political framework. Secondly, they do not have a clear and agreed on political project. I appreciate the elevated spirit of sacrifice among the youth and their willingness to fight the good fight and feel they are part of the cause, which is a good foundation to build on. However, if this is not institutionalized, we will lose the entire movement. As leaders, we must open the doors of all political parties and movements to these youth and if they are not satisfied with any one party, they should create a new one and we will support them. Still, without putting this action into a framework and institutionalizing it, all of these efforts will be in vain.”

Abu Shehadeh adds that the world has changed a lot and that their leadership inside the Green Line and also the leaders of Palestinian factions lost touch with the people, especially the youth, which make up the majority of the population. He says the youth lived a completely different experience from that of the leadership, resulting in a serious disconnect between the two. “Writing a communique was, a project in and of itself in my time: typing, proofreading and distributing them required a lot of effort. Today, in this connected world of social media, things are written, proofread and distributed in minutes. This is a new world and a different culture and language. If you want a relationship with these youths, you have to live with them, get close to them. There are basic principles we all agree on with the youth; our demands and political principles are one and the same and from this standpoint we must establish our relationship. Our role is to give them more space in leading actions and the struggle.”

The “uprising of dignity”: three-pronged Israeli attack on 1948 Palestinians

In regards to the impact the uprising had on Palestinians inside the Green Line who were the target of violent assaults by the Israeli security establishment, Abu Shehadeh says: “It is important to clarify that the attacks on Palestinians inside were three-pronged: the first was from the Israeli police, security services and the Shabak. All of their assaults were illegal and inhumane. They were so violent they contravened even with Israeli law much less with international law. Several protesters were shot and wounded.

Attacks also came from a second direction, which were the settlers, who organized in large numbers on social media and descended on the cities with one goal, which was to attack our people. This was especially true in Lod, which bore the brunt of these attacks. Other assaults took place in Jaffa, Haifa, Ramleh and Akko. The settlers attacked us, our properties and our holy sites and they were not held accountable whatsoever. The martyr, Mousa Hassouna from Lod, was shot by settlers, not by the police as were many others in the city. As for Jaffa, settlers were attacking under the protection of the police.

The third type of attacks were carried out by regular Israeli citizens, like what happened in Ramleh when a Palestinian youth was attacked by residents of the apartment building where he and his family live. He had to be taken to hospital and even there, Israeli physicians failed to offer him the treatment he needed, dealing with him as the aggressor.”

Thousands of arrests and unjustified violence

The ‘uprising of dignity’ seriously scarred the relationship between the ruling power in Israel and the Palestinians living there, especially how the state’s security services dealt with an iron fist to crack down on the uprising. The most visible show of this was the arrest of thousands of Palestinians on the inside. “We had 2,200 people arrested following the uprising, but even with all of the false narratives used to justify these massive arrests, the state could not indict the majority of them, which mean that 90% were released. Only 10% were indicted, all with false charges. The objective of these arrests was clear: sheer intimidation, which was also apparent by the police violence used against them, their families and their properties during their arrest.”

Major repercussions

In terms of the impact these attacks on Palestinian citizens of Israel had, Abu Shehadeh says: “Anyone who had accepted the “Israelization” approach now reached the conclusion that they needed to change course. They realized that the national movement’s interpretation of the situation had been correct. I felt this at the personal level when people started listening to my analyses and speeches, which was not the case a month and a half earlier. Today, the people who attend political symposiums are ten times more than before, which shows how the people are now prepared to halt this slide towards Israelization and return, encourage and listen to the national discourse. Acceptance of this analysis is a historic opportunity for us and we must build on it by opening up new horizons and hope for the struggle. The old discourse is no longer valid.”

New horizons of Palestinian national struggle

Abu Shehadeh believes there are new opportunities for the Palestinian national struggle inside the Green Line that should not be missed. “We want to open new horizons for the struggle. On the international stage, we must give this space the weight we did not give it before and open these prospects up. That is why we broached the subject of international protection after all of the attacks on us. We will also try and build relations with parties and human rights institutions on the outside so they know we are here and that we exist. We want to embarrass Israel on the international platform and call out its racial discrimination against its Palestinian citizens. We now have the space and a democratic, human and political discourse that everyone is willing to listen to and therefore the opportunity to internationalize our cause. “

The new American position on ‘48 Palestinians

The “dignity uprising” and the crackdown and harassment of Palestinians inside highlighted a new and important development in the American position towards their cause, said MK Abu Shehadeh. He said US President Joe Biden and his Secretary of State, Antony Blinken made new and significant statements in regards to the Palestinians inside the Green Line. Blinken, for example, called on the Israeli government to treat Christian and Muslim families inside Israel equally. ‘While we would rather not be treated as sects, but part of the Palestinian people, still, statement seems to indicate that they see us and realize there is another people here.” The other more dangerous statement, however, was made by President Biden, who said there would never be peace if Israel was not recognized as a Jewish state.” We reject this statement because it means the Americans support Israeli racism against 20% of the population of Israel; we are not Jewish and the state of Israel was established on the ruins of our land and people. We are a national minority that suffers from racial discrimination in all aspects of life because of the nation-state law and other racist laws. Preserving Israel as a Jewish state is preserving this historic racism against us, therefore preventing equality. That is why we want Israel to be recognized as a democratic state. We propose a program whereby Israel is transferred from a racist state to a democratic one for all its citizens, Arabs and Jews alike.

We want cultural and not political or economic autonomy

For Abu Shehaheh, recognition of Palestinians does not mean autonomy, which he says is impossible. Rather, he wants cultural independence. “Political autonomy for Palestinians here is very difficult. Why? Because we are not concentrated in one geographic spot; we are distributed throughout historic Palestine, which means it would be very difficult to apply self-rule for people in mixed cities and in Arab-Jewish regional councils. Economic autonomy is just as difficult because we are organically linked to the Israeli economy. Hence, our vision is different, whereby we call for cultural autonomy. For the Palestinians inside, this means the Shabak would not devise our educational programs. It is our right, just like any other minority in the world, to teach our history and our Arabic language to our children. We should be able to teach them poetry and literature as we see fit. We demand that we formulate our curricula and have our own national and cultural institutions including theater, cinema and media and a television station so we can deliver our message to others.

There is a ceasefire…but the battle over narrative continues

While a ceasefire was achieved, Abu Shehadeh says, the battle over narrative is still ongoing. “It is very important to identify the aggressor and also the victim. It is also important to document attacks and introduce our narrative to the media, first and foremost to the foreign media. We must prepare a file for a UN fact-finding mission to investigate Israeli state-attacks and violations against Palestinians inside, who are citizens of this state and are supposed to be protected, not attacked.

For the first time, the UN Human Rights Commissioner made a historic decision for a fact-finding mission to look into the events on both sides of the Green Line. It is our role now to document all the attacks on us by police, the Shabak, settlers and regular Israeli civilians. The issue is not just who pulled the trigger, but it is also about the attacks on our homes and our properties. It is about those who were fired from their jobs by their Israeli employers or the justice system that handled our cases with double standards. At the same time, the killer of martyr Hassuna spent three days in detention and was then released. We have had boys less than 14 years old arrested and who spent nine days in detention for charges such as throwing stones that caused no injuries. We want to document all of these violations and say to the world that Israel’s behavior against its Palestinian citizens proves where this state is headed if it does not carry out its duty and protect its own citizens. There is the possibility of holding this state accountable by international law and it is also possible to have international protection via international monitors to follow up and oversee the actions of Israeli police and security services.”

The “dignity uprising” broke all barriers and borders

The ‘dignity uprising” says Abu Shehadeh, created unprecedented national unity in historic Palestine among a united Palestinian people. “One of the most beautiful things I saw during this uprising was the Palestinian connection, whether in historic Palestine or elsewhere. Social media networks broke every barrier and border, which was clear from the close connection between Palestinians inside the Green Line and our people in Jerusalem. I think this is a strategic and important point that must be built on and in our battle to defend our existence. I remember during Ramadan, when we arrived in Jerusalem, there were tens of thousands of ’48 Palestinians already there, all who held the conviction that they had a political, economic, social and religious role to play. This role, therefore, opens up political horizons and also paves the way to create a broad-based struggle front, which we can call the “front for combatting Israeli apartheid.” This front could be bigger than a front for ’48 Palestinians alone because anti-Zionist Jews could join as well.

The future of the political process between Palestinians and Israelis

On the future of the political process between Palestinians and Israelis, Abu Shehadeh admits he is bothered by the fragility of the Palestinian situation, which depends on American and Israelis election results instead of discussing role and strategy. “There is an overall feeling of frustration and desperation; there is a tendency to look to election results in Israel for a breakthrough in the Palestinian situation. I think we should not depend on this at all, even if Meretz took power. If Palestinian political division does not end and unity over a clear strategic project and action plan for the majority of factions is not achieved, there will be no solution or breakthrough. Meanwhile, the Israelis are not even talking about ending the occupation. Lapid, for example, speaks about improving “the conditions of our slavery”, which he says with all normality and pride. This means that until we elevate our own situation, we must not depend on Israel in anything.”

Introduction:

“Hosted by MIFTAH” interviews Dr. Bernard Sabella, sociology professor and former PLC member, on the role of youth in the recent Jerusalem uprising and future expectations for youth in the city.

“Oslo” could not absent the role of youth

Dr. Sabella said the outcomes of the Oslo Accords were not able to absent the role of Jerusalem’s youth, rather contributing to pushing the question of identity and affiliation to the forefront. He also said the absence of any official Palestinian role and the obstacles and measures employed by Israeli occupation authorities to curtail the official Palestinian presence, created a political vacuum felt by Jerusalemites in general and not only by the youth. This vacuum was accompanied by the fact that one-third of the Jerusalem workforce, the majority of which are youth, is linked to the Israeli economy and its requirements, especially in West Jerusalem. Some, he says, consider this link as an indication of how tenuous the sense of Palestinian identity and national belonging is among youth.

Sabella says the surprise was in how the youth assumed the front line of defense of the Aqsa Mosque and Jerusalem throughout the uprising, pointing out that they do not hesitate to rise to the challenge of defying threats to their national identity. Thus, he said the role of youth has always been present even if it was dormant at times, when youth were more preoccupied with other issues just like any other young people.

“Accumulative political, social and economic conditions ignited the spark instead of allowing frustration to take over”

Sabella noted that the recent uprising was spontaneous in nature, reminiscent of the first Intifada, even if certain Palestinian parties– official or otherwise – pushed for this uprising to happen, namely after the PLC elections were cancelled.

He said that while the uprising was spontaneous, overall, it was due to accumulative political, social and economic factors that generated frustration and a lack of trust that any solutions would be found to pressing social problems among the youth in particular. The PA is absent, he maintains and even if its officials are well-intended, their hands are tied. As for the factions, they are busy with being ‘disunited’, with each one primarily preoccupied with their own political considerations. A united identity and sense of belonging, he continues, have been held hostage by factional divisions and disputes. In light of all these factors, the occupation is certain it is capable of using its iron fist to maintain control over the place and people and imposing more Judaization measures, thus disregarding the basic rights of Palestinian citizens in Jerusalem, without any regard to the sanctity of the city and the right of the people to their housing, religious, cultural and national space.

