The Fallacy of the Phrase: “We Accept What the Palestinians Accept!”

In October 2002, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State William Burns arrived in the Middle East as an envoy of the American administration, bearing tidings of the so-called “Road Map”—a plan that obligates the Palestinian side to safeguard the security of occupying soldiers, while placing no binding obligations on the Zionists. Instead, it merely appeals to them with vague suggestions open to interpretations they have mastered, always to the benefit of their brutal occupation. The Zionists, unsurprisingly, introduced amendments to the plan that stripped it of many of its original principles.

America granted the Zionistentity ample time to carry out killings, demolish homes, and displace families—actions designed to force the Palestinian side into submission, to compel it to meet Zionist security demands, and to relinquish many of its legitimate rights, including the borders of the Palestinian state, its army, its capital, and the right of refugees to return to their homeland.

Once America had completed its seizure of Iraq, it began threatening numerous Arab governments with regime change, in the same manner it had dealt with Saddam Hussein. This prompted those who had previously rejected Zionist usurpation to declare that they would accept whatever the Palestinians accepted—or more precisely, whatever concessions Mahmoud Abbas had accepted, as though he had become the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.

Mohammed Dahlan in the Service of the Occupation

This roadmap compels the Palestinian side to halt the Intifada. Accordingly, Mahmoud Abbas appointed Mohammed Dahlan to this task. Rothschild, the former coordinator of the occupation, stated in a quote published by Al-Hayat newspaper on April 22, 2003, that Dahlan’s presence in Abu Mazen’s government was vital to ensuring Abu Mazen’s authority and control over the people.

Dahlan did not conceal his mission. He openly declared that he would combat the military wings of the Palestinian resistance to prevent them from carrying out any operations against the occupation army. Thus, when the American president attended the summit in Aqaba on June 3, 2003, his first question to Abu Mazen was: “Where is Dahlan?”

Sharonian Maneuvers to Extort the Palestinians

The numerous Zionist objections to the Road Map were nothing but Sharonian maneuvers aimed at extracting maximum Palestinian concessions—and by extension, Arab concessions. For the Arabs had surrendered the fate of their nation to America, or rather to the Zionist enemy, through their infamous declaration: “We accept what the Palestinians accept.” In doing so, the Arabs effectively endorsed the abandonment of Palestinian rights.

In President George Bush’s speech delivered on the evening of June 3, 2003, at the Sharm El-Sheikh summit, he stated: “The Palestinian land on which the Israelis agree to establish a Palestinian state must not be fragmented.” This left the Zionists with the authority to determine the extent of the land from which they would withdraw and upon which the Palestinian state would be established—so long as it was not “fragmented.” This stance contradicts UN Security Council Resolutions 242, 338, and 1397, which call for the withdrawal of the Zionist entity from the territories it occupied in 1967.

The Road Map Legitimizes Zionist Aggression

Nothing better illustrates how the Road Map legitimizes Zionist aggression than Bush’s statement at the summit: “We will not allow a handful of terrorist killers to destroy the hopes and dreams of many.” Thus, under the banner of peace, Bush declared that Palestinians who resist aggression are “terrorist killers,” while the Zionist army—which kills civilians, demolishes homes, and seizes land and property—is engaged in a “legitimate” endeavor.

The so-called “just and comprehensive peace” proclaimed by Arab leaders—and dubbed by Yasser Arafat as “the peace of the brave”—was, in Madrid in 1991, nothing more than a reinforcement of the imbalance in UN resolutions.

Now, this imbalance and surrender are being reimposed through the Road Map. Bush did not stop at making it an agreement between the Zionists and the Palestinian Authority; he sought Arab endorsement as well. He pressured Arab leaders to guarantee the security of the aggressor state without any commitment from that state to a full, unconditional withdrawal—not even a false declaration. This state, which violates every sacred principle and claims that such violations bring it closer to God, falsely attributes to God the sanctioning of the blood and honor of non-Jews. The Qur’an exposes this lie in the verse:
{That is because they say, ‘There is no blame upon us concerning the unlettered.’ And they speak lies against Allah while they know.} [Aal Imran 3: 75]

Bush Demands Arab Recognition of the Occupation State

Bush demanded that Arab leaders declare an end to the conflict with the Zionist state, recognize it, and guarantee its security according to the Zionist definition of security. This would pave the way for political, economic, and social arrangements with it under the guise of peace and settlement, and in implementation of the Road Map’s requirements.

