Wishful statements alone do not establish a Palestinian State

A full year has passed since the beginning of the ongoing war waged by Israel against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip and, in the shadow of it, the Occupation army has been carrying out continuous campaigns of raids, killing and destruction in the West Bank, as well. All the while, armed settlers are escalating their attacks on Palestinian villages relentlessly and without mercy.

Since the beginning of this continuing season of atrocities, it has been no secret that the intentions of the Israeli leadership, both on the political and military levels, have been a quest to dismantle the Gaza Strip, which is crowded with Palestinian refugees, and commit ethnic cleansing there. Ministers and military leaders have competed to make clear statements on this matter throughout this season, some of which were recorded in the lawsuit papers submitted by South Africa to the International Court of Justice. Moreover, the Israeli actions on the ground leave no room for assuming good faith towards the Palestinian people, as their livelihoods have been completely destroyed in the Gaza Strip, they have been internally displaced time and time again and tens of thousands of civilians have been killed, most of them children and women, in a record-breaking toll with shocking facts beyond description.

Despite all that has happened, the political statements heard in the global space have maintained their usual coldness, as if they have not gripped the major events. This is evident given their content and satisfaction with their hollow calls that they have repeated for decades to establish a “Palestinian State living in security and peace alongside Israel”, without drawing any lessons from what has happened so far. Can we really trust that this “State”, if actually established, and according to the conditions, must remain demilitarised, will not be easy prey for one of the strongest armies in the world? Does the current experience of the brutal Israeli political and military behaviour towards the Palestinian people allow for the assumption of a secure future for this State?

The notion of a “Palestinian State” sounds really attractive and suggests a sovereign entity with complete independence but, in reality, we are talking about a literally microscopic State, which is supposed to, at best, be established on a geographically non-contiguous area. According to the best proposals presented in official speeches, it will be established on an area no more than 6,000 square kilometres, including the entire West Bank and the Gaza Strip together, i.e., the 4 June, 1967 borders. According to this “solution”, the return of Palestinian refugees to their country will not be permitted either. In other proposals that claim to be “realistic”, heard in successive American administrations, for example, the area of ​​this “State” will be substantially reduced to about half that area, with its dismemberment into isolated population centres, making it less than the area of ​​a small region called Transnistria, which is a microscopic, unrecognised separatist state that occupies an area of ​​no more than 3,500 square kilometres within Moldova. However, the Moldovan example is misleading, as campaigns of genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, mass destruction and starvation have no place in that gentle Eastern European country.

It is true that the repeated statements about the establishment of a “Palestinian State alongside the State of Israel” remind the Israeli political and military leadership that its quest to end the Palestinian people’s cause through military violence is unacceptable to the international community, but these statements alone do not express sufficient seriousness after all that has happened, and is happening, in terms of Israel’s blatant disregard for international law, UN systems and international norms. The lesson that is evident from the reality of the ongoing genocide and the serious developments that have taken place should remind the world of the fact that the Israeli strategic doctrine does not tolerate the mere existence of Palestine on the map in any form, and that it only accepts a formal Palestinian Authority that has no sovereignty to bear the burden of managing “these residents” instead of the Israeli Occupation, while sovereignty remains with the Occupying authority. It also wants the authority to provide tireless services to protect Israel from the Palestinian uprising and resistance under the pretext of “security coordination”.