The nationalist spirit and continuity

In this regard, Sabella pointed to the difficulty of building on this national spirit, which he said is attributed to the extent of our fragmentation and the absence of a comprehensive sociocultural framework that could transport this national spirt to the youth. This, he ascertains, would create a sense of national belonging and involvement in social issues so that solutions could be found to them. “The question is: Who will bell the cat?,” Sabella asks. “I do not have a clear answer because the accumulated circumstances that led to this uprising are still present and there will be others as long as the situation in Jerusalem remains the same. This means there will be other revolts as well against these measures and challenges – raids, displacement, expulsions –from Damascus Gate and beyond.”

Israeli politics denies the Palestinian character of Jerusalem

Sabella pointed to the need to differentiate between two levels of Israeli politics. One level includes policies that prevent any PLO activity in Jerusalem, even if this is only youth or children raising the Palestinian flag. This level reflects the insistence of Israeli decision-makers to deny the Palestinian character of East Jerusalem, to create a political vacuum and to pursue anyone who is politically active in the city. This vacuum remains an important and motivating factor for future uprisings among youth. However, the actual revolts are sparked by the second level of policies, which are imposed due to spontaneous clashes between youths and settlers, or those that occasionally erupt with soldiers at Damascus Gate or around the Aqsa Mosque, which result in Palestinians being killed, wounded and arrested. Such incidents generate anger and a will to fight back, if not immediately, then later. Official policies help to create an overall climate that allows settlers to infringe on the sentiments of the people and to push them out of their homes through crooked methods such as false documents, in addition attempts to divide the Aqsa Mosque spatially and temporally.

He continued that the people of Jerusalem, including its youth, live their lives far removed from any delusions of Arab or international saviors. Hence, the lack of Arab or international action is met with Palestinian determination, especially from the youth, to take action in Jerusalem on their own. The Jerusalem uprising was not an urgent call to Arab leaders or even to powerful countries in the world, but a reflection of Jerusalemites and their youths’ adherence to the city, to its sanctity and to its history; it was an expression that despite all measures and restriction, they are here and will remain.

The youth and their aspirations during the uprising

Mohammed and Muna Al Kurd have become a phenomenon representing the diversity of Palestinian youth. “Our youth have exceptional levels of energy, whether in pleading our case, through writing or in elevating the institutions where they work,” Sabella says. “These youth act on faith and not because they are tied to any one faction or party. I am of course, speaking about young men and women alike, but unfortunately, our young people have never received enough attention or support. They are the generation that will inherit our legacy so the more they produce, the more they will become the main pillar for our rights and our existence, not only in Jerusalem but everywhere.”

Sabella also maintains that the skills and capabilities many of our youth have gained is because of their personal sense of identity and belonging, both inside the homeland and abroad. They have played a leading role in communicating with broad popular bases in different countries, with the media and with institutions working in the field of human rights including our people’s right to self-determination. “They never expected to be rewarded for their work,” he said, “but rather did it out of conviction that the course of their lives was linked to the course of their entire people’s lives.”

The Jerusalem uprising and the subsequent war, which wreaked havoc and death for the people of Gaza, was a catalyst for these youths to appear on television and to sing the songs of Jerusalem, Gaza and Palestine. The same applied to Palestinians inside the Green Line and with our communities throughout the world who stood in solidarity, without any prior or coordination or directives from any given party.

As for the severity of the Israeli crackdown during arrests, Sabella said the objective was to calm things down for a while. “Authorities always try to carve out a space in time where they feel comfortable, but will this prevent or stop any new uprisings? I doubt it, because the problem needs a radical solution. And the problem is still a political one that needs a political solution, of course. However, if the military continues to brutally suppress the youth, the problem will remain. Meanwhile, there is an absence of institutions and frameworks that embrace youth. In any case, in Jerusalem, there will never be a solution as long as the occupation continues.

The youth and the absence of factions

According to Sabella, Palestinian youth in Jerusalem have exceptional status. In terms of identity, theirs is merged with their affiliation to Jerusalem, which is one of the most important components of their identity. The youths’ identity in Jerusalem is all-inclusive; it encompasses all of Jerusalem, not just the identity of individual people. On the other hand, these youth have their own identity and aspirations as well. Nonetheless, there have been many times the youth were prepared to sacrifice these aspirations for the sake of reaffirming their broader identity. Even young Jerusalemites who work in Israeli factories and businesses in West Jerusalem have never completely absorbed Israeli culture, even if some may give the impression that they have been influenced by it. “Still, you will find that even these youths, when there is a threat to Jerusalem, will rush to defend their city, Damascus Gate and Aqsa Mosque just like the others. Any Israeli influences immediately disappear when confrontations begin.”

Sabella points out that Palestinian factions and parties are on one side of the spectrum while the people and Jerusalem are on the other, maintaining that factions and parties have their own agenda while the people of Jerusalem have others. Unfortunately, their pushback against settler attacks receive no direct support from these factions given that their political agendas overlap with certain cultural and political issues unrelated to the youth. One of the main reasons for this is that Jerusalem was always put on the back burner in negotiations; “we therefore gave the Israelis the ability to create a Palestinian vacuum in Jerusalem. Whether we like it or not, this is reflected in the lack of a realistic political vision for how to deal with Jerusalem, its challenges and its youth. Hence, we have a crisis over what factions and the PA can offer to Jerusalem and its people; and I am not talking only about money but about Jerusalem as a whole. We have marginalized it.”

What’s needed?

The Jerusalem intifada reaffirmed the Palestinian identity in all its forms and locations. It was a cry for a new beginning, in spite of all the harassment and oppression against our people and cause. We have a lot of hard work ahead of us, says Sabella, if we are going to continue this journey for Jerusalem. We cannot reap the fruits of this uprising without all Palestinians standing together and not just at the political level but also on cultural, heritage and social levels. There is a role to be played by civil society institutions in contributing to more efforts and to galvanizing our youth to work within these institutions so they can find common ground to push our cause forward. This will unequivocally show that Jerusalem, just like all our other cities, towns and villages, is in our hearts and that we are the people and the backbone of this cause. No right that is backed by demands will ever perish.

Introduction:

The developments that followed the Palestinian leadership’s decision to restore relations with Israel and after the Democratic Party candidate Joe Biden winning the US elections, have created a new reality on the Palestinian scene. This involves the impact of these developments on internal Palestinian conditions, the future of the peace process with Israel and the projected repercussions of the US election results on the Palestinian cause. At the same time, the Arabs are normalizing more and more with Israel without first resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict as a precondition for this normalization.

Following is the full text of “Hosted by MIFTAH’s” interview with Dr. Shuaibi

Restoration of relations with Israel

Dr. Shuaibi believes the leadership’s decision to restore relations with Israel is linked to President Mahmoud Abbas’ desire to continue the political negotiating process with the Israelis in coordination with and support from Arab countries accepted by both Israel and the United States, especially Egypt and Jordan.

President Abbas’ official position, which was announced by Fatah Central Committee member Hussein Al Sheikh, reflects a number of decisions associated with the president’s desire to be part of the Arab framework and alliance led by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Morocco.

President Abbas’ decision to join this framework was made without any declared justification whether by the PLO or in his address to the people. No doubt, his decision was influenced by the US election results and the lack of any financial solutions in respond to the declining economic situation in Palestine, coupled with an increasingly disgruntled people. The economic and commercial sector in particular were hit the hardest in addition to certain areas such as Hebron, not to mention the PA’s inability to impose its authority in the Gaza Strip.

In the past three years, the President has been seeking out Arab and international support, especially after the restoration of relations with Israel, in order to convene an international conference with the Quartet Committee, Egypt and Jordan. This would serve as an alternative to the sole role of the US as broker and based on international resolutions as its terms of reference.

President Abbas was apparently reassured by Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia that they would help to convene an international peace conference with the support and consensus of France, Germany and the EU. This, he believed, would help ease into a return to direct negotiations with the Israelis in cooperation with the new US administration, regardless of the political makeup of the next Israeli government and ultimately reach a settlement he could accept.

For the President, a return to negotiations, with a guarantee that Hamas does not oppose them, would be considered both an objective and an achievement at this stage. Israel is continuing with its land-grab policy in the hopes that at some point in the future, the time will be right for the realization of the Zionist dream of a full takeover of Palestine, granting the Palestinians limited autonomy. Consequently, Israel is not interested in eradicating the PA but at the same time, it continues to resist any efforts to end the division and restore official relations between PA institutions in the West Bank and Gaza.

Reconciliation and putting the Palestinian house back in order

What is the future of Palestinian reconciliation and putting our own house in order, in light of the return to relations with Israel?

Dr. Shuaibi says: I don’t think President Mahmoud Abbas believes the most recent intra-Palestinian talks will necessarily lead to an agreement over a new national program that Palestinians will unite around and execute. He says Abbas wants to return to direct negotiations with the Israelis from the point where they were halted. He still thinks the PLO program approved by the PNC in 1988, is the appropriate program for the Palestinians. This program is based on UNSCR 242, renouncing violence and adopting direct negotiations with the Israelis in addition to the declaration of independence for Palestine on the 1967 borders on which the Central Committee approved the Declaration of Principles in Oslo. This is why the President has always specified his position regarding the future of national dialogues in relation to the need to integrate political Islamist movements into the PLO on condition that they accept this program at the practical level. That is to say, they already accepted the premise of the PLO being the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and of the establishment of a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders.

For example, several years ago, President Abbas supported internal talks when the peace process came to a standstill. Consequently, talks to end the division were halted when there was a sense that the leadership would return to negotiations. This does not mean Hamas was always in favor of ending the division. It first looked to secure its own interests at the expense of the overall national interests in addition to its affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood at the regional level.

Pressure from Arab parties led to President Abbas postponing the issue of internal dialogue and reconciliation with Hamas in order to make it easier to return to negotiations. This was when he acted in isolation of these countries and visited Turkey, Iraq and the Security Council.

Shuaibi believes national unity will never be accomplished if we bank on the same approach of “waiting it out”, all while Israel continues with its policy of taking over the largest possible area of land in the West Bank, besieging Palestinian communities. Hence, he believes the return of the Democratic Party under the new US administration is an opportunity to restructure the internal situation and the President’s Arab relationships.

The President still thinks he can continue with his old strategy in partnership with Arab countries and implement regional arrangements. From his point of view, this could lead to changes in the American position, which in turn would open up opportunities for a return to the “settlement process”. He also thinks the new US administration, like the old one, will try and build an alliance in the region comprised of Sunni Arab countries and Israel to guarantee stability in spite of Israel and some Arab Gulf countries’ goal of confronting the Iranian Shiite alliance, “from which the Palestinians and their cause have nothing to benefit.”

General elections

In regards to elections, the President realizes he cannot hold general elections in the West Bank and Gaza Strip without Hamas agreeing to them in Gaza. He knows Hamas has complete control over Gaza and therefore, any decisions such as holding general elections, will require its consent. In this regard, these elections cannot be held in the shadow of the division, which means they must be held within the framework of reconciliation arrangements.

Dr. Shuaibi maintains, “The President wants to coerce Hamas into joining him on the same path towards negotiations. He thinks Hamas will negatively impact his efforts if it remains outside of the PLO. This might be the best possible time for him to hold elections to secure and contain Hamas’ opposition and also to strengthen his own representation.”

