http://www.dailyherald.com/oped/col_gil.asp
I joined 600 people at Temple Sholom
of Chicago last week to hear Sari Nusseibeh,
Palestinian intellectual, president of Al-Quds
University in east Jerusalem and, more importantly, the PLO's representative in
Jerusalem. Nusseibeh is a Harvard-educated philosophy
professor known for his moderate views and rejection of the Palestinian
campaign of terrorist suicide bombings. He also is recognized for his public
comments on what peace with Israel will require from the Palestinians.
I
believe if Nusseibeh were heading the Palestinian
Authority, the news coming out of Israel would be far more positive. I doubt he would have
rejected the Clinton-Barak peace proposals two years
ago. He is someone who can be a leader of a future modern and democratic
Palestinian state. There are serious obstacles, and most come from other
Palestinians, but first the good news.
Nusseibeh's comments at the synagogue regarding the need for Palestinians to give
up the "right of return" gave voice to a rarely heard, yet vital,
policy shift. For Israelis, this "right" is and always will be a
deal-breaker, as it means the end of a Jewish state. In the context of a peace
agreement, some refugees would certainly return, but Israel cannot be inundated with millions of refugees and
their descendants if it hopes to remain a Jewish state. Though he was clear to
describe the right of return as "sacrosanct," Nusseibeh
recognizes that establishing a Palestinian state is also important.
"If
one wishes to pursue the right of return as Palestinians, we will never reach a
conclusion to the Arab-Israeli conflict," he said. "And therefore a
price must be paid in exchange for the right to live in freedom. In my opinion,
at least the right to freedom is a realizable right.
And if we are able to create a Palestinian state, and ... refugees can come to
the Palestinian state, then at least we can provide a future for the refugees
now in camps."
Ask
Israelis what they think of Nusseibeh and most will
have positive things to say. They understand he represents the hope that a political
settlement, and reconciliation, is indeed possible. Then they will ask,
"But how many battalions does he have?" In other words, if the
Palestinian leadership had people like Nusseibeh we
would have peace. However, not only does he have no real power, but most of his
own people reject his ideas.
Just
this week, the PLO faction that represents Yasser
Arafat, Fatah, attacked Nusseibeh
for his readiness to compromise on the right of return and for creating a
statement of basic principles for ending the Palestinian-Israeli conflict with
former Israeli internal security chief Ami Ayalon.
Many other Palestinian groups share Fatah's
complaint. The Palestinian Return Center called Nusseibeh's action
"part of a sinister war conducted against the Palestinian people by the
Israeli-U.S. alliance." Local activist Ali Abunimah
wrote in the Lebanese newspaper Daily Star that the Nusseibeh-Ayalon
agreement reveals "the shocking alacrity with which some Palestinians are
willing to abandon the most fundamental Palestinian rights, adopting hook, line
and sinker Israeli arguments..."
Such
comments remind me of a conversation with the director of the American Jewish
Committee's Israel office, Eran Lerman.
I had asked who he thought would step into the political vacuum once Arafat had
no more power. "It won't be the person with the best ideas," he said
dejectedly. "It will be the person with the most guns."
Palestinians
with guns, and those who refuse to accept any degree of responsibility for the
conflict, don't like people like Sari Nusseibeh. And
they certainly don't accept an idea that grants both Jews and Palestinians
rights to their own states.
Nusseibeh's lone voice is refreshing and sorely needed. Hopefully, he can convince
more Palestinians. He convinced me.
Chaya Gil is a vice president of the American Jewish Committee-Chicago
Chapter and chairs its Israel Update Lecture Series. She can be contacted at chicago@ajc.org.