Opening Remarks

Faisal Husseini – PLO Executive Committee member in charge of the Jerusalem file

For several years, the government of Netanyahu and the subsequent government of Barak made no attempts at progress on the negotiation process. If you ask anyone about the status of Jerusalem, he or she would reply that it was better before 1993. The borders were open, and we were able to maintain full communication with Gaza and the West Bank. Jerusalem was not besieged at it is today, and played the role of the capital in terms of trade and other aspects. Jerusalem institutions were providing services not only to the inhabitants of Jerusalem but also, as in any other capital, to the whole country. The most important hospitals are in Jerusalem, as well as the best education services and the main churches and mosques. This city was developing toward providing services for all Palestinians.

Since 1993 the Israelis have decided to close the city. They created check points around East Jerusalem preventing any Palestinian from entering the city without permission. This created a new situation where people stopped coming into Jerusalem, and instead of providing services to more than 1 million Palestinians, Jerusalem now provides services to a maximum of 180,000 Palestinians. This has not only damaged the city's service and trade industry, but has hurt the quality of life for those Palestinians who are now denied access to these services. The Israelis also tried to weaken Palestinian institutions and reduce the number of Palestinian residents of Jerusalem.

The Israelis consider the Arab inhabitants of Jerusalem to be residents, rather than citizens. With the occupation of 1967, Israel decided to annex the land and not the people. They considered us as foreigners who have permanent residency in Jerusalem and in Israel. I as Jerusalemite suddenly found myself a foreigner in my own country and my own city. This policy has continued uninterrupted, and in 1993 the Israelis further enforced the conditions of residency, confiscating the right of residency of anyone whose center of life was not in Jerusalem. Anyone living outside Jerusalem , or outside the country or outside the borders of the Jerusalem municipality, will lose his/her right of residency. Even the 70,000 Palestinians who are living in areas around Jerusalem such as Ar-Ram and Izarriyya, as well those working in the Gulf states or in Amman and returning to Jerusalem in the summers, have lost their right or residency, in accordance with the Israeli policy of reducing the Palestinian population in Jerusalem.

This policy backfired, however, for in fear of losing their rights 53,000 Palestinians returned to the city between 1996 and 1999. Instead of 180,000 Palestinians representing 27% of the total population of Jerusalem, the Israelis how have on their hands 233,000 Palestinian Jerusalemites representing 33% of the population. Additionally, another 40,000 Jerusalemites are still outside the city. When Israel occupied the city in 1967 the Palestinian population numbered nearly 100,000, 45,000 of which were outside the city and therefore denied their right to return. Because of a high birthrate, however, the Palestinian residents of Jerusalem have grown in number from 55,000 to 180,000 in 1996 and now 233,000. Even if Israel tries to make Jerusalem its capital, the Palestinian population will soon reach 46-47% of all Jerusalem residents. The Israeli's are not interested in this population, and are therefore looking to get rid of areas such as Sho'fat, Beit Hanina and other areas in south and the east. Their main interest is the Old City and its immediate surrounding, but even this area is composed of almost 60,000 Palestinians, while the Israelis number only 3-4 thousand. Inside the old city itself, an overwhelming majority of 27,000 Palestinians face less than 2000 Israelis.

Palestinians in East Jerusalem have succeeded in preserving their autonomy. Health services are still under the Palestinian control as is most of the education, for even in the schools under Israeli control the curriculum is Palestinian. We have two universities: Al Quds Open University and Al-Quds University, as well as our own welfare and cultural organizations. Holy places are still under Palestinian control, rather than under the Israeli Ministry of Religious Affairs. There clashes between us and the Israelis over these issues almost every day, but still we have preserved our own existence.

Israel has managed to push 170,000 Israeli settlers inside East Jerusalem, and in doing so confiscated approximately 4% of East Jerusalem land. At the same time, Palestinians of East Jerusalem are forbidden from built new houses. We are in desperate need of 30,000 new housing units. There is a constant struggle between us and the Israelis; they are trying to build more settlements while we are trying to build our homes, they are trying to kick the as many Palestinians as possible out of Jerusalem, while we are trying to bring as many as possible inside. They are trying to force their institutions on us, using the fact that theirs are more developed as a justification, while we are defending our own institutions. They are now attempting to control even inside our holy places, preventing us from undertaking renovations or restoration. Increasingly sensitive issues are emerging daily, where every move made by either party reflects this constant struggle for sovereignty.