The future of the PLO and its institutions

“President Abbas is banking on the continuation of the status quo; that is, no change to the legitimacy Fatah granted him as its president or to the support he gained in the last PNC elections in 2018, which further reinforced his legitimacy. From his perspective, the President believes he has legitimacy to continue leading the PLO in his capacity as the elected head of the largest Palestinian faction. This is further reinforced by recognition of this status at the Arab and international level. Shuaibi also maintains that Abbas believes the recent makeup of the Central Council will secure the legitimacy and support of his position at a later stage, which means PLO institutions will remain weak and even paralyzed.

The fate of the PA

Dr. Shuaibi maintains that the dissolution of the Authority is not likely, nor is it in the interest of any party, including Israel and Hamas. “The current alliances, which are partly backed by international parties such as the United States and even European countries, in addition to the presence of countries such as Turkey, Iran and Israel, are not keen on the departure of the PA. Neither do the Palestinians have any other option but to continue with the current status quo. The same goes for the Israelis, who would not benefit from the collapse of the PA; neither would Hamas, especially after its experience in administrating the Gaza Strip and ultimately failing to establish an alternative authority to the PA in Gaza. That is why the PA, in its current shape and program, is a comfortable option for parties and does not contradict with the PLO’s program in that its strategy is based on the ongoing transformation from the PA to a state and on pressuring countries to recognize Palestine in accordance with the Palestinian national program declared in 1988.

The Arab condition and normalization

Dr. Shuaibi addresses the recent Arab condition and how some Arab regimes are racing towards normalization, saying this is a ‘reordering” of the Middle East after the elimination of the roots of terror, Al Qaeda and ISIS mainly. It also comes after Trump’s plan, which was based on the idea of building an alliance in the region to confront anti-US and western forces, namely in Iran, Turkey and Russia, in addition to pushing back against the Chinese “Silk Road” program that passes through this region. This was why there was a desire to establish a regional alliance in the area, based on Arab Sunni-Muslim countries and Israel as a security and economic power on the ground. This kind of alliance requires a solution and elimination of the Palestinian cause within a framework solution and via Trump’s plan and would pave the way to build normal relations between Sunni-Arab countries and Israel. However, when the Palestinians derailed this solution by not participating and actively confronting it, some Arab countries showed their willingness to build on this alliance, even without a solution to the Palestinians and without a Palestinian presence. After the US elections, both Egypt and Jordan seemingly found an opportunity to rebuild a regional alliance with a Palestinian presence. They also found a way to rebuild the relationship with Israel via an Arab entry-point and not through the bilateral normalization of these two countries. That is, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia are prepared to pressure the new US administration into accepting the convention of an international conference where these countries are willing to participate along with the Quartet Committee. That would make the Arabs a party in the negotiations and in pressuring the Israelis as an alternative to the current Arab project, which is based on the Arab Peace Initiative that calls for normalizing with Israel after the resolution of the Palestinian cause.

The US election results and repercussions

Dr. Shuaibi maintains there are domestic, regional and international repercussions to the US election results. He says the US administration will first focus on its domestic issues as a priority. “No doubt, the Trump plan is over, which is a good thing for the Palestinians, because this plan was being commandeered by the Zionist movement’s far right, which believes it can forcefully impose a settlement on the Palestinians. Such a settlement would give Zionism legitimacy over the majority of the Palestinian territories and relegate the Palestinians to fragmented minorities living in cantons. Such Palestinian entities would have no value unless they were linked to this or that Arab country or if they formed some weak quasi-state in the Gaza Strip, thereby dividing loyalties in the West Bank.

Today, Trump’s plan may have been halted, but this does not mean Israel has changed is plans on the ground. This is because the foundation of the Zionist project is not based on American consent but on its support, while being a direct Israeli project in and of itself. This is why Biden will focus his priorities on US interests and the domestic situation. The Covid-19 pandemic has also been a clear point of contention, given how his predecessor, Donald Trump, handled the crisis and failed to adequately address it. It was also one of the reasons that helped Biden beat Trump in the elections, which means combatting the epidemic will be one of his priorities. We already know that at least the first year of his new administration will largely focus on this issue.

The other issue he will focus on is the economic situation in the United States, because this is the ticket on which Trump was elected. That is why the new administration must offer some economic solutions to the domestic situation and to unemployment rates in particular, which spiked during the pandemic. He will then turn to improving American-European relations, which were rattled during the Trump era and which Biden and his Vice President described as a return to the world, a return to the UN and to international agencies. This means a reemergence of the US in these venues, but it also means there will be no real efforts or priority by the administration to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. However, we know that AIPAC and the Zionist movement voted for the Democrats, which means they could have an influence on improving Israeli-American relations, which were damaged because of the Netanyahu government’s bias towards Trump. This will require security and financial support to Israel in exchange for appeasing the Arabs by taking some measures that would effectively cancel out Trump’s previous decisions such as closing the PLO office in Washington, restoring financial support to UNRWA and resuming financial aid to the Palestinian security services and to charitable associations in Palestine, followed by a reopening of the US Consulate in occupied East Jerusalem.

Nonetheless, Europe – France and Germany in particular – could be given a role in facilitating the convention of an international peace conference similar to the Madrid Conference. This would allow the Arab leadership, represented by Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Morocco, to be main partners in the conference alongside the Quartet Committee, comprised of the US, the EU, UN and Russia. After the conference, there would be a return to direct long-term negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis.

The Biden administration is looking to ‘heal the American spirit”

“Hosted by MIFTAH”s guest is researcher and expert in Israeli affairs, Antoine Shulhat, who speaks about the scene in Israel in the wake of Joe Biden winning the US presidential elections and the restoration of relations between the PA and Israel following President Trump’s defeat. He addresses the dramatic repercussions of this defeat on Israel at the political and security level, especially given how the United States working to rebuild its previous alliances abroad.

Shulhat expects Biden will not reverse Trump’s major decisions regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict such as moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem or his recognition of Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights. However, he does believe he will move more towards restoring some sort of balance in American relations with Israel and the Palestinians.

Biden and the two-state solution

Shulhat indicated that Trump’s defeat will have dramatic repercussions on Israel given the considerable gap between Trump and Biden’s foreign and security policies. Based on statements made by Israeli government spokespersons regarding a possible cut in the US security budget, Shulhat expects this could lead to less pressure on the Iranian regime and a return to the “policy of compliance” that former US President Barack Obama adopted and which culminated in the 2015 nuclear deal, in parallel with the Middle East and the Palestinian cause. On this, Shulhat thinks that while there are many possibilities, it is unlikely Biden will cancel the major decisions Trump made such as moving the US embassy to occupied Jerusalem and recognizing the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights but will likely try to regain some balance with Israel and the Palestinians.

Reading into Israeli government statements, Shulhat believes the Biden-Netanyahu relationship (or any new Israeli Prime Minister) will not be as strong as the relationship with Trump, especially since Biden could disregard some of the components in Trump’s “deal of the century”, including giving a green light to the annexation of some areas of the West Bank. In addition to this, Biden has officially expressed his commitment to the two-state solution.

Moreover, Secretary of State-nominee, Antony Blinken recently spoke about the vision of the new US administration towards the Palestinian cause, stressing on Biden’s endorsement of a two-state solution. Blinken said the solution would preserve and strengthen military and intelligence cooperation between the two countries, including Israel’s military superiority. He also said the administration would call on both Israel and the Palestinians not to take unilateral steps that could prejudice any chance of returning to the two-state plan, adding that they would restore funding to the PA and reopen the US Consulate in East Jerusalem. Blinken also noted that the administration would transfer humanitarian and economic assistance to the Palestinians but on condition that they halt stipends to ‘those involved in terrorist operations.”

Obama’s third term

Shulhat believes the Biden administration will focus on “healing the American spirit” in accordance with the perimeters of the Democratic Party due to internal divisions and racial tensions, which reached their peak during the Trump administration. This is in addition to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, which delivered a major blow to both American lives and the economy and which will take precedence over foreign policy.

He also said it was plausible to interpret Biden’s strategic approaches through the lens of the Obama administration in which he was Vice President. The Obama administration supported Arab revolutions and worked on resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict on the basis of the two-state solution. The US even abstained on a UN Security Council resolution that condemns settlements in the Palestinian territories instead of its usual veto, contrary to expectations. This administration also economically supported the PA within its vision that a solution to the conflict will bring stability to the Middle East region. What’s more, the US signed the Iran nuclear deal, which Israel strongly opposed.

Shulhat continued that he believes Biden’s win was a huge disappointment to Netanyahu, who was hoping for a second term for Donald Trump. Still, Netanyahu did not wait long to ensure that the incoming US administration would adopt a political line that adamantly defends Israel’s interests. In the end, most political analysts agree that even with the new Biden administration, the United States will continue to consider Israel an important, if not the most important ally in the Middle East. Based on this, Israeli interests depend on developing and strengthening the relationship with this administration, even if there are differences in opinion.

Even though Biden stressed that his term in the White House would not be like a ‘third Barack Obama term”, given all the changes to the United States and the world since then, ample analyses have been based on the fact that Biden has appointed several people to key positions in his new administration who were part of Obama’s team. This, he says, prompts us to conclude there is a good chance that the Obama administration’s policies will continue rather than be any different.

“It is important to remember the messages Obama conveyed during his first trip to Israel in March, 2013 during which he recognized a ‘national state for the Jewish people’ as a means of paving the way for the Israeli nation-state law, and two, as a means of legitimizing the basis of the Zionist narrative, which considers the colonization of Palestine as a realization of the return of the Jewish people to the ‘Promised Land.”

“Liberation from Netanyahu” and banking on Biden

Shulhat maintained that the official Palestinian position is something of a courtship, saying we cannot separate the PA’s return to all forms of civil and security coordination with Israel from the context of this wager or from the context of the pace of normalization by several Arab countries with Israel, adding that this normalization has given Israel extra power against the Palestinians.

“I think Israel’s insinuation that it will postpone the ‘deal of the century’ is the best it will offer the Palestinians. I don’t expect we will see any Palestinian concessions for a return to the negotiating table except for the return to all forms of civil and security coordination, especially within this context of normalization, which coincides with Netanyahu’s mantra of “peace for peace” as an alternative equation to “land for peace”. This includes the premise that building and normalizing relations in the region is the way to reach a settlement to the Palestinian problem, not vice-versa.”

The changes to the current political scene in Israel and the upcoming elections are basically aimed at “Israel’s liberation from the clutches of the Netanyahu government”. The most recent show of this is Gideon Saar’s split from the Likud Party and his establishment of a new party.

Based on this, we must reiterate that whether Netanyahu stays in power or not is still the least important issue in the context of dealing with the specifics of Israel’s present situation and what this means for the conflict, Shulhat says. The more important issue lies in the changes this state and its political system are undergoing in light of its right-wing domination and how its foreign policies, both international and regional, will be impacted by these changes on the one hand, and how they are related to the sudden transformations in the world and region, on the other.

“What I can say is that all eyes in Israel will be on the repercussions of the Saar break from the Likud Party. However, we must take into consideration that the current political condition, which has been the status quo for a long time, points not only to a lack of a political narrative counter to the rightist narrative towards the Palestinian cause but also to a lack of real opposition against this rightist trend.”

Reigniting the international community in the service of the Palestinian cause

Shulhat said the almost inevitable option given the latest regional developments vis-à-vis normalization and the coronavirus pandemic and based on UN resolutions that support the Palestinian right to establishing a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders is to “reignite the international community in the service of the Palestinian cause.” He said this could coincide with attempts to prompt other parties to assume their role at the regional and international levels, maintaining that these efforts should mostly be geared towards Europe, which is expected to regain its political weight in tandem with the new US administration.

