This position remained almost unchanged until 1988, when the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) publicly declared its readiness to accept the concept of a two-state solution: Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza Strip (less than a quarter of historic Palestine) and Israel in the rest of the land. By then Israel would not even entertain the proposal, and none of the major Israeli parties accepted that concept officially until very late in 2006 when the two-state solution was adopted by Ehud Olmert’s Kadima party. The balance of power has constantly favoured Israel, which has always enjoyed unreserved support from the United States and the West. Israel was thus under no pressure to even acknowledge the resolutions issued by the United Nations supporting the two-state solution and calling on Israel to withdraw from the territories it has occupied since the 1967 war.
The Oslo Agreements in 1993/4 offered the Palestinians limited self-rule but only over the Palestinian population – with no real jurisdiction over Palestinian land – for five years, as a testing period. Should the Palestinians show ‘good behaviour’ then negotiations would be initiated to settle the major issues of the conflict, such as the fate or division of Jerusalem (which both ‘states’ claim as their rightful capital), the status of refugees, the dismantling of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, control of borders and full sovereignty. From the Palestinian viewpoint, throughout the ‘test period’ the situation surrounding all the major contested issues has been exacerbated deliberately by Israel so that the resulting confrontational disorder would fail to meet the minimal requirements for any restitution of Palestinian rights. From the Israeli perspective, the Palestinians have clearly failed to prove that they are fit to be a ‘partner’ in peace, and thus no advancement should be undertaken to jointly solve the conflict.
Hamas’s view has been that the Oslo Agreements, and any peace talks for that matter, are worthless as long as their design is built around a balance of power where the fulfilment of Israeli demands tops the agenda. According to Hamas, these are capitulation treaties, not peace agreements. From Hamas’s perspective, the failure of the Oslo Accords is inevitable and the rationale behind this goes as follows: Oslo proponents claimed for months following its signing that it would bring an end to occupation [of Palestine] and that, therefore, the Palestinians need no longer exercise an armed struggle against the Israelis. But eight years after Oslo, the following have been the dividends of peace:
1. The territories occupied in 1967 are still occupied.
2. More than ever, the West Bank and Gaza have been carved up, mutilated and turned into isolated islands of human concentrations, or cantons, administered on behalf of the Israelis by the Palestinian Authority.
3. Existing illegal Jewish settlements continue to expand and new ones have been erected.
4. Jerusalem is being expanded and de-Arabised.
5. Large areas of land have been confiscated to allow for the construction of by-passes for the exclusive use of Jewish motorists and especially settlers who illegally live on confiscated Arab land.
6. Thousands of Palestinians continue to be detained in Israeli prisons.
7. Various forms of collective punishment continue to be adopted by the Israelis including the demolition of Palestinian homes, the closure of entire areas and the enforcement of economic blockades, the destruction of Palestinian infrastructure and the uprooting of trees and crops.
8. The economic situation for Palestinians is more dire than ever before.
Why Should One Convert to Islam?
