| 
 Al-Jazeerah History
 
 Archives
 
 Mission & Name
 
 Conflict Terminology
 
 Editorials
 
 Gaza Holocaust
 
 Gulf War
 
 Isdood
 
 Islam
 
 News
 
 News Photos
 
 Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials
 
 US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
 
 www.aljazeerah.info
 
	  
           |  |   Palestinian Authority Charity Economics, 
	  Subservient Politics: Why Oslo Must Go  By Ramzy Baroud Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, September 24, 2012 
 Recent demonstrations in protest of the rising cost of living 
	  have swept across the West Bank. While they are not indicative of a 
	  Palestinian version of the ‘Arab Spring’, they are still an important 
	  first step.
 
 A reasonable demand, however, cannot possibly be for 
	  Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to sack the 
	  government of Salam Fayyad. Neither has much sway over Palestinian 
	  economy, let alone political will.
 
 Abbas enjoys Israeli and 
	  Western backing because of his ability to manage - if not sustain - a 
	  factional split between his party, Fatah, and Hamas, which controls Gaza. 
	  He remains faithful to security coordination between his authority and 
	  Israel, and continues to crack down on his opponents with an iron fist. He 
	  is also desperately clinging to a loyalty to Washington policy - despite 
	  the fact that the latter’s prestige and influence is quickly diminishing 
	  in the region. In an era of numerous political possibilities, Abbas, 76, 
	  is fervently traditional, lacking in nerve and by no means capable of 
	  revolutionary change.
 
 While Abbas is perceived as America’s man 
	  in Palestinian, Fayyad is an economic equivalent. His years at the 
	  International Monetary Fund (IMF) and his Western-driven branding as 
	  pragmatic, non-factional and incorruptible made him most suited to lead 
	  the post Hamas-Fatah split period. Since 2007, Fayyad has reigned supreme. 
	  His conduct, language and demeanor have signaled a departure from the 
	  Palestinian politics of old - when revolutionaries with military fatigues 
	  seemed to be driven, at least rhetorically, by nationalistic slogans 
	  concerning liberation, freedom and the right of return.
 
 Abbas and 
	  Fayyad helped to redefine the old Palestinian discourse, a process that 
	  started following the Israel-PLO signing of the Oslo Accords in September 
	  1993. The accords were touted as signaling a new age of mutual respect, 
	  peace and security. In reality, they only cemented the status quo, 
	  allowing Israel to continue expanding its illegal settlements and 
	  determining every political outcome based on a protracted colonial vision. 
	  While no Israeli leader - left, right or center – has since deviated from 
	  this vision, Palestinians have grown in number within an ever shrinking 
	  space. ‘Palestine’ has been sliced off into numerous cantons, with an 
	  isolated population center dependent on precarious international handouts.
 
 For years, Abbas and Fayyad oversaw the financial transaction, which 
	  was more of a pyramid scheme than a state-building measure. Funds arrived 
	  from multiple sources, including tax revenues collected by Israel on 
	  behalf of the PA. In addition to controlling the Palestinian borders, 62 
	  percent of the West Bank (Area C) and even the exit and entry of 
	  Palestinian leaders, Israel also controlled every aspect of the 
	  Palestinian economy. The Paris Protocol, signed in 1994, was meant to 
	  regulate the transition in the Palestinian economy. Nearly two decades 
	  later, the protocol has become the very rope by which Israel continues to 
	  strangle Palestinians. When the latter fails to play by the (Israeli) 
	  rules, Israel adds more military checkpoints, refuses to transfer 
	  Palestinian tax revenues, and so on. Within days, the ‘Palestinian 
	  economy’ begins to grind.
 
 In the West Bank, the Keynes vs. Hayek 
	  economic debate matters little. Even ‘dependency theory’ in its standard 
	  application is of no use. The West Bank has subsisted on a charity-model, 
	  with many middlemen who accumulated unimaginable wealth from money that 
	  was meant to trickle down. Not only did Oslo turn a struggle for 
	  liberation into a massive charity network riddled with corruption and 
	  nepotism, it also managed to turn the process – as in the ‘peace process’ 
	  – into an end in itself. Few Palestinians benefited, and the vast majority 
	  had to fight for their survival. As for Israel, the bulldozers never 
	  slowed down and settlements continued to expand at the expense of 
	  Palestinian land, leaving no room for any kind of ‘state’. Over time, the 
	  ‘two-state solution’ became a mere brand which helped separate Palestine’s 
	  ‘extremists’ from its ‘moderates’.
 
 Now, the Palestinian Authority 
	  is not only politically bankrupt, it is financially broke as well. Future 
	  prospects look even grimmer than the current reality. A recent report by 
	  the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) downplayed the hype 
	  over the supposed economic prosperity in the West Bank. “Economic 
	  expansion last year was accompanied by a decline in real wages and labor 
	  productivity and did not succeed in reducing high unemployment, which 
	  persisted at 26 per cent,” said the report. The growth in Gaza’s economy 
	  also proved to be a ruse, since the ‘growth’ was mere mathematical 
	  guesswork based on Palestinians’ ability to rebuild what Israel destroyed 
	  in its December 2008-January 2009 war on Gaza. “Food insecurity affects 
	  two of every three Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory, but 
	  is most severe in Gaza. Also alarming is the poverty rate in East 
	  Jerusalem, estimated at 78 per cent,” reported UNCTAD.
 
 While the 
	  political aspect of Oslo has been dead and buried for years, it continues 
	  to exist as a financial matter. The Israeli government of Benjamin 
	  Netanyahu looks on as the house of sand they built with their Palestinian 
	  ‘peace partners’ crumbles. Israeli journalist Amira Hass reminds 
	  Palestinians that their real fight is with the occupation, not price 
	  increases enacted by a largely helpless authority. While it is true that 
	  the enemy remains the solider and the settler, much enmity towards the PA 
	  is also likely to play out in the future.
 
 While Israeli Foreign 
	  Minister Avigdor Lieberman continues his outbursts targeting Abbas and 
	  Oslo, Netanyahu has ordered the transfer of NIS 250m of tax revenues to 
	  the PA in order to delay its potential collapse. Still, Israel has no 
	  intention of abandoning its carrot and stick approach to dealing with 
	  Palestinians. Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon was crystal clear when 
	  he said that Israel would not renegotiate the Paris Protocol (UPI, 
	  September 10).
 
 How long the PA can continue to operate as a 
	  functionary of Israel and Western interests will now largely depend on 
	  Palestinians. Even if more money is pumped into PA coffers, the 
	  fundamental problem will not go away. Bribing a nation with meager 
	  handouts to deny them political rights is superfluous at best, and it will 
	  most certainly not last.
 
 There are new calls for the dismantling 
	  of the Palestinian Authority. For these calls to be meaningful, they need 
	  to be accompanied by a unifying transitional political program which will 
	  guide Palestinians out of the temporary chaos that is likely to follow. 
	  The program must be a part of a larger vision, one that looks past 
	  charity-economics and frivolous talks of two-state solutions, and which 
	  actually bridges the gap between divided Palestinian communities.
 
 - Ramzy Baroud ( 
	  www.ramzybaroud.net ) is an internationally-syndicated columnist and 
	  the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father Was a 
	  Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story (Pluto Press, London.)
   
 |  |  |