“At the Palestinian level, I must also point out the need to continue efforts to repair our domestic situation and to pull the rug out from under those who want to use it as a tool to derail the Palestinian cause” Shulhat maintains. What’s more, another ‘card’ is being taken advantage of, which is Arab normalization with Israel. “We must keep it in mind that this normalization is not limited to full diplomatic relations with Israel but also entails -- at a deeper level perhaps -- the normalization of its policies towards the occupation and settlements as a means of whitewashing them. Let us remember that this normalization took place in spite of the Palestinian cause and reflects an approach that considers the Palestinians as irrelevant to the political developments in the region. It also points to the beginning of the end of the Arab Peace Initiative, which stipulates that the normalization of any Arab relations with Israel cannot take precedence over a just solution to the cause of Palestine.”

Biden and the West

As previously mentioned, Shulhat believes the United States will move on the domestic front at the expense of its foreign policy. However, in this context, Shulhat pointed to some approaches the new administration will take, including restoring US participation in the Paris Climate Agreement and strengthening its alliance with its traditional allies in the West in general and with Western Europe in particular. According to a number of Israeli analyses, this alliance will have repercussions on Israel given that Europe prefers a conciliatory approach with Iran but a firmer one with Israel in regards to its policies towards the Palestinians.

At the UN, some observers are expecting relatively quick changes regarding two of its bodies: a halt to the withdrawal from WHO and a return to the Human Rights Council just like [former President Barack] Obama returned to the HRC after his predecessor George Bush Jr. pulled out. There is a consensus that inside and outside UN bodies, the Biden administration’s behavior will be affected by the competition and rivalry with China, Shulhat says, adding that they also believe there is no real difference between the Democratic and Republican Parties regarding the perceived threat from China. The Democratic Party platform publically declared that under certain conditions “firm measures” must be taken against Beijing. At the same time, Biden declared that his policy towards Russia would also be firmer. Based on this, there are predictions that US policies towards China and Russia could impact on Israel’s bilateral relations with these two countries.

Introduction:

Political pundits say the recent US presidential elections and Democratic candidate Joe Biden’s victory, will have repercussions on the relationship of the new US administration with both Palestinians and Israelis. They also say these results will generate tangible changes to US policies, to the Biden administration’s international relations and to domestic American affairs. The observers predict that the Biden administration will shift priorities in handling several domestic and foreign files, including the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Birzeit University lecturer Dr. Ghassan Khatib says: “I think the results of the US elections will lead to tangible changes in American policies and in America’s international relations, not to mention at the domestic level. The reason for this is that the previous administration under President Donald Trump made unprecedented alterations to US policies, especially at the international policy level. Hence, the gap between the two parties in the elections has never been as wide as this time, which means any new party in power also means new changes. So far, they have already announced many of the changes to be made, including that the new administration will return to the climate deal, which the previous administration withdrew from, and that they would improve relations with their European allies. Other than that, there is the Middle East. This new administration has already said it would reverse some of the policies taken by the previous administration, meaning it will go back to traditional US policies in many aspects of the Arab-Israeli conflict.”

Reflections and repercussions

Khatib continues, “I think some changes will be relatively fast, which is why I also think the new administration, if we are to go by its statements, will resume aid to the Palestinian people and possibly to UNRWA. This is important because it will encourage other countries to resume financial aid. There were countries that halted their own aid to the Palestinians because of pressure from the Americans. What’s more, the Americans may reopen the US Consulate in Jerusalem, which has symbolic significance. Most importantly is that the Democratic Party and Biden both feel strongly about the two-state solution which means we can expect them to be critical, even if only verbally, against Israeli settlement expansion. This will put a measure of international pressure on Israel regarding settlements because during the Trump era, these countries were prevented from expressing any criticism towards settlement expansion. On the contrary, the US ambassador to Israel used to encourage it and confirm that the United States has no problem with expanding settlements. This of course, weakened the international position opposing settlement expansion. The political process, on the other hand, is more complicated because the US administration was managing the conflict rather than trying to solve it. This is because everyone concluded that the possibility of resolving the conflict was too hard so they resorted to trying to finalize it completely in Israel’s interests. I expect the new administration will also return to managing the conflict rather than resolving it. While on the surface, this may not look very good or enough, it is still better than the Trump administration’s vision for resolving the conflict completely in Israel’s favor, otherwise known as the ‘deal of the century.”

The leadership’s options

Dr. Khatib says: “In my opinion, the American elections are an important shift in international policies towards the Palestinian question. These elections could hold within them opportunities and challenges, which really will depend on the Palestinian performance and the extent of the Palestinians’ internal cohesiveness and strength. It will also ultimately depend on how clever they manage the political file pertaining to their relationship with the United States. If our position is strong, smart and cohesive, we may be able to avoid some inevitable pitfalls that come with reopening the political process. This is somewhat concerning, because right now, the internal Palestinian situation and our style of managing political action and issues is not reassuring at all. Hence, it is the perfect occasion to call on the Palestinian leadership to maintain cohesiveness, unity and confidence in itself and in the people and also to assume wise approaches in dealing with these new changes given their importance.”

Reconciliation and elections

In response to the question about the fate of Palestinian reconciliation and holding elections, Khatib says: “Anyone who falsely believed over the past few months that reconciliation was possible and elections could be held will realize the connection between the failure to hold these elections and achieve reconciliation with developments in the United States. The truth of the matter however, is that we were never close to elections or reconciliation regardless of whatever happened, not to mention the external, regional factors pertaining to influences from regional powers on both sides of the rift. That is why I don’t think the US elections outcome will have any impact on our internal situation. As for external files, it does not look good, for internal reasons rather than because of the United States.

Arab normalization with Israel

In terms of the recent wave of normalization between Israel and Arab countries and how they may impact the recent elections, Khatib commented: the second Middle East file where we will see changes to US policies is the Gulf because the Democratic Party running the administration has a different approach for dealing with the Iranian file and this will reflect itself on the relationship of the United States with the Gulf. In my assessment, part of the change is that the new US administration will not be as enthusiastic towards the issue of normalization. While it will surely support normalization, there will not be the same amount of pressure to achieve it like before. This is why I think the pace will slow and this wave will end, especially since the next country the US was hoping to prompt into normalization – Saudi Arabia – is very hesitant and fears the potential backlash in the region. Hence, the retreat of American pressure towards normalization will be comfortable for Saudi Arabia, which was never excited about moving in this direction since it strives to lead the Muslim world.

The “deal of the century” and annexation

One of the most positive paradoxes to the US elections is that throughout it, Biden’s campaign announced it would not support annexation because it weakens the chances of a two-state solution in the future. I would like to note here that the elections divided the Jewish community in the United States. Public opinion polls on the US elections showed that two-thirds of American Jews voted for Biden because of domestic issues and because they were concerned about the racist atmosphere Trump propagated. The second reason is that there is a sense of anxiety and conviction among the majority in the American-Jewish community that Netanyahu’s and Trump’s policies are moving in the direction of total control over all the Palestinian territories in a way that would block any chance for a two-state solution and would constitute a threat to the democratic and Jewish nature of the state of Israel. This is concerning for the overwhelming majority of American Jews who by nature, are interested in a democratic and Jewish Israel more than they are interested in the annexation of occupied Palestinian land.

The Biden administration and its relationship with the Palestinians

“We will see a return to American policies similar to the pre-Trump era, which are neither fair nor friendly to the Palestinian people. They are biased to Israel and harmful to our interests but this administration will be less pronounced than the Trump administration in this bias.

Khalil Shaheen, political analyst, researcher and media expert, said this about the US elections: “The rise of “Trumpism” has been accompanied by transformations at the global level, which are also related to the rise of right-wing populism in many countries. Trump’s victory constituted a strong motive for the rise of populism and its intersection with the rising populism in Israel, clearly represented in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the right wing. This caused considerable damage to the Palestinian cause and to the rights of the Palestinian people, especially since Trump’s populism intersected with the most far-right religious and ideological camps inside Israel and overall adopted the Zionist narrative.

Transformations from Trump’s defeat

From another aspect, Shahin says, “It is not certain that Trump’s defeat will constitute a turning point or prompt a retreat of populism, whether in the United States or at the international level. What is certain is his defeat will have reverberations even outside of the United States, especially in some countries that populism fed on in tandem with the rise of Trump’s populism. I think we need more time before we can tell whether Biden’s win will constitute transformation regarding a retreat in right-wing populism including core values within it that impinge on the rights of the Palestinian people: that is, denial of international law and international humanitarian law and UN resolutions since populist trends are, by nature, contradictory to human rights. This means that the restoration of another ruling trend in the United States could mean at least a slight reconsideration that this new US administration will deal with international law and international humanitarian law in addition to the UN and its agencies. Some indications of this were apparent in Biden’s statements when he said for example that he would not take a hostile position towards UNRWA and that he would resume American support to the agency. To many, this is an indicator of how the Democrats deal with international institutions, which is applicable to some other international arenas such as its position towards the Human Rights Council, from which the US also withdrew. At the time, the US took several hostile positions towards HRC resolutions pertaining to the Palestinian cause and rights. This trend could be extended into transformations in UNESCO and other agencies and these policies, if adopted, could constitute a shift away from the methods of the Trump administration, which waged war on the rights of the Palestinian people in the various international arenas and forums.

The Palestinian leadership and the relationship with the Biden administration

Shahin believes we must take a step back until the relationship becomes clearer between the leadership and the Biden administration. “I think we need more time until we see just what policies the new US President will adopt in terms of its foreign policy on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict including normalization between Israel and some Arab countries or the Trump administration’s actions regarding efforts to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. A big part of the Palestinians’ policy is going to depend on the behavior and policy of the new American administration. That is why I don’t think we need to start by offering more concessions, which the leadership thinks it can use to appease the Biden administration. This means we need to hold off until the new administration’s policies mature on several important junctures, including its position on the implications of the ‘deal of the century’ rather than the deal itself. The deal will be pushed aside as a framework for a dictated solution on the Palestinians; it no longer exists. However, there are some implications of the deal that are being implemented such as the Israeli annexation of Palestinian land, the position on refugees, the nature of the Palestinian state, its jurisdictions and the level of sovereignty it will have, in addition to settlements, all of which are important issues. If the new administration adopts the policies of the previous Obama administration, for example, we can conclude – especially since there are already signs of this in Biden’s statements – that it will take a position opposed to settlement expansion but will not actually take measures to reverse the previous approach of further entrenching settlements. Still, even this position requires us to hold off. We don’t know how Israel and Netanyahu will behave vis-à-vis the annexation process before Trump leaves the White House. In other words, there are Israeli positions pushing for tangible steps if not full annexation or at least the imposition of Israeli law or sovereignty over West Bank settlements. Their hope is that this would be a final parting gift from Trump before he leaves office.

We will see how Biden deals with all this – will he consider settlements to be a reality on the ground? Or will he plan to take executive decisions down the line to cancel out the decisions made by Trump in this regard? These are all important questions because they will have an impact on the positions of the Palestinian leadership and the possibility of restarting any Palestinian-Israeli political process.

