The issue of Palestinian disarmament has apparently swept the centre stage of all discourse revolving around the multi-faceted Palestinian-Israeli conflict. There seems to be an unprecedented unanimity between Israel, the U.S.A, the international community and the Palestinian National Authority, each of course for different reasons, about the issue of Palestinian factions disarming. Israel, for its part prefers to pursue a proactive policy of targeted killings and collective punishment to fight what it calls the Palestinian terror infrastructure. The US administration, the custodian of the vision of a two state solution, stresses and fervently insists on Palestinian disarmament as a precondition to comprehensive peace talks and statehood, while turning a blind eye to Israel’s colonial expeditions in the West Bank, ultimately allowing Israel to prejudge final status issues. The international community made its voice heard through the Security Council when it unanimously issued in March Resolution 1559, which amongst many things called for the disarmament of all armed factions in Lebanon, whether Lebanese or not (explicitly implying armed Palestinian factions, especially pro-Syrian factions.) And there is the Palestinian National Authority, which since the election of President Mahmoud Abbas, voted into office on the plateau of non-violence, internal reform and economic development, has actively pursued a policy of dialogue and non-violence as part of its commitments pertaining to the Road Map.

It is a genuinely good step to have Palestinian factions disarmed, especially amidst the resurgence of violence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The recent clashes between various Palestinian factions and the Israeli army were sparked off by the Israeli army’s decision to extra-judicially kill Luay Saadi, a local Islamic Jihad leader, which in turn prompted resistance factions to fire the notorious Qassam Rockets. Add to this the alarming trend of lawlessness and security chaos in the Palestinian territories, unanimity is not necessarily always good or for that matter pragmatic. In this case, unanimity over an issue such as Palestinian arms, rather represents a deviation from much more urgent and pertinent issues such as the illegal occupation itself. Needles to say, it is the occupation of land and people for 39 years that has created an atmosphere of animosity and hatred. The occupation, the apartheid wall, the illegal settlements, the illegal checkpoints, the illegal home demolitions, the illegal confiscation of agricultural land, the prisoners held without fair trial, the policy of targeted and add hoc killings, economic strangulation and most recently an utterly absurd proposal to enforce roads exclusively for Israelis on occupied Palestinian land, remain the core problem. Couple all of this with Israel’s mad pursuit of unilateral actions, and it becomes obvious that to precondition Palestinian disarmament embodies the trivial and hypocritical stances of Israel, the U.S.A and indeed the international community. These actions on behalf of the US and the international community only aid in the postponement of final status talks.

For non-violence to become a national banner, especially in light of the conduct of this Israeli cabinet, represents political maturity and genuine will on behalf of the Palestinian people, especially while being in the vulnerable position they are in. To further explore the legality of Palestinian arms in terms of the rights and duties of the occupied, in accordance with the Fourth Geneva Conventions, is not the point here. The ultimate question that needs to be asked, or rather answered is, whether Israel can give up its occupation, and sit down and confront its Palestinian counterparts in fair and square negotiations.

Many statements have been made by Israeli and American officials about the need to disarm Palestinian factions, which were catalyzed by Hamas and the Islamic Jihad’s decision to participate in the upcoming Palestinian legislative elections salted for January 25. Israel insists on disarmament as a prerequisite, while threatening to disrupt the election if Hamas or Islamic Jihad takes part.

Only two things will lead to the full disarmament of all Palestinian factions. Targeted killings and random arrests are not the right choice. Firstly, the inclusion of more extreme factions such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the political process, with their popular grass roots support, will force them to pursue their policies and agenda through political channels rather than the use force as a means to achieving their ends.

Seek and you shall find! In this case it is right in front our eyes. Israel, the U.S.A and the international community should empower and support President Abbas, rather than pressure him and make him politically isolated as it has it previously done by using the usual and easy scapegoat, President Arafat. An attempt at similarly vilifying President Abbas will not work this time round. Conversely empty pledges and praise will not help either, as this US administration has been doing by calling Abu Mazen - President Abbas and the late Abu Ammar, Chairman Arafat.

Secondly, who better to disarm Palestinian factions than Abbas himself, surely not Sharon, his record till today stands positively clear, he has achieved a ceasefire since February 8 that incorporated all the spectrum of Palestinian factions. Thus if President Abbas suggests that disarmament should follow the inclusion and participation in legislative elections by armed factions, he is the best suited person to judge so. Let the right man do the job.

The Palestinian-Israeli peace process will head in the right direction if and only when there is unanimity between the concerned parties about the need to immediately end the occupation.