Throughout all of Palestine, but particularly in Jerusalem, a deeper understanding of the struggle must take into account the following 5 perspectives.

1.      The Palestinian

2.      The Israeli

3.      The Moslem

4.      The Christian

5.      The Jewish

We as Palestinians have undertaken two major struggles; the first against the British Mandate in which we attempted to achieve independence, and the second against the Zionist Movement. Beginning in a time when the population in Palestine was 90% Christians and Moslems against 10% Jews, our main purpose was to preserve the unity of our land against any kind of division into two states. Gradually with the increase in immigration, especially after the Second World War, our struggle focused on preserving the unity of the state and on checking this overwhelming force flooding our country. We did not oppose religious immigration, for Jews have historically lived in Palestine and have been well treated, but these immigrants were arriving with a political, rather than a religious, agenda. Their aim was to implement the Balfour Promise to the Zionist Movement, which claimed that Palestine was a land without a people and should therefore be given to a people without a land. This declaration was gravely mistaken, however, for the Palestinian people were very much present all along.

The Palestinians lost the war of 1948, and as a result Israel occupied 78% of Palestine, leaving us with only the remaining 22%. This is approximately 1/5 of historical Palestine, and only 50% of what the United Nations gave us in resolution 181. During the 1948 disaster and even after, we Palestinians continued our struggle. In the end, however, we reached the bitter conclusion that to continue to fight for justice and for our full historic and national rights would lead us nowhere. Israelis have their own definitions of history, national rights and justice, and managed to sell these definitions to the rest of the world as well.

During and after the Intifada we Palestinians made another major concession in our national agenda, which was to accept the concept of two states. We resigned ourselves to accepting the 22% of our land left to us by the June 4^th borders of 1967. In considering the 5 elements mentioned above, the only viable solution for both Palestinians and Israelis was the acceptance of a separate state for each people. As for the three religions, all the holy places as well as and movement in the Holy Land and inside Jerusalem itself must be kept unrestricted and free from political agendas.

Currently, anyone who arrives from the United States or from any other country in the world has the right to visit holy places like Al-Haram Ash-Sharif, but this right is denied to people who live in the West Bank. Palestinians must obtain permission to visit their own sacred sites, and for many this permission is denied. Even if the two state solution is implemented, the conflict will not be solved for the three religious parties until there is completely free access to the city.

In order to implement the two states, borders must be established. The only acceptable borders are those of June 4^th, 1967, for the entire peace process is based on acceptance of UN resolution 242, which calls for the withdrawal from all areas occupied in 1967. Accepting such borders is no major concession from the Israeli side, for in truth 70% of even West Jerusalem is built on confiscated Palestinian property, yet we are not demanding the return of this land. The Palestinian vision for Jerusalem involves two capitals located in one open city with free access for all. Further, we envision two sovereignties and two policies, with a Palestinian municipality in the Palestinian sector coexisting with an Israeli municipality in the Israeli sector, with a committee to coordinate issues such as the environment, transportation, sewage, etc.

Once the return to the 1967 borders has been agreed upon, the next step will be determining where the borders need to be adjusted and moved. Certainly, the security concerns of each people must be taken into account, but security demands must be determined by, not the determinant of, the final international borders.

Settlements constitute another problem that cannot be solved immediately or easily. In the 20^th century we witnessed three main changes:

1. After the first world war, all prior agreements vanished. Some people gained their independence, others lost it. Certain kingdoms disappeared, others were founded. A new map of the world developed, which served as the basis for new ideas and new agreements. This policy continued until the second change occurred.

2. After the second world war all agreements again vanished, and another new policy evolved.

3. What we are witnessing now is the result of the end of the cold war. The Soviet Union is no more, and the relations between states have again altered.

