Palestinian statehood and need for continued reform

News has just come through on the vote at the UN recognising Palestine as a “non-member State” and Palestinians are celebrating the streets.  Several European states decided in the past few days not to oppose the vote that President Mahmoud Abbas has described as issuing "a birth certificate for the State of Palestine".

 

Leaders within the Palestinian Authority need to use this moment to press ahead with reconciliation and reform.  The Palestinian Authority is restricted in its ability to govern by the Israeli occupation and cannot be said to be truly sovereign even within the West Bank.  However even within the constraints imposed by occupation it must demonstrate its competence to represent diverse Palestinian interests well.  Over the past decade the Palestinian Authority has developed from a dysfunctional body with no popular mandate to an administration that shows an increasing capacity to deliver essential services, albeit highly dependent on outside donors and the willingness of the Government of Israel to pass aid funds on.  Currently corruption within the Palestinian Authority still remains a significant problem although some progress has been made.  

If the people of Palestine are to capitalise on their non-member State observer status at the UN, the Palestinian Authority must walk the walk that even UN “non-membership” implies and demonstrate to the world it is ready to move to full sovereignty.  The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights documents the abuse of basic rights in both the West Bank and Gaza.  These include; police violence (beatings etc), the use of torture by security services, the constraint on press freedom (particularly with respect to articles supportive of either Hamas or Fatah in the West Bank and in Gaza respectively) and the use of military courts without due legal process.  To be in compliance with the core values of the UN, Hamas must be unequivocal in its renouncement of attacks against civilians and show greater willingness to promote the path of non-violence.

There have been positive developments.  In October local elections were held in 92 of353 municipalities in the West Bank for the first time for 6 years.  But they were boycotted by Hamas who alleged threats, intimidation and arrests of potential candidates. 

At the UN, President Abbas is first and foremost asserting the rights of all Palestinians to self-determination but he is also appealing for the Palestinian Authority to be recognised as a body capable of managing the internal affairs of a future sovereign Palestinian state.  For this appeal to be taken seriously Fatah and Hamas must work on implementing the reconciliation agreement of May 2011 (and subsequent agreements since), achieve progress on human rights, accountability and transparency, and conduct free and fair elections.  This would, no doubt, result in further pressure on Israel to end the occupation.

Passports "Taken Out" on the Today Programme

When the story of the killing of an alledged Hamas leader, al-Mabhouh, in Dubai broke there were two things that were focussed on: the probablity that this was the act of the Israeli Security Services and that the killers used forged British and EU passports to enter Dubai.

The passports issue has played out over the past few weeks with Israeli ambasadors being summoned or invited to talk to various EU Foreign ministers, and being asked to give undertakings not to abuse EU passports in the same way again. The Israelis have continually stated that it has not been proved that their Forces were involved.

Excitement was generated by visions of a John Le Carre style assasination operation and at one point the normally sober BBC Today programe refered to al-Mabhouh being "taken-out" by Mosad. A thriller term for what was the ending of a unique, individual and entirely real human life.

As Dubai Police gather evidence in their murder enquiry and ask for Israeli co-operation in excluding Mosad agents from their equiries, I wonder if the EU foreign ministers were asking for the right undertakings. Maybe they should have said: "use our passports if you must - but promise not to travel abroad to kill people."

It is clear that in almost any circumstance the killing of an individual without trial or any semblance of judicial process is morally wrong as well as illegal under international law. But I would argue it also makes peace for Israel a more distant possibility.

I grew up in Belfast and my first interest in politics arose was when I saw the destructive cylical violence going on around me. But I ask you to consider what have happened if the state had killed the political leadership of the Republican movement, Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness? Where would the Good Friday Agreement have come from? Who could the state have negociated with? Who would have had the political weight to hold the movement together as it ceased it's violence? The small violent Republican splinters who planted a car bomb last month would be just the tip of the iceberg.

Israel has long had a practice of extrajudical killings and there is no evidence that these do anything other than continue the cycle of violence. Going to great lengths to talk to the Hamas leadership rather than going to great lengths to kill them is more likely to lead to peace.