By Daoud Kuttab

One of the hardest decisions that a political leader has to take is when to engage in negotiations and when to refrain. This has been the dilemma facing Palestinian leaders for decades. At times they are blamed for refusing to engage and at other times their engagement has given the other side a cover to keep doing what they were doing before the talks.

For years the Israelis have been repeating the statement made by Israel’s UN ambassador thatArabs don’t miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. In 1993, Palestinians did engage Israel in a process that many thought would lead to a genuine breakthrough, only to find themselves two decades later in a much worse position than they were when the Oslo accords were signed. Twice as many settlers are now living in illegal Jewish-only settlements in Palestinian areas compared with before the famous handshake at the White House Lawn between Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat.

Both leaders have since died unnatural deaths but the peace for which Shimon Peres received an advance payment in the form of a Nobel Peace Prize has not materialized. Continue Reading »

By Daoud Kuttab

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has called on the Palestinian leadership to stay relevant and engaged. The outgoing prime minister, who is heading a caretaker government, made this plea from his office in Ramallah.

In an exclusive and wide-ranging interview with Al-Monitor, Fayyad explains the reason for his optimistic outlook despite the general pessimism. An unexpected event could trigger a breakthrough, he argues. It could be as simple as the video of Ahmad from Hebron, he said, referring to a YouTube video that has gone viral in which a 15-year-old Palestinian boy innocently asks an Israeli soldier coming to arrest him if he could postpone the arrest one day because he has an important test at school. Continue Reading »

By Daoud Kuttab

The official title of the first conference of its kind at An Najah university on April 28 was “The Palestinian Media in Light of Changes in the Arab World.” But a more appropriate title for the proceedings of the one-day event at Palestine’s largest university would have been “Whether Palestinian Journalists and the Palestine Media Merit Being a Special Case.”

The “special case” controversy erupted when the well-known journalist Nabil Amr told the large audience of his comments to Yasser Arafat as soon as Amr was appointed minister of information. ”I told him,” said the former minister, “that I intended to abolish the ministry and privatize Palestine TV and Sawt Falstine [Voice of Palestine radio] to a public service station such as the BBC.” Amr, who at one time suffered wounds from unknowns shooting into his house, said Arafat refused his idea without even a discussion. Continue Reading »

By Daoud Kuttab

It is not clear whether Salam Fayyad uttered these exact terms, but what the New York Times’ Roger Cohen quoted the outgoing Palestinian prime minister as having said resonated with many Palestinians. Frustrated as to the lack of progress after 46 years of occupation, Palestinians are ready to find any scapegoat to pour all their frustrations on. The statement that the Palestinian leadership lacks a coherent strategy and that many decisions are taken without study and thought sounds about right to many people. But is it that simple?

There is definitely much to be said about the importance of tactics in negotiations and the need to maximize one’s strengths while trying to capitulate on the weakness of one’s opponent. But is the delay of a breakthrough in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict only the result of bad tactics and the absence of a strategy among Palestinians? Many would agree wholeheartedly. But the evidence is not that persuasive. Continue Reading »

By Daoud Kuttab

Sometimes the best way to gauge reactions to a particular action is to look away from it. The reactions of the Jordanian parliament and government on Wednesday, May 8, to Israel’s decisions regarding Al-Aqsa mosque is a prime example.

Jordan, one of two Arab countries that has signed a peace agreement with Israel, decided to withdraw its ambassador from Tel Aviv and summoned the Israeli ambassador to lodge a strong complaint about the events in Jerusalem. The Jordanian parliament, however, was much more radical, with MPs voting unanimously to demand that the government expel the Israeli ambassador.

While the decision of the parliament is not binding on the executive branch, it would be a mistake to dismiss the decision. Such an action reflects an increasingly angry mood in the Arab world in reaction to Israeli incursions into the Al-Aqsa mosque compound. Continue Reading »

By Daoud Kuttab

Europe, Israel’s No. 1 trading partner, is once again trying to rethink its Israel policies in light of the latter’s failure to facilitate the two-state solution. The European Council for Foreign Relations (ECFR) has issued a powerful document aimed at guiding member states in dealing with Israel, Palestinians and Arabs.

Entitled “Europe and the Vanishing Two-State Solution,” the 65-page report written by Nick Witney deals with what Europeans think about the two-state solution, the need for and the constraints on European action, concluding with specific actions the EU can take. Continue Reading »

By Daoud Kuttab

The statement made by the Qatari prime and foreign minister in Washington in favor of adding a clause to the Arab Peace Initiative allowing for “land swaps”  caught many off guard and drew a largely negative reaction in Palestinian and Arab circles.

On the surface, the statement by Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr Al Thani of Qatar in the presence of US Secretary of State John Kerry, the Arab League delegation (including the Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki) didn’t seem like a problem. Hamad said: “The Arab League delegation affirmed that agreement should be based on the two-state solution on the basis of the 4th of June 1967 line, with the possible of comparable and mutual agreed minor swap of the land.”

Since the 2000 Camp David talks, the Palestinian leadership has accepted that while the two-state solution should be based on the pre-June 5, 1967, borders, the concept of land swaps was possible. Continue Reading »