Bashir Bashir is a fellow at the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem and a professor of political theory at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He spoke on the subject of what he called the "Politics of Reconciliation," Wednesday night in Torgersen Bridge, regaling the audience with personal experiences and political views on possible resolutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Collegiate Times editor-in-chief David Grant caught up with Bashir for an interview before his talk.
Q: How do you see the political scenario right now, on the ground, between Israel and Palestine?
A: We are facing a very critical time. The Palestinian front is very fragmented. We have certain challenges internally, such as the 9th of January when (Palestinian President) Mahmoud Abbas is out of office. What will we do with that? The most challenging thing at this point is the relationship between the Palestinians themselves and that is the question of unity.
In Israel as well things are being settled after the issues with (Prime Minister Ehud) Olmert. One of the things that I certainly believe is that a serious, fair settlement to the conflict is something that we are not approaching. Certainly, in the light and nature of the American involvement in the process -- I don't think the American involvement in the process is constructive. The maximum offered by the Israelis, backed by the Americans, is not something that answers the minimum of the minimum to the Palestinian national aspiration for emancipation, freedom and self-determination.
Q: There's been a change in Israeli political leadership. Tzipi Livni is now the head of the centrist Kadima party after prime minister Ehud Olmert surrendered his party's leadership over corruption charges. Livni had been the lead negotiator with the Palestinians and is seen in some circles as more centrist, or moderate, than Olmert. As you look to the future, how do you describe the evolution of Israeli politics?
A: One of the things I think is a mistake ... is to think as if there are substantive differences between the different major Israeli parties vis--vis settling the dispute with the Palestinians. That could have been right slightly right to a certain extent 20 years ago.
But now whether the ruling party is the Likud, or Kadima, or the Labor party, their views are not substantively different on settling the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. They might differ on what is the best way to ... "manage," as they say, the Palestinians, but they certainly have, I would say, some form of consensus, driven by a wide-spread Jewish Israeli consensus, on the terms of settling the conflict with the Palestinians. And the terms and conditions that are enjoying consensus in Israel are not fair terms.
Q: On the Palestinian side, the current president, Mahmoud Abbas, has lost a great deal of credibility with the Israelis, the Arab world, and his own people. There is Marwan Barghouti, a popular hero of the second Intifada, who said he would run for the presidency though currently jailed by the Israelis. People in the West Bank, at least, are rather both restless and forlorn about peace or an improvement in "the situation," their term for the Israeli occupation. Could you talk a little about the future of the Palestinian political situation?
I think the Palestinian political situation is very, very, very troubled. This is one of the worst episodes in the Palestinian national project. There are a few things at work here. One of the most problematic ... is this segmentation and the fragmentation between Hamas and Fatah.
If there is any chance for Palestinians to get back on track fighting for their independence and freedom, to be supported internationally, they need to reorganize their national home. Reorganizing their national home means getting to clear terms and rules of the game in relation to sharing power and reforming their national institutions. The most pressing issues for the Palestinians are reforming the Palestinian Liberation Organization so that it becomes a more inclusive frame. That means including Hamas.
I think Abu Mazen (Abbas' colloquial name) enjoys certain support in the West Bank and even in Gaza. The issue of Abu Mazen is connected to a broader issue that connects to the national segment of the Palestinian national project which is what is going to happen to Fatah. Fatah is a very weak, very fragmented... it seems to suffer from different diseases connected to leadership, transparency, responsibility, to democracy.
Leave a comment 4 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
I fully agre wot tje one state solution for all. the twp state solution will not work; it is a temporary myth.
Reply to this Top
Let's go one state solution!
Reply to this Top
There is already a second state. It's called Jordan.
Reply to this Top
The one state solution sounds the best to me. Look at the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. Separation was not going to work, it won't work here. By separating these two populations with fences and checkpoints just makes the problem worse. Bi-national states have worked, look at the U.S., it has its problems but for all intentions and purposes it is a multinational state. It can be done.
Reply to this Top