The two-state solution

Shahin believes the new US administration’s interests regarding the two-state solution will revolve around slogans. “I think the new administration will most likely be interested in the slogan of the two-state solution but not its implications like the previous administration. Still, it will be keen on relaunching this process between Palestinians and Israelis so as to avoid more confrontation on the ground, especially if Netanyahu takes more steps to entrench settlements and annexation. Nonetheless, this will not be a priority for the administration. There are more pressing domestic ones, especially pertaining to the coronavirus pandemic in addition to other issues such as the relationship with China and Europe and the climate, which the Democrats promised they would move on quickly. This means the new US administration may wait for a while before resuming efforts between Palestinians and Israelis but my guess is that it will be more interested in managing the conflict rather than resolving it given the wide gaps between the Palestinian and Israelis positions. We could be seeing a form of the conventional negotiations conducted by former US Secretary of State John Kerry – that is, shuttle trips between the two sides.

Regarding Palestinian reconciliation, there were efforts to resume bilateral dialogue between Fatah and Hamas in addition to the meeting of the secretary generals of factions. It seems however, this file hit a speedbump, partly because they were waiting for the results of the US election. That is, will the Democrats once again return to a containment policy of Islamic trends, particularly the moderates and the existing groups in the Middle East? Will this apply to Hamas? Previous administrations, including the Obama administration, adopted this policy, but when it came to the Palestinian-Palestinian issue and because of Israel’s position, they used to constantly push for maintaining the conditions of the Quartet Committee, which placed conditions on Hamas’ participation in the Palestinian political system. This is important from the perspective that launching a political process—at least from the viewpoint of President Abbas – requires that he is portrayed as having political or negotiating legitimacy, if you will. And if no political process is launched, he at least would need a renewal of his legitimacy as a President whose term expired some time ago. The PLC would also need revamping in a way that would allow it to wage a political process with Israel with consensus on its legitimacy. I think this needs time as well to see how the new Biden administration will handle the issue of Palestinian reconciliation or Hamas’ participation in the political system, in elections and other issues.

On this note, I think the Palestinian leadership is leaning more towards resuming relations with the United States. This was clear from the congratulatory letter President Abbas sent to Biden, the gist of which was the president’s hope of resuming the peace process without specifying terms or conditions. It was a short letter but it reflected the President’s interest in a future political process, which will manifest in different ways. That is, soon we will see mutual measures between the Palestinians and Americans that start with the resumption of contacts, something that may have already begun; we will see a reopening of the PLO office in Washington and a PLO envoy there; a decision to reopen the US consulate in East Jerusalem; a resumption of financial aid to the PA; a resumption of USAID projects in the Palestinian territories in addition to UNRWA. The Americans may get to these issues quickly as opposed to the peace process, which need executive measures by Biden, such as cancelling previous decisions made by Trump for which he has a majority at least in Congress. Hence, he does not need to pass new bills to make these decisions. Likewise, Biden can also make decisions on the laws passed during Trump’s administration, which impose restrictions on funding to the PA.

In any case, this means we will be returning to the same place in terms of diplomatic, political, economic and security contacts with the United States. The question is how this will reflect on Palestinian-Israeli relations. I think in exchange, the new US administration will be keen on restoring the Palestinians’ relationship with Israel, even if gradually.

Dr. Honaida Ghanim, director of the Palestinian Center for Israeli Studies “Madar” had this to say about the US elections: “The election results coincided with the release of Madar’s most recent position paper, which was based on analysis of the development of these elections and the results of opinion polls conducted here and in the United States. Recently, several opinion polls were conducted in Israel addressing the difference between Trump and Biden. The results showed that over 70% of respondents support Trump and consider him Israel’s best friend. We think that if the elections were held in Israel, Trump would most likely have won by a landslide. In the United States, 20% Jewish Americans voted for Trump. Hence, the first repercussions are linked to this gap between American and Israeli Jews, whereby the second group claims they represent the first even though only 5% of American Jews consider Israel as their number one cause. Therefore, the outcomes of these tectonic shifts may not necessarily show today but they can be built on in the future in order to impact American policies towards Israel.

Ghanim also says there are issues related to strategic matters. “America deals with Israel as a strategic ally, which means this is not about “mood swings” but about a persistent strategic alliance. Still, these shifts that are taking place beneath the surface will have a future impact on relations between the two sides; they will also impact strategic relations which do not change overnight. Still, the changes do not indicate any profound changes in terms of Israel remaining the US’s strategic ally in the region even if the relationship will not be the same as before. This relationship will gradually move into a discussion within the Democratic Party, which is a shift that greatly concerns Israel.

Impact on the Israeli political party scene

Ghanim believes the US elections will have an impact on the political party scene in Israel. “The impact will basically be moral support in that the possibility of Netanyahu’s defeat is plausible and achievable as long as everyone in the US came together to bring down Trump, which they succeeded in doing. This could be moral support. Also, it could allow more maneuvering room for parties in opposition to Netanyahu so they can rebuild themselves. Today, there is a bully-like alliance between “Trumpist/Netanyahu-ism” and populism in Europe, India and Brazil, which could also have an impact on the Israeli scene. However, the most dangerous repercussion is that the rising star on the Israeli scene is [Neftali] Bennet’s star, meaning that the political conflict in Israel is not between the right and left but between trends that are already right wing. There is obviously a huge shift in Israel towards the right, which means Netanyahu will try and go over and beyond it to the more extremist trends. The presence of Bennet means the propaganda he will use will be based on whoever is more extreme. What’s more, the main topic at the core of this competition between Netanyahu and Bennet will not be the coronavirus pandemic but the topic of annexation. This will turn into a key topic at the heart of the internal conflict between the right for which the Palestinians will pay the price. Meanwhile, confronting these extremist steps Israel takes against the Palestinians depends on how the new US administration reacts to them.

How Palestinians can employ the election results There are a lot of ways in which the Palestinians can employ the US election results vis-à-vis their relationship with the Israelis, says Ghanim. “The election results proved the elections were between the white supremacist trend and other trends and groups such as minorities, blacks and women. This reaffirms the need for Palestinians to work at the grassroots level with these groups and movements in the US and Europe in general because the future is there, in this popular, grassroots relationship. Today, we have fertile ground to work with them and not necessarily with official circles because these circles are mostly impacted by their popular bases. The election results showed that Biden was supported by these groups and that the Democratic Party is no longer one bloc but several blocs combined. Hence, communicating with these blocs requires Palestinian diplomacy and formulating plans and organized action. It also needs the right discourse because we are at a dangerous crossroads in the United States; we don’t know which way things will go. It could take a horrifying turn but if we take into consideration that things really are going in that direction, we still have a lot of room for Palestinian action right now.

The fate of the political process

Meanwhile, Ghanim said the statements made by Blue-White Party leader, Benny Gantz and official spokesperson for the Palestinian presidency, Nabil Abu Rudeina, calling for a return to Palestinian negotiations is nothing more than public consumption. “On what basis will the two parties return to negotiations?” she asks. “Will they go back to dragging the Palestinians into 20 more years of negotiations that will end with the Palestinians living in isolated cantons like they are today? Or will there be new foundations for them? Or will there be a return to the same deceptive power formula Netanyahu employed before with the Palestinians, which he deems is the best way to eliminate the Palestinian cause. If the wager is on shifts in the Israeli arena, the Palestinians are betting on a losing horse. Therefore, any negotiations must have a new structure through adopting a new strategy as a bases for these talks. In addition, the Palestinians must speed up getting their house in order, including the situation of Palestinian institutions and the political system. Anything other than this is merely empty words.

Local and global repercussions

Ghanim also believes the US election results have reflected on the overall situation in the world, not just on Israel and the Palestinians even if the part pertaining to the Palestinians inside the Green Line and their relationship with the government in Israel are afforded a special analysis.

“I am one of those people who says there is a huge difference between a death sentence and being sentenced to life. A death sentence means you are finished, which is what Trump was trying to do to the Palestinian cause. Right now, we are living a life sentence with the occupation but we have time to rebuild ourselves; the question is how to take advantage of this. Of course, this will have an impact on the Palestinians inside [the ’48 territories], with the knowledge that these changes produced by the US elections and the Democrats winning the presidency, are far-reaching changes. At the level of the refugee cause, the restoration of funds to UNRWA and the US rejoining the climate agreements which Trump pulled out from will all have an impact, but not anytime soon. Also, if we do not initiate the change, we will not feel it; we are the ones that must change the tools for maneuvering rather than wait to see what happens in the United States. What happened with Trump should be a big lesson to us, which is that we must build up ourselves and have internal strength, which is the basis for our strategic core.

Arab normalization

In regards to Arab normalization with Israel, Ghanem says: “We used to have strong Arab consensus and support [around our cause] but this has started to wane. For Palestinians, this is a big loss. The slogan that always said there would be no peace unless it is first achieved with the Palestinians and then with the Arabs, has been turned upside down. What is happening today only further weakens the Palestinians and will have very dangerous repercussions. What’s worse, not only is the UAE normalizing with official Israel but also with the settlers, which means it has gone over and beyond even the red lines set by the EU. We are facing a new and confusing scenario because building any relationship with regimes is like betting on a losing horse. The first wager should have been on the peoples; what happened in the UAE, Bahrain and Sudan is proof of this.

Ramallah – 23/9/2020 Jerusalemite personalities have accused Israeli occupation authorities of implementing racist policies towards Palestinian residents of the city through the preventative measures against Covid-19 by employing these measures in the service of the occupation.

The personalities told “Hosted by MIFTAH” that almost every decision taken by the Israeli government negatively reflects on the Palestinians such as the massive deployment of Israeli police and army throughout the city, which did not help to raise awareness about the danger of the virus or the measures needed to prevent its spread. They said this was proof that occupation authorities deal with Jerusalemites as second-class citizens, reflected in the nature of the health, social, educational and judicial services available to them.

Hatem Abdel Qader, former Jerusalem minister and Fateh leader said, “Any decision made by the Israeli government at the public level has negative repercussions on Palestinian society in occupied Jerusalem. For example, when the government makes any decisions pertaining to health, it tries to make it sound as if it were for the public good. However, this decision often has negative repercussions on Jerusalemites. The government employed racist preventative measures to paralyze economic activity in the Old City and to prevent worshippers from entering the Aqsa Mosque while it allowed settlers to break into the compound without them abiding by public health measures in place.

Abdel Qader said that Israeli police are also increasing the number of fines and violations against residents of East Jerusalem for not wearing masks or wearing them improperly. At the same time, he said, Israeli police do nothing towards violators in West Jerusalem where commercial activity is more or less the same. Israelis on that side of the city are not held accountable in the same way, he said.

Abdel Qader continued that Jerusalemites are under the pressure of living in a distressful environment, especially for the hundreds of Palestinian families that include a family member with a West Bank ID. As part of its preventative measures, occupation forces have suspended permits for these relatives to enter and reside in Jerusalem, using the pandemic as an excuse.

Political analyst and journalist, Rasim Obeidat said that based on his daily monitoring of Israeli measures in Jerusalem, there was a clear racist nature to how Jerusalemites are dealt with vis-a-vis the pandemic. He explained that Israeli police and army units had been deployed throughout the city’s streets and alleyways of the Old City but without offering any guidance or awareness about the dangers of Covid-19 and how to mitigate its spread. Instead, he maintained, the police are constantly on the lookout for Jerusalemites not wearing masks or wearing them improperly so they can issue them a NIS500 fine. At the same time, Israeli police deal with the same situation for Israeli Jews in Jerusalem by merely warning them to wear a mask to ensure they do not contract or spread Covid-19.

