| |
Fidaa Shehada is a former National Endowment for Democracy
Reagan-Fascell fellow and a former officer in crisis management
at the Palestinian Center for the Dissemination of Democracy and
Community Development (Panorama).
democracy at large:
How does the Palestinian-Israeli conflict affect your democracy-building
work?
Fidaa Shehada: It’s
hard to talk about democracy with people who live under occupation.
For example, you’ll hold a training workshop for young people
about democratic good governance and how to hold local government
accountable, and attendees will arrive sweaty from the checkpoints
or a run-in with soldiers. If you talk about the importance of elections,
the young people ask whether refugees and the Palestinians in East
Jerusalem will vote. Sadly, democracy doesn’t always seem
relevant to the Palestinian situation. You talk about the responsibilities
of the municipalities, and they know very well that their municipality
doesn’t have the sovereignty to implement what we are talking
about.
dal: How do you
answer the questions they raise?
FS: I explain that
while the occupation is our major problem, we might do a better
job of solving it if we address our internal problems. The young
people who attend our workshops see the corruption in the Palestinian
Authority, and it affects their lives. They know that the Palestinian
Authority has control over this problem, and you hear them criticize
the Palestinian Authority for it.
I assure them that we need to work on both the internal and the
external situations, and I encourage them to examine what we can
do internally to make our situation better. I also try not to talk
about democracy in a theoretical way. I try to relate it to their
daily lives. I break the concepts up and talk about the impact equal
rights can have on their daily lives. Some people argue that democracy
is a western concept, but I try to convince them that democracy
is related to us, east or west. It’s a way for people to express
themselves and participate in shaping their future.
dal: How does
the conflict impact Palestinians’ ability to build democratic
institutions?
FS: First of all,
the Palestinians have no real sovereignty over their land and natural
resources. The Legislative Council has no role in decisions related
to peace negotiations or the economy. Even if they created a liberal
legal and political system on paper, they don’t have the power
to implement it.
One very serious consequence of the conflict is that, with the closures,
citizens can’t meet with government officials and have a dialogue.
Sometimes, the young people make an appointment with a legislator
and then find, because of the closures, he or she couldn’t
reach the office and they can’t meet. Similarly, many court
cases never go forward, because the judges can’t reach the
courts.
And now the Palestinians want to hold elections. But how do you
hold elections under these conditions? How will candidates campaign,
and how will voters reach the polling places?
Another impact—more difficult to quantify—is the loss
of hope. One day, I didn’t have a lot of work to do, so I
called 20 of the young people I work with just to see how they were.
I called them at 2:00 in the middle of a regular day, and I was
shocked to find that almost half of them were sleeping or doing
nothing. These are healthy young people, and this should be the
time in their lives when they have fun, go to school. But there
was a closure, and the way to Birzeit University was closed. A big
problem, especially for the young, is the feeling that they don’t
have a role. They’ve lost all hope. It’s a big obstacle,
and it threatens to impoverish and alienate a generation of young
Palestinians.
During a later month-long curfew, I couldn’t do any work so
I gathered the participants in my project just to talk about the
situation, which was really bad. I think it was the worst time in
my work as a trainer, because the situation makes what you say about
democracy seem unworkable. It’s embarrassing. But I felt better
after getting everyone together. They had many suggestions for action,
like creating a listserv to chronicle what was happening. This is
exercising democracy, even just holding a dialogue. Not everyone
agreed with each other, but it was helpful to sit together and think
wisely, to express our opinions, to offer each other support. The
most important thing is to keep hold of hope. Afterwards, we could
talk about how to make the municipalities work better, but in the
bad times you just have to have hope.
dal: How might
democracy impact the conflict?
FS: The tools of democracy
will enable the Palestinian public to participate in decisions related
to the conflict. This participation would help make them more responsible
and accountable in any solution to the conflict. In addition, building
and reforming our institutions will enable the wise use of Palestinian
resources. Gaining control over corruption will also help Palestinians
regain international trust and support, and redirect international
focus towards the occupation and how to implement a just solution.
dal: Did democracy
seem within reach when the peace process was healthier?
FS: Oslo was all
about security; democracy has rarely if ever been a topic of discussion
related to the peace process, but democracy became a Palestinian
need. People saw the corruption and realized that things weren’t
improving. In ’97, a group of reformers got together and started
investigating these issues. We in the NGO community started to organize
roundtables and conferences on democracy and institution-building.
But at the time of the second intifada [in 2000], a debate developed
between those who want to build accountable institutions and those
who think that the focus on democracy will undermine the national
struggle for independence. Today, there is a growing Palestinian
constituency that believes in the need for democracy but the outcome
of the internal debate is not yet clear.
dal: Do you think
there is hope for democracy in Palestine?
FS: In the near future,
I am not very optimistic. The future of democracy in Palestine depends
on several factors, including the outcome of the present confrontation
with Israel. In the long run, it will not be possible for Palestinians
to develop a real democracy without a political settlement. Developing
a successful Palestinian democracy also depends on changes in the
discourse and programs of Palestinian parties with respect to their
commitment to democratic procedures and values. In addition, changes
in the Palestinian economy are of major importance: its internal
integration as well as its relations with neighboring economies.
The Palestinian Authority is still a very young entity. Its legislators
have little experience, and “democracy,” “citizenship,”
“legislation” and even “corruption” are
new terms for everyone. The concept of the “rights of citizens”
is still becoming familiar. In the past, it was smart to avoid paying
taxes and to disobey laws. If you didn’t obey the rules of
the Israelis, that was power. But when the person collecting the
taxes is Palestinian, things should be different. Palestinians need
training in citizenship. They are still learning what their rights
are in a democracy. We need time to allow people to learn what it
is like to be a citizen.
© 2005 IFES
|
Printer-friendly version
