Arafat's Top Aide Responds to Shamir's Proposal

By Bassam AbuSharif

THE PALESTINE Liberation Organization supports the holding of elections in the West Bank and Gaza to choose representatives freely and democratically. But we Palestinians are in favor of a truly democratic choice—not a sham democracy.

We think the election plan proposed by Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir is an example of sham democracy. It is a trick aimed at ending the intifada and at legitimizing Israeli occupation. And as long as Israeli election proposals remain vague and separate from the final objective of the right of Palestinians to self-determination, they will be nothing but a device for perpetuating Israeli occupation.

The only genuine form of democracy is that practiced freely without restrictions, threats or any form of intimidation. That is not possible today in the West Bank and Gaza, where any gathering, even of only five people, can be broken up with bullets. Nor is it possible at a time when Palestinians who try to practice their right to freedom of expression are liable to prosecution. Under the rules of occupation, as enforced by the Israeli army, it is illegal for Palestinians to engage in political activity, to campaign, or even to express their national feelings and beliefs.

Another condition for free democratic choice is a set of rules that safeguards those elected. History shows many tragic examples when the results of democratic elections have been eradicated by army intervention. The most recent case is Panama, where the army brutally annihilated the election result and democracy itself.

In occupied Palestine, past experience with elections has been even more tragic. In 1976, the PLO agreed to elections for the West Bank municipal councils. Of the 116 candidates' elected by the Palestinians, 96 were PLO supporters. Israelis tried to assassinate three mayors: Bassani Shaka'a, Karim Khalaf and Ibrahim Attawil. Shaka'a's legs were amputated after attackers planted a bomb in his car. Khalaf lost his foot when a bomb exploded in the car he was driving and he later died of gangrene. Attawil escaped death when he discovered an explosive device in his car.

Two other mayors, Mohammed Milhem and Fahd Kawasmeh, were deported to Jordan. Israeli occupation forces then removed most of the elected mayors, including all the PLO supporters who had been elected by the people.

Now the situation is even more dangerous. Israeli soldiers have been deployed in the streets of cities in the West Bank aid Gaza for 18 months-using live ammunition against men, women and children demand. ing freedom and democracy. These events demonstrate that unless a neutral force is present, the Israeli army may repeat the same behavior.

Our worries are supported by the words of Yitzhak Shamir, the prime minister of Israel, and Yitzhak Rabin, the defense minister of Israel and military governor of the West Bank and Gaza.

Rabin told the daily Ha'aretz on April 21: "We will send to prison any elected Palestinian who declares loyalty or affiliation to the PLO." Shamir informed Yediot Aharonot: "We don't need America's help to carry out the elections. We can control the whole process. We will not talk to the PLO. We have nothing to talk about with the PLO. And if the elected Palestinians will not abide by the rules of the game, we will cancel everything and return to the previous situation."

Shamir is not denying Palestinians their right to vote; he is just announcing that if they make the wrong choice, it will not be respected.

The intifada has shown that the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza are not "Pro-PLO"—they are the PLO. This has been demonstrated as well to Dennis Ross Secretary of State James Baker's envoy, b; the group of Palestinians who met him in Jerusalem recently. This is why the PLO is not afraid of the results of free and democratic elections. And it is why the Israelis are afraid of those same results.

What Shamir is proposing clearly contradicts not only the principles of democracy and freedom upheld by the free world, but also the democratic principles of Israel itself. I do not believe that is what President Bush had in mind when he called for elections in the West Bank and in Gaza.

We believe that a package deal in the Middle East is the only path to lasting peace in the region. The Palestinians seek a settlement that would put an end to bloodshed in the area. They seek a comprehensive peace, not a truce. They are seriously committed to this goal, while Shamir and his government still cling to the same old expansionist dream.

President Bush asked the PLO and Israel to reach a mutually acceptable formula on the issue of elections. This is important if we wish to keep the pence process moving forward in the Middle East. But the crucial point is this: President Bush repeated and emphasized that the laid occupation of Gaza and the West Bank must come to an end.

Here lies the key issue. It is only on this basis—of Israeli withdrawal—that steps toward peace can be negotiable and the final status of the West Bank and Gaza be clarified. The end of Israeli occupation is what the Palestinians are struggling for. Israeli withdrawal from these areas should be required by the rules of civilized human society.

Is Israel ready to withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza? Does Israel accept United Nations resolutions 242 and 338 calling for withdrawal from territories occupied in the 1967 war? Is Israel ready to cease resorting to the forms of state terrorism it uses against the Palestinians, including air raids on refugee camps in Lebanon?

These are basic questions, and the United States should attempt to get answers to them.

The Palestinians do not trust Shamir and his government. The casualties and sufferings inflicted on them by the Israeli occupation forces give them excellent reasons not to. But the Palestinians are ready to give the Israeli government the benefit of the doubt and to seek a package deal in the Middle East based on the principles of the initiative put forward by Yasser Arafat to the U.N. General Assembly on Dec. 13.

The substance of this package is the two state solution. The state of Israel will five In peace side-by-side with the state of Palestine, which will be confederated with Jordan. An internationally guaranteed peace agreement will protect the interests of all parties including the Palestinians and the Israelis.

The process should comprise four interrelated steps:

A beginning of the withdrawal of Israeli forces and their replacement by international or multinational forces, according to an internationally assured timetable.
Election of representatives from the West Bank and Gaza to a legislative body of the Palestinian people. The Israeli withdrawal need not be complete before elections are held, but Israeli soldiers and armed settlers should not be in any position to hinder or endanger voters, The elections should be monitored and observed internationally to guarantee freedom of choice and protection of those elected—so that they do not suffer the same fate as did those elected in 1976.
An interim period under international or multinational auspices. During this transitional period the Palestinian legislative assembly will elect an executive body. That executive body will select a team to negotiate with Israel. The negotiations can begin on internal issues but must also consider substantive matters involved in a comprehensive settlement, such as borders and water.
Preparations for Use convocation of an active, well-constructed international Peace conference that will be convened on the basis Of UN resolutions 242 and 338 and the Palestinian right to self-determination. The international peace conference should be convened within an agreed period of time that takes into consideration the deplorable conditions being endured by the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. At this conference, all parties in: the Middle East conflict can raise any questions for discussion or negotiation.

The PLO wants a comprehensive peace that will safeguard future generations, both Palestinian and Israeli. The PLO will continue it's efforts to establish such a peace in cooperation with all parties concerned.

This article first appeared in the May 21, 1989, issue of the Washington Post. Reprinted with permission of the author.