Obdeidat said the discrepancies in punitive measures based on location clearly shows the stark difference between how Palestinians and Haredi Jews in close proximity are treated, such as in “Mea Sherim” neighborhood where the Jews do not abide by precautionary instructions such as wearing masks, continue to attend temple and hold weddings and funerals. They are given mere warnings while just on the other side, Israeli police raid weddings and mourning houses held by Palestinians and issue fines up to NIS 5000 to the bride and groom and their families and NIS500 to the invitees.

Political activist and expert in Israeli affairs, Ismail Maslamani said Israel’s racist policies have not stopped since 1967, culminating in what he called the ‘soft expulsion” of residents to outside the separation wall. He added, “Israel treats us as if we are third-class citizens; one of the most glaring forms of discrimination is in its health, social, judicial and educational services. In the past year and a half, occupation authorities, through its Knesset members and some ministers, have tried to isolate Jerusalemites and prevent them from going to hospitals to receive treatment. Even Covid-19 testing was not widely available until Arab MKs intervened.”

Maslamani pointed out that Israel’s racial discrimination goes beyond health care and has infiltrated service institutions such as the “Bezeq” phone company. It offers Palestinian Jerusalemites internet services ranging between 25-100 megabytes while offering Israelis in the city 1000 megabytes. This has posed a serious predicament for Jerusalemite students who have been forced into remote learning due to the pandemic.

Attorney Deeba said Israel “spares no effort to invest in and exploit the coronavirus pandemic to implement its racist policies against the Palestinians. Its primary objective of the lockdown was to isolate Jerusalem and empty it of its Arab Palestinian inhabitants, leaving it in the hands of settlers. For example, when Islamic Waqf authorities were prepared to close the Aqsa Mosque to Muslim worshippers at the height of the pandemic, Israeli police refused to close Dung Gate for settler break-ins into the compound. They also tightened the lockdown on Palestinian areas and meted out fines and violations of around NIS1.8 million in the first days of the lockdown.”

He continued, “Israeli health inspectors even raided law offices and prevented lawyers from receiving clients,” adding that occupation authorities had taken advantage of the pandemic by closing off the Shufat camp in order to raid the youth and sports center building and arrest several of its members, in an attempt to prevent the opening of the biggest sports club in Jerusalem, which the camp residents had funded themselves after the UN provided them with the building.

Director of the youth development department in Jerusalem, Mazen Ja’abari maintained that Jerusalemites “had not expected the coronavirus pandemic to lead to such deterioration in their conditions. Since the Israeli government imposed a lockdown last March, hundreds of tourist shops in the Old City have closed because they did not receive any help.”

He continued, “Israel offered emergency economic aid packages to Israelis, which Palestinian merchants did not benefit from, thus depriving thousands of Palestinian families of a steady income and pushing them into poverty and dependence on social and humanitarian aid.”

Ja’abari said the major blow was when Covid-19 began to spread. Palestinians in Jerusalem found themselves hostage to their lack of knowledge on how to deal with the pandemic, compounded by the fact that occupation authorities did not provide them with the necessary information and methods to combat the virus, especially in terms of testing, health services and awareness campaigns. Then, when the Palestinians took it upon themselves to open a testing center in Silwan, Israeli forces shut it down, confiscated medical equipment and arrested the people in charge. What’s more, Israel did not open testing stations for Palestinian Covid-19 patients in East Jerusalem until the Adalah Center took the case to the Israeli High Court. That was when some primary testing centers opened, he said.

Ja’abari pointed out that international law necessitates that Israel, as the occupying power, must fulfill its role in caring for the residents under its occupation. However, Israel does the opposite in clear violation of human rights, namely health care and medical, social and economic services. This is in addition to the clear discrimination in the distribution of medical assistance between Israelis and Palestinians, which has turned the coronavirus pandemic into multilayered oppression of Palestinians. Not only are they burdened with hefty fines, Palestinian neighborhoods are besieged and its residents constantly being accused of spreading Covid-19.

Director of the Jerusalem Center for Social and Economic Rights, Ziad Hamouri, described Israel’s preventative measures in Jerusalem as retaliatory and racist, targeting the rights of Jerusalemites in general. He continued, “Israeli authorities have treated Jerusalemites harshly by employing double standards: the first are employed with a soft hand when it comes to the Israelis and the second are meted out with an iron fist when applied to Palestinian Jerusalemites.”

Hamouri explained that the lockdowns delivered a serious blow to economic activity in Jerusalem, which he said was ‘on its deathbed” while other cities, including the western sector of Jerusalem or Palestinian cities inside the 1948 territories were not affected in the same way. He said economic and labor activity continued to operate to some extent in these areas such as restaurants and shops while in East Jerusalem this was not the case.

He continued that this discriminatory approach affected the tourism sector as well, showing the clear discrepancy in this regard between East Jerusalem and other areas. “Billions of shekels were disbursed to various economic sectors in Israel while the Palestinian economic sector got nothing except some grants, loans or tax cuts.”

Hamouri also said there were other repercussions from Israel’s racist measures that affected Jerusalemite families. “Even before the pandemic, there are always problems pertaining to Jerusalemite rights, whether social, economic or health rights. There is also the issue of family reunification that many families must deal with, coupled with Israel’s continuous pressure on Jerusalemites to leave their city as part of Israel’s demographic battle. Couples who reside in Jerusalem and whose residency rights are under threat are targeted in this policy. This also results in their health, social and economic rights being deprived, in exchange for increased settlement population density in the holy city.”

Member of the coronavirus task force in Jerusalem and director of the Beit Safafa medical Center, Fouad Abu Hamed said the coronavirus epidemic in Jerusalem was linked to political dimensions pertaining to the nature of Israeli measures. “It is all political,” he said. “When we talk about the pandemic, the Jerusalemites who are directly affected are those facing residency and legal status issues because they are the ones deprived of comprehensive medical services. Those who do not have these residency or family reunification problems do not have these same problems.”

Abu Hamed continued that this is not limited to health services but also economic issues. “These families cannot benefit from the economic assistance or stimulus packages offered by the government. That is why these preventative measures have become such a sensitive subject and require special protection and care: this includes imposing measures on the ground against those not wearing a mask or for holding public gatherings or home visits are made to patients to ensure they are isolating. Israeli police do not consistently apply these measures in Palestinian neighborhoods of Jerusalem expect to impose heavy fines. Meanwhile, the awareness and guidance campaigns against the pandemic in Arabic for the Palestinian public is completely lacking and insufficient.”

Legal and rights institutions are merely buying time in Israeli courts to postpone demolitions, confiscations and evictions

126 structures, including 83 homes were demolished since the start of this year

Zakariya Odeh, coordinator for the Civil Coalition for Palestinian Rights in Jerusalem, said during an interview with MIFTAH that Israel’s policies on the social, health and economic rights of Jerusalemites, in particular towards housing, have escalated in the recent period, citing the spike in the number of demolished homes, whether by Israeli municipal teams or coerced self-demolitions.

Odeh maintained that legal and rights institutions in Jerusalem are merely buying time in Israeli courts to delay demolitions, confiscations and evictions, especially since self-demolitions are carried out due to the threat of exorbitant fines that could reach up to NIS90,000 if the structure is torn down by the Israeli municipality.

Following is the full interview conducted by “Hosted by MIFTAH”:

**How do you explain the recent spike in home demolitions, especially “self-demolitions”?

This policy is not only about residency rights but is linked to other matters. It is important to point this out given that the recent spike in demolitions is linked to Israel’s urban planning in occupied Jerusalem. After the occupation of Jerusalem, the Israeli government made decisions that were geared towards the annexation of the entire city. One of these decisions was to expand the borders of the so-called Jerusalem municipality from 5.5 square kilometers (during Jordanian rule) to 71 square kilometers through the annexation of land from villages around Jerusalem. Thus, a law passed in the Knesset in 1980 declared Jerusalem a “united city” and capital of Israel. This constituted a legal foundation for the annexation process, which was linked to the policy of land confiscation as well. Israeli authorities took control over 88% of land in the eastern sector of Jerusalem, leaving 12% of the land for construction purposes, whether residential or commercial. This had a major impact on residency rights in Jerusalem and the possibility to obtain building permits. It should be noted that land confiscation was all to the benefit of settlements; today there are 15 settlements within the so-called Jerusalem municipality borders in which 215,000 settlers live, comprising one-third of the overall number of settlers in the West Bank. What’s more, Israel’s urban planning includes three plans: a regional plan, which became the 2020 plan, then later the 2030 plan and finally the 2050 plan. It is clear that the central goal of the planning policy is to increase control over the land and multiply the number of settlements and settlers in the eastern sector of Jerusalem while also decreasing the number of Jerusalemite residents. These plans did not take into consideration the Palestinian presence in Jerusalem, which is clear from the underdeveloped and neglected infrastructure and roads in East Jerusalem’s neighborhoods.

**How did this impact on the residency rights of Jerusalemites? What are the most significant challenges and hindrances in this regard?

Israeli occupation authorities impose stringent restrictions on building licenses for Palestinian residents of Jerusalem to the point that obtaining a permit can take from five to 10 years in addition to the cost of the permit itself. The cost of a building permit for a 100 square meter apartment is $40,000 on average. One can only imagine how expensive this is for residents, given that 78% of Jerusalemite families fall under the poverty line, according to official Israeli statistics. The problem does not stop at this either. When someone puts in an application for a permit, the municipality also demands they bring a deed or proof of registry for the piece of land on which the house is to be built. The fact is, the land registry has always historically constituted a huge problem for Jerusalemites dating back to Ottoman rule and then the British Mandate, followed by Jordanian rule and finally the Israeli occupation. In the past, land registry in the owners’ names was never an easy task because the land was registered as collective property. Since 1967 and over the 53 years of occupation, the Israelis have never opened the door to land registry in Jerusalem, which made it very difficult to obtain building permits. Add to this Israel’s law of absentee properties and the people are left with no real options. They found themselves forced to build without a license, which, according to Israeli law, put their homes at risk of being demolished. In terms of statistics and numbers, there are currently 22,000 homes threatened with demolition in Jerusalem for lack of a building permit.

**Are there any accurate statistics on the demolition process and its acceleration over the past three years, particularly home demolitions?

It is important here to mention the considerable uptick in Israel’s demolition policy of Jerusalemite homes in the past three years, especially this year and last. According to available statistics, at the beginning of this year until August 20, a total of 121 structures were demolished, 80 of which were homes and 57 of which were torn down by the owners themselves. Unfortunately, self-demolitions have become more and more common; the families are forced to demolish their homes because if they do not, according to Israeli law, they would be forced to pay the demolition fees, including the bulldozers that raze the homes, the police and army expenses – they provide security for the demolition teams and close off the site – fees which reach between NIS80-90,000. That is why many people chose to do it themselves, which costs them at most, NIS3,000.

The statistics also show that the year with the highest recorded number of demolitions was 2019 including the highest number of self-demolitions. A total of 238 structures were torn down last year, including 189 homes, of which 58 were demolished by their owners. As of August 2020, there have been 120 homes razed to the ground.

