Democracy means choosing for ourselves

Eyad Sarraj Director, Gaza Community Mental Health Center The Washington Post

In 1998, Haidar Abdel Shafi, myself and a few others applied to register our Movement of Democracy as a political party with the Palestinian Authority. The deputy minister of interior promised approval if we would agree to minor changes in our application. I agreed; the requested alterations were not substantial.

Then the deputy minister became difficult to reach. We were finally told that the denial of our right to form a political party came from the highest office, namely Yasser Arafat's.

The prospect of elections within the Palestinian Authority raises two important questions: What sort of elections will these be? And how do those of us who have been critics of human rights abuses by Arafat's administration feel about President George W. Bush's recently discovered concern for good governance by the Palestinian Authority?

The violation of human rights by the Palestinian Authority is hardly new. We Palestinians have always known our path to democracy would be long and tortuous. We've known our Authority was in no hurry to reform its ways. When we tried to form a political party, the Palestinian parliament was in hibernation because its members could not contemplate a confrontation with Arafat.

In 1998, when 20 of them found the resolve to criticize the behavior of the regime publicly, one member was shot at and another badly beaten. Many Palestinians were agitated, disillusioned and simmering with anger.

The countries now urging Palestinian reform were silent then. Countries providing aid were more keen on a peace treaty and believed they could not risk losing Arafat. Americans, Europeans, Israelis and Arabs all believed he was the only Palestinian who could sign a permanent peace deal with Israel. And they all believed democracy and human rights could wait.

One of my earliest and greatest shocks was when Vice President Al Gore, during a mid-1990s visit to Jericho, approved the establishment of military courts by the Palestinian Authority. These courts have sentenced people to death in summary trials where the accused have no attorney and no right to appeal. In 1996, I stated the regime was corrupt and oppressive. I was arrested, beaten and thrown into solitary confinement.

Now, amid the destruction, killing and deepening of hatred and revenge, the cause of Palestinian democracy has been rediscovered. Bush suddenly has a vision of a democratic Palestine. Laughably, the most oppressive Arab regimes agree. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is delighted, of course.

Traumatized and emotionally brutalized, Palestinians are bewildered. Bush says they are "gifted and capable," but at the same time he is telling them whom to choose -- or, whom not to choose -- as their leaders. They ask if all this is genuine or whether it's just another conspiracy.

Suddenly Arafat is branded a corrupt terrorist, the same Arafat who risked his life by following the Sadat example, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and for whom the White House doors were once wide open.

Those doors are closed to him now. Arafat has now been refused entry to the White House. This insulting gesture of neglect has enraged Arafat and possibly driven him into refusing to do anything to halt the violence. It could be that Arafat thought he was punishing Bush.

However, the killing spree continued. Palestinians and Israelis were losing hope. Fear, pain and death have become the order of the day. Desperate Palestinians have carried out suicide bombings against Israeli civilians. Sharon's response has been predictable: Reoccupying the West Bank, surrounding Arafat and transforming the Palestinian scene into chaos and destruction. Arafat's popularity soared. In the Arab streets, he was seen as a hero of the resistance. Only Bush and Sharon could have had this effect on Arafat's popularity.

Still, deep down, many Palestinians harbor a sense that the destruction and suicide bombings have reached an alarming level. Today's children of Palestine are preoccupied with death and sacrifice. A group of intellectuals and politicians took the initiative recently to call for a halt to the atrocities of killing Israeli civilians.

I was among them, and the number of signatories has grown from a few dozen to several hundred. We sounded our grave concern that killing is only strengthening the extremist elements in Israel. But the Palestinian environment is fertile with rage, indignation and defiance.

Bush seems to understand that Palestinians are suffering under a brutal form of military occupation that has adopted a system of humiliation as a matter of policy. His vision would have been perfect if it had contained a few more elements to complement his clear goal of a two-state solution. The end game should be spelled out with more details of the permanent settlement, including borders and the division of Jerusalem.

Bush also should have provided more details about how a peace plan would be implemented and the precise obligations of each party. Any plan to reach a peaceful settlement should include the possibility of sanctions imposed on the party that fails to meet its obligations.

Bush should not have called implicitly for Arafat's removal. Such a call invites a defiant reaction, not only from Arafat, but from rank and file Palestinians already incensed by the U.S. administration's unyielding support for Israel. Their defiance can mean more popularity for Arafat, even it means more suffering. Any challenger to Arafat will be accused of being an agent of the CIA and could be killed.

Bush should now invite the UN and European Union to refine his vision into a workable plan that would incorporate immediate steps to enhance security for Israel and improve living conditions in Palestinian areas, with an end to the occupation figuring prominently on the schedule.

Such a plan should not dictate the removal or installation of leaders. If Bush believes Palestinians are capable and gifted, he should allow them to decide for themselves.

The world community, however, must ensure fair and free elections. That will require freedom of movement, now severely restricted by Israeli forces. It is a test of Bush's resolve to get Israel to withdraw. And then, among Palestinians, there must be room for freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. Maybe then we can have a new, independent political party.

The Bush vision of the peace plan is excellent if translated into hope for the Palestinian masses, who increasingly embrace death as a way of avenging injuries to their dignity and as an exit to a better world in heaven.

If they are to root out violence and terror, Palestinians need to feel they are being treated with dignity. That is not a reward to the extremists. Instead terrorists are rewarded by more violence and despair. Extremists on both sides thrive on hatred and blood. Let us then deprive them of that and send a message of hope and respect to the besieged populations of Israel and Palestine.

The holy land has been taken hostage by the devil. It is time for liberation. It is time for freedom. It is time for Israelis to walk free from fear, and Palestinians to walk with dignity.