Abu Mazen Pledges to Disarm the Resistance

On June 4, Abu Mazen and Sharon met under Bush’s supervision in Aqaba to announce their commitment to the Road Map. Abu Mazen, as Prime Minister of Palestine, pledged to prevent the militarization of the Intifada, declaring that resistance to the occupation would henceforth be verbal only. He committed to disarming resistance organizations and remained silent on the right of refugees to return, the right to establish a Palestinian state on all land occupied since 1967, and the right of Palestinians to have Jerusalem as their capital.

This silence persisted despite the fact that UN resolutions affirm these rights and do not condemn resistance to occupation—in fact, they consider it a legitimate act. At the summit, Sharon declared the Zionist entity a Jewish state with Jerusalem as its capital. He announced that the only settlements to be abandoned were the “random” ones—those not officially authorized by the government. These are negligible compared to the cancerous settlement expansion orchestrated by this terrorist.

Hamas Rejects the Road Map for Violating Palestinian Principles

It was only natural for Hamas to reject the summit’s outcomes, as they violated the fundamental principles unanimously upheld by Palestinians—principles no Palestinian dares to transgress. Five major organizations followed suit, rejecting what can only be described as imposed dictates.

The Road Map suspended these core Palestinian principles pending mutual agreement in negotiations, while simultaneously stripping Palestinians of their only leverage: resistance. It did not halt Zionist aggression against Palestinian civilians, nor did it stop the demolition of homes, businesses, or the assassination of honorable individuals.

The result? Arabs and Palestinians are expected to fulfill their obligations while the Zionists commit to nothing. President Bush, in his speech, affirmed the Jewish identity of the Zionist state—an affirmation that negates the right of return for refugees, nullifies any obligation to dismantle settlements, and implies the Zionists’ right to expel Arabs living within their usurped land.

When Will Arabs Stop Surrendering Palestinian Principles?

We do not know when Arabs will cease their relentless concessions on Palestinian principles. Nor do we know when they will realize that such concessions open the door for the Zionists to implement their plan—fromthe Nile to the Euphrates.

Even the American professor Noam Chomsky condemned these concessions. Al-Hayat newspaper reported on June 10, 2003, that what the Arabs accepted in the Road Map had already been proposed by Sharon in 1992. The Palestinian state envisioned by America and the Zionists for 2005 had previously been rejected by both parties.

But once the Zionists altered the reality on the ground through settlements, the idea of a demilitarized state on a small patch of land—permitted by the occupation state—became the proposed solution to end the Intifada. The Palestinian Authority would then assume the role the occupation failed to fulfill, under conditions dictated by the Zionists and disguised as negotiations. This is precisely what Mahmoud Abbas committed to.

We do not know how long Arabs will continue negotiating over principles under the pretext of accepting what the Palestinians accept—while Palestinian factions reject these concessions, and only a U.S.- and Zionist-installed authority embraces them. These concessions threaten Arab national security.

Yasser Arafat Marginalized for Demanding Mutual Ceasefire

On June 14, 2003, newspapers published an appeal from YasserArafat to Egyptian officials not to ignore him. His dispute with America and the Zionists stemmed from his insistence that any cessation of violence must be mutual. He refused to allow the occupation state to continue killing Palestinians and demolishing their homes while Palestinians were asked to accept aggression and refrain from self-defense.

Mahmoud Abbas accepted this imbalance, prompting the occupiers to demand that nations cease contact with the democratically elected Palestinian president and deal exclusively with Mahmoud Abbas.

Accepting the killing of Palestinians and the theft of their land is the first step toward falling under the feet of the Zionists—those who, according to their distorted Torah, are commanded to kill other nations and expel them from their lands. The Arabs are first among these, for the Torah allegedly grants them the land from the Nile to the Euphrates.

Defending the land of Palestine is the first line of defense for all Arab lands.

------------------------------

Published in issue no. 1557, of Al-Mujtama magazine (Kuwait), on 28 Rabi' al-Akhir 1424 AH / 28 June 2003, p. 34.