From Palestine Chronicle
Palestinians rally to mark anniversary of .Great March of Return..
(Image by YouTube, Channel: javier guerrero barajas) Details DMCA
The International Conference on Palestine held in Istanbul between April 27-29 brought together many speakers and hundreds of academics, journalists, activists and students from Turkey and all over the world.
The Conference was a rare opportunity aimed at articulating a discourse of international solidarity that is both inclusive and forward thinking.
There was a near consensus that the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement must be supported, that Donald Trump's so-called "Deal of the Century" must be defeated and that normalization must be shunned.
When it came to articulating the objectives of the Palestinian struggle, however, the narrative became indecisive and unclear. Although none of the speakers made a case for a two-state solution, our call for one democratic state from Istanbul or any other place outside Palestine seemed partially irrelevant. For the one-state solution to become the overriding objective of the pro-Palestine movement worldwide, the call has to come from a Palestinian leadership that reflects the genuine aspirations of the Palestinian people.
One speaker after the other called for Palestinian unity, imploring Palestinians for guidance and for articulating a national discourse. Many in the audience concurred with that assessment as well. One audience member even blurted out the cliched question: "Where is the Palestinian Mandela?" Luckily, the grandson of Nelson Mandela, Zwelivelile "Mandla" Mandela, was himself a speaker. He answered forcefully that Mandela was only the face of the movement, which encompassed millions of ordinary men and women, whose struggles and sacrifices ultimately defeated apartheid.
Following my speech at the Conference, I met with several freed Palestinian prisoners as part of my research for my forthcoming book on the subject.
Some of the freed prisoners identified themselves as Hamas, others as Fatah. Their narrative seemed mostly free from the disgraced factional language we are bombarded with in the media but also liberated from the dry and detached narratives of politics and academia.
"When Israel placed Gaza under siege and denied us family visitations, our Fatah brothers always came to our help," a freed Hamas prisoner told me. "And whenever Israeli prison authorities mistreated any of our brothers from any factions, including Fatah, we all resisted together."
A freed Fatah prisoner told me that when Hamas and Fatah fought in Gaza in the summer of 2007, the prisoners suffered most.
"We suffered because we felt that the people who should be fighting for our freedom, were fighting each other. We felt betrayed by everyone."
To effectuate disunity, Israeli authorities relocated Hamas and Fatah prisoners into separate wards and prisons. They wanted to sever any communication between the prisoners' leadership and to block any attempts at finding common ground for national unity.
The Israeli decision was not random. A year earlier, in May 2006, the leadership of the prisoners met in a prison cell to discuss the conflict between Hamas, which had won the legislative elections in the Occupied Territories, and the PA's main party, Fatah.
These leaders included Marwan Barghouti of Fatah, Abdel Khaleq al-Natshe from Hamas and representatives from other major Palestinian groups. The outcome was the National Conciliation Document, arguably the most important Palestinian initiative in decades.
What became known as the Prisoner's Document was significant because it was not some self-serving political compromise achieved in a luxurious hotel in some Arab capital, but a genuine articulation of Palestinian national priorities, presented by the most respected and honored sector in Palestinian society.