Any agreement that will be signed by the Palestinians and the Israelis now will live only as long as this world regime continues. If it should be changed all these agreements would be meaningless, especially if one or more parties feel that the agreements are unjust. If we are to make an agreement with the Israelis, it must be one that lasts. Such an agreement should enable both the Palestinians and the Israelis to face the challenge of any changes that come in the future. I want to sign an agreement that insures the security of my grandchildren, not an unjust or unsustainable agreement that would require them to fight all over again. For these reasons, any agreement must include a complete Israeli withdrawal, the settlers as well as the military, for to leave behind any remaining elements of the occupation is to beg future conflict and strife.

Settlements

A resolution of the question of Jerusalem, as I mentioned before, must leave it an open city. In this city, however, there are currently settlements. Our message to the Israelis is that if they believe in such an open city, and desire to have Israeli neighborhoods near to Palestinian neighborhoods, than of course the same policy can be applied in West Jerusalem, which has a much lower population density. It makes much more sense to construct Palestinian neighborhoods in the western half of the city than to implant Israelis in the already overcrowded east. If, however, Israelis are not up to this challenge of repealing the double standard, if they prefer to preserve the exclusivity of their neighborhoods, then they must respect the Palestinian right to do the same, and must withdraw their settlement-neighborhoods from East Jerusalem.

Refugees:

The peace process does not involve only the Palestinians and the Israelis, but is part of a search for stability in the entire region of the Middle East, paving the way for regional cooperation. We believe that bringing about the Palestinian state and solving the Palestinian problem can accomplish both of these goals, bringing stability to the region and serving as the gateway to regional cooperation. The refugees in the Arab World remain in camps against their will and against the will of the countries that have been forced to hold them, and without resolution of this problem there will be no stability in the region. Any agreement must respect the right of the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, after which other matters can be discussed. We know that Israelis not only fear but panic at such a prospect, but once the Israelis accept the principle of the right to return, it is our obligation as Palestinians to implement this right without materializing the Israeli fears. The Israelis must understand that we would like to solve the Palestinian problem and bring stability to the region, not destroy them. Although they destroyed us in the past, we do not want to be stuck in a viscous cycle of revenge. We are ready to begin working towards peaceful coexistence, but such coexistence must be based on justice and the fulfillment of each side's obligations, otherwise the peace will not be sustainable. Therefore, we view the refugee situation in this light; the refugees will have the right to choose, either to:

1. live in the Israeli state as Israeli citizens,

2.  return as Palestinian residents of Israel,

3.live in the Palestinian state while looking after their land in Israel, like an American who owns property in France,

4. decide not to come back and remain where they already are, but at the same time be granted a passport that allows them to enter the country whenever they desire.

Therefore this matter is not a cause for panic, for we would like to implement it in a way that serves the interests of all parties involved.

Most importantly, we have to implement a solution that promotes peace, not mutual punishment. This brings up the issue of the prisoners, which no sustainable agreement can ignore. During the fighting many Palestinians and Israelis were killed, and some of the people who fought against Israel are still in Israeli prisons. They did not fight Israel out of their own initiative, they took orders from their leaders who are now part of the peace process. This matter must be resolved and those prisoner released, because each side needs to look towards the future, rather than dwelling on the past. Otherwise, we would be obliged to search for those Israelis who have Palestinian blood on their hands and to punish them in our own way, and this is not a healthy way to begin a new era of peace.

Question: What would be the status of the Israeli Settlements in the Palestinian state?

First, the settlers would have to understand that they are in the Palestinian state and under Palestinian sovereignty. We have no problem with Moslems, Christian and Jews coexisting peacefully in our country, though of course all must respect our policies and laws. Some settlements, however, were built for the sole purpose of creating problems and preventing the implementation of any kind of viable solution. These can not be accepted, for they are motivated by political, rather than religious ideology. Furthermore, I want to emphasize that Jews who choose to live in Palestine would in no way be restricted to ghettos, for we as Palestinians have suffered too long in refugee camps, and now strive to be rid of such mentality.

Next >>