— Throughout the Palestinian and Israeli left, a serious discussion is occurring over the Oslo Accords and their inability to deliver peace, a Palestinian state or an improvement in life for the majority of Palestinians. Â鶹´«Ã½ Weekly's ADAM HANIEH spoke to Dr ADEL SAMARA in Ramallah about the issues.
Samara is a Palestinian economist born and living in the West Bank town of Ramallah. He has been an activist on the left for many years, spending time in Israeli jails for his political activity. He is currently director of the Al Mashreq Centre for Development and Cultural Studies.
Question: What is your evaluation of the Oslo Accords after three years?
First, it is important not to separate the peace process from developments all around the world and the fact that this whole process was designed by US imperialism. It was not a discussion between the peoples of the area or even between the bourgeoisies of the area.
However, the Israeli bourgeoisie wholeheartedly supports the agreement. In fact, the only people who are against the agreement in Israel are the radical Marxists and the extreme right-wing Israelis.
It is now clear that the agreement means the annexation of the West Bank and Gaza to Israel. The limited areas under the self-rule of the Palestinians are nothing more than that — a self-rule under the control of the central Israeli government.
There is nothing in Oslo to say that the Israeli settlements should stop or even where they should be built. There is nothing that permits the Palestinians to export and import freely.
There is nothing written that will allow the Palestinians sovereignty over land — this is why the Palestinian elections are a mockery: how can you elect a body that does not have sovereignty over a clearly defined piece of land? The Palestinian leadership's interpretation of Oslo is a mere lie.
More than that, there is nothing written about the 1948 Palestinians, which is a serious betrayal of the Palestinian struggle.
Question: Why, then, did the Palestinian leadership sign Oslo?
The Palestinian bourgeoisie is essentially a comprador bourgeoisie — they make their profits through acting as agents for international capital. For these people, it is easy to agree on self-rule. They can easily make their profits in these areas.
There are essentially three factions of Palestinian capital which support the agreement. Firstly the bureaucratic-comprador element, which is Arafat and the people around him. It was a militant petty-bourgeois faction, but over 30 years they have been extracting money from every Palestinian working abroad and accumulating this money.
The second is the Palestinian financial capital consisting of wealthy Palestinians in the diaspora from places like Europe, America, Australia.
The third, and the weakest, is the Palestinian "subcontract" bourgeoisie, who have established joint projects with Israeli capital in the territories ever since 1967. You may walk down the streets of Ramallah and see the name of this or that Palestinian company, but a large part of the money resides in Tel Aviv.
Question: Is this the reason for the Palestinian support for the industrial zones of cheap labour which are due to be opened within Gaza?
The Palestinian Authority is striving very hard to open these parks — it is the Israelis who are hesitating. Why? Because labour is much cheaper and stability greater in countries like Jordan and Egypt. That is why these industrial parks are not working.
Also, if the aim of these parks is to produce for the Arab market, why shouldn't they be in Jordan? Why would the Israeli capitalist want to use a Palestinian capitalist as his agent in Jordan when King Hussein is willing to be the agent? The Palestinian capitalist is trying to be the sole agent of the Israeli bourgeoisie, but the Israelis have the choice of most of the Arab world.
Question: How has life changed for Palestinians since Oslo?
Economic life has deteriorated, especially in the last two years. Per-capita GNP has dropped by almost 40% since 1992. The Palestinian economy is a dependent and colonised economy, which means it is dependent on its enemy, which is holding the tap and allowing only a few drops to fall.
There is very little investment and industrialisation in the Palestinian areas; this is why income levels are deteriorating. The Israelis are applying more pressure to force the Palestinians to give up even more. The donor countries also are not interested in giving Palestinians their rights.
Social life is related to political and economic life. Political life is very bad. Just last week one of Arafat's most trusted aides, who was the attorney-general for the Palestinian Authority, was fired for pocketing bail money and fines paid to his ministry.
A report earlier this year found the PA had wasted or misused $326 million last year. One of the largest companies in the territories is Al-Bahar, which is registered in the names of two top PA officials but is not publicly accountable to the Ministry of Finance.
Question: So public support for the PA has dropped over the last two years?
Certainly. There is still a strong desire for peace, but support for Oslo has dropped dramatically. One survey found support has dropped from 40% in December 1995 to 23.6% in October 1996.
The radical left has not capitalised on this because it has largely become complicit in the Palestinian Authority's regime. The leaderships of the Palestinian opposition, the PFLP and DFLP [Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine], are largely destroying their own organisations. They are doing this for the sake of jobs in the regime or in the NGOs.
The opposition is telling the people not to protest and is filled with talk about "civil society", "positively building the new state" and "new forms of struggle". These ideas are essentially western liberal ideas. How can we make a "civil society" if we don't have a civil government?
Much of the funding comes through US institutes such as US AID and even Republican think-tanks which are funding these NGOs and self-help groups and employing former members of the Palestinian left. The NGOs are consuming the parties, bribing the leadership with salaries and positions.
Question: What is the state of struggle amongst the Palestinian working class?
A very positive example is the recent strike by 19,000 teachers in the West Bank, which was large, militant and directed against the regime. It was not supported by the traditional left organisations or Fatah.
The teachers were demonstrating around economic demands — a 200% wage increase and smaller class sizes. PA school teachers earn around $300-500 a month compared to the $700-900 UNRWA teachers earn. In Israel, teachers earn on average $1500 a month.
The strike also had a political dimension because last year the PA education minister promised a wage rise which has not been delivered. The official teachers' union is appointed directly by the Education Ministry. Of course they opposed the teachers' actions.
During the dispute a grassroots organising committee arose whose leadership body was arrested by the PA. Large demonstrations occurred and forced the freeing of the leaders. Strikes will certainly continue.
However, without a real party organisation it is impossible to depend only on spontaneous struggle. Unfortunately, the current leaders of the Palestinian unions are redefining themselves as "democrats", not socialists.
The number of Palestinian Marxists is still very small; there are many Palestinians who call themselves Marxist and there are countless songs about Marxism, but the understanding of Marxism beyond slogans is very weak.
Question: What about Fatah, the traditional leadership of the PLO?
The PA tends to "spoil" the best Fatah activists with jobs and salaries. There is hope amongst the young Fatah activists, and the recent elections at Bir Zeit University are promising. Fatah regained control of the student council after a devastating loss to the Islamist forces last year.
The Fatah students achieved this because they distanced themselves from the regime and presented a critical, left-wing, secular program. This is in contrast to Hebron University, where the Hamas bloc increased its majority, winning 19 seats to Fatah's 15. [Hamas also scored 61% in the elections in Al-Quds University. — A.H.]
There is no strong organisation to the left of Fatah to attract these young militants. The same goes for the forces of political Islam. The youth must be differentiated from the older layers. They are not fundamentalist in the same sense but are concerned with social problems. However, they have an even further distance to move than the Fatah youth, and there is no left pole of attraction.
Question: What about the protests in Gaza and towns like Hebron?
Very often the protests are organised by the PA as a means to demonstrate to the Israelis that they have the ability to mobilise people and are a serious force in negotiations.
The one exception to this is the demonstrations that occurred around the opening of the tunnel under the Al Aqsa mosque in East Jerusalem last September. These mobilisations occurred independently of the regime and frightened them.