What’s more, between 2004 and 2019, approximately 1,000 homes were demolished and 3,167 people displaced, including 1,704 children. Women and children are the primary victims of these home demolitions and therefore of the displacement policy, all of which leaves psychological scars on the entire family. One example of this is the Abu Sbeih family in Silwan, which was forced to demolish their own home just over a week ago. The owner’s young son looked at his father and said: “You are demolishing our house and not the Israelis?” This child stood and watched his father and uncle tear down their apartment so they would not be left with the demolition fees.

It is my opinion that Israel’s demolition policy is part and parcel of its displacement and “silent transfer” policy, which has been ongoing since 1948. Back then, they applied it to our people inside [the ’48 borders] and today they are applying it to Jerusalem and the West Bank. Ultimately ,the goal is to completely change the demographic and geographic makeup of Palestine and of Jerusalem in particular in order to create a Jewish majority and a Palestinian-Arab minority.

**How do self-demolitions serve Israel’s purpose and paint a prettier picture of its occupation? Do they exempt Israel from its legal responsibility as an occupier?

The truth is, self-demolitions have more than one psychosocial impact on the family, women and children in particular, and on the entire neighborhood in general. The demolitions save the occupation the effort of demolishing Palestinian homes. But even beyond this, these demolitions give the impression that the person demolishing their own home has done something wrong because they built it without a permit and was therefore forced to tear it down. This serves Israel in that it gets the same result but at the same time gives the impression that the occupation is not the culprit. Still, in international law, this does not exempt the occupation from its legal responsibilities because it does not grant Jerusalemites permits, nor does it allow them to build and then it makes them pay the costs of the demolition.

**How much is the demolition policy, both self-demolitions and those carried out by Israeli authorities, linked to other plans such as annexation, settlement and land usurpation?

I think the demolition of homes, restrictions on building permits and the displacement of residents are all parts of a one policy of “transfer”. The confiscation of land and settlement building is one goal occupation authorities work towards nonstop. This racist planning policy is in the service of Israeli Jews, not Palestinians and does not reflect the needs of Jerusalemites or even take them into consideration. There is also the revocation of residency rights from Jerusalemites, the closure of the city and restrictions on movement. Moreover, a decision by the Israeli interior ministry in 2002 effectively froze all family reunification requests, which also falls within Israel’s strategic approaches. Statistics indicate there are approximately 8,000 Jerusalemite children who have no legal status in the city, which effectively denies these children of social, economic and health rights. They are not residents or even registered in the family records at the Israeli interior ministry, rendering them basically nonexistent in the eyes of the occupation. Imagine the social, economic and psychological impact this has on the victims of this policy. Then there is the Jerusalem ID revocation policy, which denies Jerusalemites the right to live in their own city. Since 1967 to today, around 14,650 ID cards have been revoked as part of an ongoing and systematic policy.

Let us not forget how Palestinian education is targeted in Jerusalem. There is a systematic policy in place since the first days of the Intifada, which has only escalated in a bid to take control of the entire educational process. In 2011, Israeli authorities began to change and distort the Palestinian curriculum, which only increased throughout the years, culminating in 2015 with a move to implement the Israeli curriculum on Jerusalem schools. They are fully aware that education is one of the most important tools used to promote Palestinian nationalism, which is exactly why their efforts are nonstop to take over the entire system and “Israelize“ the curriculum. This is what can be called the ‘occupation of the minds” of Palestinians in Jerusalem.

Israel also targets Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem. Since 2000 to today, 47 Jerusalemite institutions have been completely shut down while hundreds of activities have been banned in the city, including culture and art activities. Most recently, at the end of August, the Yabous Cultural Center and the Edward Said Music Conservatory were raided by Israeli security forces and computers and files confiscated. All of these measures are part of one policy, which targets Palestinian existence in Jerusalem.

**What happens when people’s applications for building permits are denied by the municipality? What measures do Israeli authorities take against them? And what happens to the families that lose their homes?

Many applications for building permits when the homes are built without them, take years in courts before they are rejected. By that time, exorbitant expenses and fines are meted out to the home owners. Our statistics indicate that the average number of permits issued to Palestinian Jerusalemites in East Jerusalem is just 100 a year in spite of the high population growth and density in the city, which has multiplied over the years of the occupation. The population of Jerusalem on the eve of its 1967 occupation was 67,000 while today there are more than 375,000 people and currently comprise around 40% of the population within the so-called Jerusalem municipal borders. The only thing they offer to these residents is demolition, displacement of families and deprivation of residency rights. In addition to this, there is no support for these families from official Palestinian parties in spite of their harsh conditions after their homes are demolished. All of their savings are usually depleted in order to obtain a building permit. As for self-demolitions, since these residents are not given ample support, they have begun to take on a new approach: to refuse to tear down their own homes on the premise that this is a criminal policy carried out by occupation authorities and for which they are responsible. This is in spite of the economic pressures that come with occupation authorities carrying out the demolition, which can cost between NIS80,000-90,000. It’s true there are some official initiatives and efforts by the PA, whether from the Ministry of Jerusalem Affairs or the Jerusalem Governorate, but still these efforts are not sufficient for supporting these families. In this regard, official parties have clearly fallen short in supporting Jerusalem and its people’ steadfastness.

**What is the role of local and international human rights organizations and institutions? What role can they take in terms of legal aid or lobbying to halt the demolition policy?

There are several legal and rights institutions that follow up on these violations, especially house demolitions, by raising awareness among residents of these measures and offering legal support for the affected. However, the problem is with the process itself whereby legal support is within an Israeli context. That is, the courts are Israeli, the laws are Israeli and the prosecutor is Israeli. It should be noted that there have been discussions about resorting to these courts during the first days of the occupation and whether this was right or even useful, especially the Israeli High Court. The fact is, the only thing these legal and rights institutions can offer is to buy time by postponing demolitions, confiscations or evictions. So, instead of their home being demolished within a year or two, it gets postponed for five or even 10 years. One example is the Sheikh Jarrah case, which has been in the courts for 40 years even though 13 families have been evicted so far. A similar case is the Bustan case whereby legal aid was able to prevent the eviction of the families. So there are legal services but few accomplishments because the judicial system and Israeli law are not objective but slanted to serve Israel’s own political end goals.

The other thing these institutions do is to lobby and advocate with international parties, the UN and human rights organizations. It shares their reports and participates in conferences to speak about home demolitions. They also work with the EU, with various diplomatic missions and international organizations working in Palestine and Jerusalem because they realize the importance of international legal pressure. In the end, our problems are political and their solution is political as well, which is an end to the occupation. However, in spite of everything going on, the international community - -whether the EU or other countries – have not shouldered their responsibilities. The international community has fallen short as a result of Israeli pressure and policies.

**How has Israel’s nation-state law impacted the steady increase in the number of demolished homes? Likewise, did the US administration’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel also have an impact?

Both the nation-state law and the current US administration’s policies since 2017 have had a clear impact in this regard. The nation-state law says that a united Jerusalem with a Jewish majority is the capital of Israel and the capital of the Jewish state. Hence, the law confirmed the Israeli policy of annexation and control and also granted the right and self-determination for the Jewish people while not recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to their self-determination, in addition to considering settlements as having moral value. All of these provisions of the law reinforced Israel’s policy of control, annexation and settlement building, which is linked to demolitions of course. In addition to this, the US embassy moved from Tel Aviv to occupied Jerusalem, halted its support for UNRWA and funding to Jerusalem hospitals, closed its consulate in Jerusalem – which was historically America’s recognition that Jerusalem is occupied – thus giving the green light to the Israeli government to escalate its measures, increase home demolitions and build more settlement units.

**How did the separation wall contribute to the accelerated pace of forced expulsion of Jerusalemites and to the escalated demographic conflict?

Since the state of Israel was established in 1948, the goal of its demographic politics has been to maintain a Jewish majority and to continue the expulsion of Palestinians through reinforcing and increasing settlements, stripping Palestinians, namely Jerusalemites, of their residency rights and limiting their freedom of movement. Part of the challenges facing Jerusalem and its residents is the so-called Israeli plan for “Greater Jerusalem”, which they have been working on for years and which includes, within it, other plans pertaining to the expansion of the city’s borders so they encompass the Gush Etzion settlement bloc. This bloc alone is comprised of 13 settlements. To the east of this is the settlement of Maaleh Adumim and the EI project to build 3,600 settlement units, hotels, shopping centers and other services. This project is currently underway and is aimed at linking Maaleh Adumim to Jerusalem’s center, thereby dividing the northern West Bank from its south. To the north, there are the Givat Zeev and Kochav Yaacov settlements. According to this plan, immediately after the signing of the Oslo Accords, the Israeli government closed off Jerusalem by erecting checkpoints at its entrances. Then, in 2005 it began to build the separation wall until Jerusalem became completely encircled with this wall today. Three Palestinian residential areas have now been isolated from the city: Kufr Aqab and Samiramis to the north, Shufat camp, Anata and Dahiyet Barid to the east and Walaja to the south. There are now approximately 140,000 people behind the separation wall in communities that have been neglected for years and have no proper services or infrastructure.

Israel is floating ideas for severing these communities completely from Jerusalem. In 2018, a bill was put to the Knesset that includes two provisions on the percentage of the vote needed to change the status of Jerusalem. According to this law, there would need to be 50% of Knesset members who vote in favor of the law in order to pass it. This has changed, however, to become two-thirds of the vote should there be any negotiations over Jerusalem. The second provision is to change the borders of Jerusalem, which were ratified in 1980 in a bid to change the law so the separation wall would become the so-called municipal borders. This would effectively mean the isolation of the three aforementioned communities. Several discussions were held on the parties that would govern these communities such as local councils or by the Israeli army’s “civil administration” and would ultimately result in their total isolation from Jerusalem’s borders. If this happens, Palestinians will comprise only 20% of the overall population of Jerusalem after being 40%. This is the strategic plan proposed by the Israeli government’s “Givani” committee in the 70s. At the time, the government formed the committee and then asked it to formulate a population strategy for Jerusalem. Their recommendations were that the Palestinians should not be more than 22% to 24% of the population of Jerusalem. This has been their goal for years – to make this change and this is what they are working on now through their tunnel and road systems that link the city center with settlement blocs in order to facilitate movement between them and also link these settlements with the Israeli municipality in Jerusalem.

**In light of the negative impacts of home demolitions, especially on women and children, do you think we will be seeing a rise in the level of domestic violence?

Most definitely. Israel’s policies, especially home demolitions, impact children and women more than others. According to studies, the increased pressure on men due to the occupation commonly leads to increased violence against women and children. This has also resulted in a rise in the divorce rate, especially in young couples. The problem of shortage in housing due to the difficulty in obtaining building permits in addition to the high rents in Jerusalem, which can reach up to $1,000 a month, put economic and psychological pressure on people and prompt couples to live outside the separation wall and therefore outside of the fabricated municipal borders of Jerusalem. In turn, this puts them at risk of losing their residency rights in accordance with the so-called “center of life” law. There are thousands of Jerusalemites who lost their residency rights because they live in neighborhoods on the other side of the wall or in areas in the West Bank such as Ramallah or Bethlehem. This has had an incredible impact on the social fabric and on civic peace in that there are more problems within the family including a sharp uptick in violence, to which Israel gives no attention.

