1BUV Global News No Ads or Trackers
No Ads or Trackers
Iraq Daily Roundup: Three Killed - Antiwar.com Original

Elections Under Fire: Palestine’s Impossible Democracy Dilemma

Many Palestinian intellectuals and political analysts find
themselves in the unenviable position of having to declare a stance on whether
they support or reject upcoming Palestinian elections which are scheduled for
May 22 and July 30. But there are no easy answers.

The long-awaited decree by Palestinian Authority President
Mahmoud Abbas last January to hold legislative and presidential elections in
the coming months was widely welcomed, not as a triumph for democracy
but as the first tangible positive outcome of dialogue between rival Palestinian
factions, mainly Abbas’ Fatah party and Hamas.

As far as inner Palestinian dialogue is concerned, the elections,
if held unobstructed, could present a ray of hope that, finally, Palestinians
in the Occupied Territories will enjoy a degree of democratic representation,
a first step towards a more comprehensive representation that could include
millions of Palestinians outside the Occupied Territories.

But even such humble expectations are conditioned on many “ifs”:
only if Palestinian factions honor their commitments to the
Istanbul Agreement
of September 24; only if Israel allows Palestinians,
including Jerusalemites, to vote unhindered and refrains from arresting Palestinian
candidates; only if the US-led international community accepts the outcome of
the democratic elections without punishing victorious parties and candidates;
only if the legislative and presidential elections are followed by the more
consequential and substantive elections in the Palestinian National Council
(PNC) – the Palestinian Parliament in exile – and so on.

If any of these conditions is unsatisfactory, the May elections
are likely to serve no practical purpose, aside from giving Abbas and his rivals
the veneer of legitimacy, thus allowing them to buy yet more time and acquire
yet more funds from their financial benefactors.

All of this compels us to consider the following question:
is democracy possible under military occupation?

Almost immediately following the last democratic Palestinian
legislative elections in 2006, the outcome of which displeased Israel, 62 Palestinian
ministers and members of the new parliament were
thrown
into prison, with many still imprisoned.

History is repeating itself as Israel has already begun its
arrest campaigns of Hamas leaders and members in the West Bank. On February
22, over 20 Palestinian activists, including Hamas officials, were
detained
as a clear message from the Israeli occupation to Palestinians
that Israel does not recognize their dialogue, their unity agreements or their
democracy.

Two days later, 67-year-old Hamas leader, Omar Barghouti, was
summoned
by the Israeli military intelligence in the occupied West Bank
and warned against running in the upcoming May elections. “The Israeli
officer warned me not to run in the upcoming elections and threatened me with
imprisonment if I did,” Barghouti was quoted by Al-Monitor.

The Palestinian Basic Law allows prisoners to run for elections,
whether legislative or presidential, simply because the most popular among Palestinian
leaders are often behind bars. Marwan Barghouti is one.

Imprisoned since 2002, Barghouti
remains
Fatah’s most popular leader, though appreciated more by the
movement’s young cadre, as opposed to Abbas’ old guard. The latter group has
immensely benefited from the corrupt system of political patronage upon which
the 85-year-old president has constructed his Authority.

To sustain this corrupt system, Abbas and his clique labored
to marginalize Barghouti, leading to the suggestion that Israel’s imprisonment
of Fatah’s vibrant leader serves the interests of the current Palestinian President.

This claim has much substance, not only because Abbas has done
little to pressure Israel to release Barghouti but also because all credible
public opinion polls
suggest that Barghouti is far more popular among
Fatah’s supporters – in fact all Palestinians – than Abbas.

On February 11, Abbas
dispatched
Hussein al-Sheikh, the Minister of Civilian Affairs and a
member of Fatah’s Central Committee, to dissuade Barghouti from running in the
upcoming presidential elections. An ideal scenario for the Palestinian President
would be to take advantage of Barghouti’s popularity by having him lead the
Fatah list in the contest for the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC). Hence,
Abbas could ensure a strong turnout by Fatah supporters, while securing the
chair of presidency for himself.

Barghouti vehemently
rejected
Abbas’ request, thus raising an unexpected challenge to Abbas,
who now risks dividing the Fatah vote, losing the PLC elections, again, to Hamas
and losing the presidential elections to Barghouti.

Between the nightly raids and crackdowns by the Israeli military
and the political intrigues within the divided Fatah movement, one wonders if
the elections, if they take place, will finally allow Palestinians to mount
a united front in the struggle against Israeli occupation and for Palestinian
freedom.

Then, there is the issue of the possible position of the “international
community” regarding the outcome of the elections. News reports speak of
efforts made by Hamas to seek guarantees from Qatar and Egypt “to ensure
Israel will not pursue its representatives and candidates in the upcoming elections,”
Al-Monitor also
reported
.

But what kind of guarantees can Arab countries obtain from
Tel Aviv, and what kind of leverage can Doha and Cairo have when Israel continues
to disregard the United Nations, international law, the
International Criminal Court
, and so on?

Nevertheless, can Palestinian democracy afford to subsist in its state of inertia?
Abbas’ mandate as president expired in 2009, the PLC’s mandate
expired
in 2010 and, in fact, the Palestinian Authority was set up as an
interim political body, whose function should have ceased in 1999. Since then,
the “Palestinian leadership” has not enjoyed legitimacy among Palestinians,
deriving its relevance, instead, from the support of its benefactors, who are
rarely interested in supporting democracy in Palestine.

The only silver lining in the story is that Fatah and Hamas
have also agreed on the restructuring of the Palestine Liberation Organization
(PLO), which is now largely monopolized by Abbas’ Fatah movement. Whether the
democratic revamping of the PLO takes place or not, largely depends on the outcome
of the May and July elections.

Palestine, like other Middle Eastern countries, including Israel,
does have a crisis of political legitimacy. Since Palestine is an occupied land
with little or no freedom, one is justified to argue that true democracy under
these horrific conditions cannot possibly be achieved.

Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle.
He is the author of five books. His latest is
These
Chains Will Be Broken
: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance
in Israeli Prisons (Clarity Press). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research
Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro-Middle
East Center (AMEC). His website is

www.ramzybaroud.net
.

Source link

Leave a comment