Hanan Ashrawi: The US Role in the Middle East Peace Process

HANAN ASHRAWI URGES THE U.S. TO FULLY ENGAGE IN THE PEACE PROCESS AND TO BUILD A NEW PEACE ALLIANCE

Dr. Hanan Ashrawi’s remarks at the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill on February 12, 2004 during a Public Hearing on “The Middle East in Election 2004”, sponsored by the Council for the National Interest and the Palestine Center.
#file_1#
Hanan Ashrawi, the noted Palestinian legislator well known to U.S. audiences, urged the United States to stay fully engaged in the Middle East peace process as the only power capable of holding Israel accountable for its act. Besides, she said in remarks at a rare appearance on Capitol Hill, “what’s good for the Palestinians could be what’s good for the region and for humanity.”

#file_2#

“On the ground in Palestine, conditions are extremely critical,” she said. “The war on terrorism is a sort of umbrella for all sorts of violations and suspension of human rights, civil rights, global rule of law. We’re seeing the destruction of multilateral international organizations.”

“The Iraq war has confirmed the worst fears of the Arabs that the U.S. has encouraged extremism and violence.”

Since the beginning of the Intifada in September 2000, more than 2,700 Palestinians and 930 Israelis have died, and almost 27,000 on both sides have been hospitalized from internal fighting. On the eve of her talk, the Israeli army killed 15 in attacks in Gaza and wounded at least 50.

But “peacemaking and Palestine-Israel have been placed on a back burner,” as the U.S. has engaged in crisis management, verbal commitments, and de facto, if not unconscious, accommodation of Israeli measures. The vacuum, Ashrawi warned, was bound to be filled by the Israeli unilateralism – preempting negotiations on permanent status issues including borders that should be decided by Palestinians and Israelis together.

Nor has the European Union, Russia or the United Nations—the Quartet – been willing to intervene while the United States remains unengaged. America is considered the gatekeeper to the political process. Thus a new alliance for peace is required for the peace process to be resumed.

The U.S. has a role to play “even if it is not entirely even-handed,” merely for “the politics of self-interest. It must realize that the Palestinian question is the focal question, the most emotive question, the source of instability and militarism and extremism because it is the most visible expression of injustice and suffering and grievances and pain that hasn’t been resolved.”

“Israeli behavior on the ground, in the name of the U.S., has also formed a great liability for U.S. standing and interest in the region.”

A solution will not come by “bombing and shelling people into a democratic system, but by allowing for a bottom-up, grassroots approach to genuine democracy.”

“Palestine has already been declared a state. We need to liberate Palestine.”

As for the “Road Map,” which the U.S. introduced last year, the Israelis issued 14 “reservations,” accepting only those parts the Knesset approved, but insisting that the Palestinians follow the “implementation” of the Map, not the text. There was no monitoring of either, and although the Palestinians complied fully with the text of the Road Map, the Israelis accused them of not following the “implementation of the Road Map.” Throughout it all, the United States displayed a lack of political will.

“The Palestinians perceive multiple standards,” she said, “and there are feelings of injustice and inequality. There is an overall need to release the region from the grip of war.

As for the barrier that Israel is constructing, she believed it will separate Israel from Palestine, but will still be considered an “apartheid wall, [which will] render any kind of viable solution impossible.”

Israeli unilateralism is “rampant,” Ashrawi said. In addition to the wall, “the Israelis are expanding the settlements, not restricting them; they say they are tearing down outposts but in fact allow them to be rebuilt. More and more roads are being constructed.”

Sharon’s proclaimed “unilateral disengagement” is typical. If he disengages from Gaza, “not a single Palestinian would not rejoice at seeing settlements removed – but there can be no unilateral solution, in which the will of the powerful is imposed on the weak. Gaza is the most congested area in the world, and its people remain dependent on jobs in Israel. The disengagement there must be tied to disengagement from the rest of Palestine.”

Most of all, disengagement must occur in the West Bank where the ideological heart of Palestine lies.

Ashrawi felt that the time had come to “work simultaneously on various fronts.” Palestine should proceed with elections. There is a special need at this time for legitimacy through elections. There has been a rapid disintegration of Palestinian institutions. The country has been undergoing deliberate de-development. There has been no intervention to prevent it. The Palestinian Authority is entirely incapacitated, and she finds a rise in extremism as a result.

She looked forward to the Arab summit next month, but feared that the Arab states had learned the wrong lesson from the Iraq war – that their foreign policies should be based on friendship with the US rather than on the legitimate needs of their people.

In the question period, Dr. Ashrawi was asked about a one-state instead of a two-state solution for Palestine. She replied that while the Israelis showed their racism in arguing that the Palestinians are a demographic threat, she stated she believed a two-state solution was still possible. “But if there is no political program for either, we may end up with a de facto one state solution in one or two generations. Or we may be condemned to perpetual violence.”

She took pride in the progress made by women despite Palestine being a patriarchal society. More women are being empowered, and she pointed out that 150 women have signed up to stand in the Palestinian elections. She herself is an elected member of the Palestine Legislature, gaining more votes than any other candidate.

How can the Palestinian Authority be changed, she was asked. Dr. Ashrawi said, “Elections.” She pointed out that there is a feeling of disgruntlement, as one government after another has failed. “This is due to the intervention of Israel. Institution building and the rule of law must continue, and no excuses should be made. But it is difficult – how can you have elections under a state of siege?”

Dr. Ashrawi was introduced by Ambassador Edward Peck, who pointed out the connections between Iraq and the problem of Palestine. Dr. E. Faye Williams, member of the CNI Board, moderated the question and answer period. Eugene Bird, president of CNI, provided a short introduction to the CNI proposals for a regional approach to peace in the Middle East by the creation of a broad new alliance for peace.

This hearing was the second of ten public hearings sponsored by CNI and other organizations on Washington on the “Middle East in Election 2004.”
See also:
http://www.cnionline.org
http://www.miftah.org