**What repercussions will this have on Jerusalemite youth in particular?

One of the consequences of these conditions is their repercussions on Jerusalem’s youth. For years, it was difficult for Jerusalemites to be accepted in the Hebrew University or to get jobs at their workplaces. However, after the murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir, the subsequent uprisings and unrest in most parts of the city and the rise in the level of resistance following the repeated attacks on the Gaza Strip, Israeli leaders realized that the services they had been offering Jerusalemites over the years had not succeeded in Israelizing them. Hence, they pushed back against these uprisings, which were all led by young people who had suffered from the accumulated measures of the occupation such as restriction on their freedom of movement and lack of job opportunities. Unemployment rates among youth were high, their education was targeted and drugs and other social ills prevailed, which Israeli authorities did not care to contain. In response, Israeli institutions resorted to the use of a strategy for improving the living conditions of Jerusalemites; they allocated budgets to this end, aimed in essence at annexing and controlling the eastern sector of the city and reinforcing so-called Israeli sovereignty over it. They aimed at integrating the youth into Israeli society through various methods, including making it easier for them to enroll in Israeli universities.

This was one of the fundamental challenges facing Jerusalem, the contradiction between attempts by Jerusalemite youths to preserve their Palestinian identity and sense of belonging and their aspirations to live a dignified life. This converged with the absence of any role of national influences, whether at the level of factions and parties, or the role of official Palestinian parties which did not make any serious effort to close this gap by offering programs and projects, job opportunities and even entertainment venues for youths that promote this identity. The result was that many Jerusalemite youths turned to Israeli institutions, which increased their presence in most areas of the city through community centers, working under the guise of education in particular but also for mental health and social counseling for youth and children. At the same time, occupation authorities continue to target local Palestinian institutions and hinder their work or shut them down completely, often opening alternative institutions in their place. This is the biggest danger facing Palestinians in Jerusalem today.

• We worked within an emergency austerity budget that resulted from Israel’s piracy of Palestinian money
• Jerusalemite women and youths are at the core of the development plan for Jerusalem
• During my last arrest, I was charged with leading the response to the pandemic in Jerusalem
• Politically, we are facing Israeli-American vigilantism, which is aimed at undermining our rights
• Jerusalemites cannot be bought or sold with a handful of food or money. They are fully aware of the “stick and carrot” approach

The role of civil society organizations is extremely important; they should not change their character or messages in society

“Hosted by MIFTAH” conducted the following interview with Mr. Fadi Hidmi, Minister of Jerusalem Affairs in which he showcased the ministry’s work and developments in the city in spite of the huge challenges and impediments imposed by the Israeli occupation.

**How has the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry dealt with the coronavirus pandemic? How have you addressed the needs of Jerusalemites?

The Jerusalem Ministry is part of the government system and part of the state of emergency declared in Palestine in response to the pandemic. From the beginning, we had instructions on how to deal with this crisis at the health and social levels from the government. In terms of health, I am speaking about Jerusalem hospitals in particular. We all know the Ministry of Health’s limitations of handling the affairs of Palestinians in Jerusalem. We all remember when Israeli occupation authorities in Silwan shut down its center and prevented any intervention by the Ministry of Health physicians when they were sent to conduct testing. Of course, there have also been huge social and economic ramifications, to which the Ministry has responded in spite of the challenges it faces by the occupation.

**Did the budget allocated for Jerusalem cover all of your needs or did it fall short?

The ministry operated within the austerity emergency budget that resulted from Israel’s piracy of Palestinian money. Nonetheless, the Prime Minister [Mohammed Shtayeh] reassured us that Jerusalem was a top priority. There is an undeclared budget related to the PA’s intervention in Jerusalem; the entire official system operating in Jerusalem falls under the Ministry of Jerusalem affairs budget. Even though Palestine and its public treasury are going through a very tough financial situation and we know how much Israel is making deductions, Jerusalem is always at the forefront in this regard.

**Has your ministry allocated special programs for Jerusalemite women? And are they part of the budget?

Palestinian women are an integral part of our people and one of the ministry’s priorities. I have always said that Palestinian women are the whole society. How could they not when they are the mothers of martyrs, the mothers of prisoners. The role of Palestinian Jerusalemite women throughout history has always been very deep-rooted and substantial. We recall Hind Husseini, Zleikha Shihabi and others; the list is long. In this context, we developed the Jerusalem Development Plan (the capital cluster) in which we focused on two basic and intersectional components: women and youth.

**How were you able to deal with the occupation while still having to respond to the pandemic?

After the US embassy was moved to Jerusalem and after the announcement of the “Deal of the century”, Israeli occupation authorities were given even more ammunition to fight anything and everything Palestinian. Hence, what we are up against in Jerusalem is a systematic war on everything that is Palestinian, whether official, institutional, or at the popular level. Everyone is a warrior because they represent the battle for sovereignty over the Arab, Islamic and Christian identity of Jerusalem. There is a plethora of harassments we have to face. Throughout this pandemic, Israel does not want us to serve our people in Jerusalem, but in light of its blatantly discriminatory failure to do so, it disregarded its responsibilities towards East Jerusalem in terms of any real preventative measures against Covid-19 including delays in testing. Israel became increasingly obstinate that it did not want us to stand by our own people, which is a violation of every humanitarian norm and international law as a civilian population under occupation. The occupation does not want us to progress or develop and this has been the problem in terms of protection for our people. However, none of these policies will ever deter us from moving forward in serving our people, especially during tough times.

**You have been arrested more than once along with other Jerusalemite officials. On what grounds are occupation authorities pursuing you?

There is a political dimension to Israel’s arrest of Palestinian officials in Jerusalem, under a false legal guise. They fall back on the so-called “interim agreement application law” that prevents Palestinian presence in Jerusalem, but this is nothing but a cover in every arrest. I was arrested four times in the course of a year. The same happened to the Jerusalem governor and to head of the Popular National Conference for Jerusalem, Bilal Al Natsheh. In short, anyone who works officially, institutionally or at the popular level is pursued and arrested. The last time I was arrested I was charged with leading the fight against Covid-19 in Jerusalem. Their excuses are always bogus because this is always about targeting our identity and our existence as an integral part of the popular fabric in Jerusalem. Jerusalem is our city and Jerusalemites are our people. There is no law on the face of this earth that can prevent any Jerusalemite or any human being in general from standing beside their people at any time much less during a pandemic.

**What is your relationship as a ministry with civil society institutions in Jerusalem? Have you been able to overcome the occupation’s obstacles together?

Integrative action is key at this stage. One example is the cooperation we saw in responding to the pandemic. There was unprecedented cooperation between institutions and volunteers and between youth and the official establishment. They carried out concerted efforts in serving Jerusalemites, which is the one focal point where everyone came together. It was this harmony and concordance which Jerusalemites were banking on and which they saw being strongly applied on the ground.

The truth is, Jerusalem is in need of this institutional interconnection; there can be joint action and clear plans for everything pertaining to the work of official institutions whether the ministry or governorate in terms of all official Palestinian action in Jerusalem.

**Does the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry have statistical data on Jerusalemites in the various sectors including unemployment, poverty and Israeli violations?

When we say that the ministry has a strategic cluster plan, this means we formulate our planning based on this essential data. We cannot talk about the housing sector without knowing the needs of this sector and without having the data on it. The same goes for all the other sectors. This is the method required for any strategic approach to succeed. The Ministry for Jerusalem Affairs works according to directives from the government and formulates its plans based on them. The Palestinian government is in a state of development. While it is true that it was affected by the coronavirus pandemic – we are currently working on data from this pandemic in terms of its emergency, relief, health and humanitarian aspects, but we are also not neglecting the developmental dimension on the ground.

In Jerusalem, there are conspiracies being hatched along with increased settlement activity, which have imposed realities on us that we must address in terms of its current and strategic repercussions. We must also not forget the city’s international dimension since Jerusalem has a presence in the international arena.

**From a political standpoint, how has the Ministry of Jerusalem Affairs dealt with the recent American positions on Jerusalem?

We are up against Israeli-American vigilantism. The United States is taking the lead and Israel is following, which is contrary to what used to happen in the past. Israel and the US are in one basket and the world is in another. Of course there are countries that have not taken a declared stance on this American position but overall, EU countries and many other countries in the world are standing against the US position regarding Jerusalem and Israel’s annexation plans for the Jordan Valley. We cannot underestimate the dangers of the next stage but we have and will continue to combat these developments as they come along. That is why we called on the international community to provide us with the necessary protection for our people, including in occupied Jerusalem.

What the United States and Israel are doing only serves the law of the jungle and is not in line whatsoever with international law, conventions or resolutions that confirm this is occupied territory and that the occupier must provide protection for all those under its rule.

**In light of the current political situation and possible developments, are you concerned about the future of the PA and the possibility of its collapse?

The PA is not disconnected to the overall Palestinian reality. Therefore I am not concerned about the people or PA because it is part of this people and all of its components are part of this popular structure. Jerusalemites have always proven they take the initiative and that they get stronger with every hardship. I am not worried. Palestinians will always prevail and our positions will never be replaced. We have always faced predicaments and crossroads but our national constants have never changed and never will. Nor will they ever be compromised by blackmail or pressure.

**The Israeli Jerusalem municipality is trying to play a central role in citizens’ affairs. As a ministry, how do you see this sudden shift in the municipality’s position?

This is ultimate naiveté on their part. Jerusalemites cannot be bought or sold with a handful of food or money. They stand in the face of Israeli bulldozers that come to tear down their homes. The Israeli municipality is the party that imposes exorbitant taxes on Old City merchants and is responsible for all of the policies aimed at driving them out. The collective memory of Palestinians is not weak and neither is their short-term memory. Israel has a plan that cannot be beautified; there are too many witnesses and too many tragedies. We are a people that was not born yesterday; the stick and carrot approach is something they know well.

**How do you think the current political reality will reflect on the Palestinian narrative in confronting the occupation and in developing a global vision more supportive of the Palestinian people?

The first and final lesson learned is that the coronavirus pandemic proved to the Palestinians, the Israelis and to the world that Jerusalem is not united and that Jerusalem is for the Palestinians alone. This was confirmed by the way in which Israeli authorities dealt with Jerusalemites during the pandemic. It was brazenly racist in a way that no one can deny in terms of their disregard and neglect towards the Palestinians. Another lesson learned is that the wager should always be on Jerusalemites. They have taught us for years that Jerusalemites are always on the ground and are always the ones that take the reins of initiative. They will never trust those who demolish their homes and exercise such brazen racism against them.

I think after this pandemic is over, a new perspective will evolve in the world; there will be earthshattering economic repercussions. If we take into account the setback in economic indicators since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, we know we are up against a difficult economic impact. However, the Palestinians have prior experience in dealing with such crises, which has helped us avoid a lot of problems. Responding to the current crisis will be one of our biggest challenges. Success will be measured by how comprehensively we deal with the crisis and all of its sub-problems and this is what we are already seeing from the Palestinian leadership.

**Will this crisis impact the role of civil society organizations which work on programs addressing the national narrative and identity?

The pandemic may have an impact on this role at present and perhaps on its situation in the future but it will not impact the overall situation for these organizations. CSOs exist in order to serve a strategy that supposedly has clear markers and which are not changed or replaced. The only thing replaceable are the tactics of any given stage and the short and mid-term strategies of that stage. However, CSOs should not change their character, message or presence in society, only their interim approaches and tactics so they can deal with the reality, in this case one that has been imposed on the entire world because of this pandemic.