All successful liberation movements in history had a clear vision of what constituted liberation. The Vietnamese National Liberation Front set the objective of driving the US army out of their land and establishing one socialist state. The French resistance was not content with driving the German army out but aimed to dismantle the Nazi state. The African National Congress centered its efforts on dismantling apartheid while allowing white South Africans to remain. The Algerian National Liberation Front set out conditions under which French settlers would be allowed to remain after liberation. One thing they all had in common: A single state over all of the land, through which society itself—not foreign forces—could determine its future.
The Palestinian Liberation Organization also set out such a vision in 1964 and 1968, emphasizing the unity of Palestinian land and setting out the conditions under which Jews could remain. Unfortunately, it dropped that vision when it bowed to the colony and the US at Oslo. In this context, the recent articles on the "one democratic state" solution are an excellent development in terms of discussing the original Palestinian vision for liberation. This article aims to take this discussion some steps further.
Diagnosing the problem to discern the solution
The questions recently raised by Lara Kilani in her article are critical. There is, of course, room for debate on each of them. This said, diagnosing the problem helps up discern the solution. If we understand occupation as the imposition of foreign hegemony, and the difference between immigration and settler colonization to be that settlers seek, not to integrate an indigenous society, but to impose a polity of their own atop of it, then the problem because clear: The existence of a settler state that (happens to) defines itself as Jewish. This means that the problem is not the presence of non-Palestinians but that of a non-Palestinian state; that the problem with the two-state model is not the number "two" but the fact that one of them is a non-Palestinian state; and that the root problem is not the violence itself but the fact violence is inherent to the existence of a non-Palestinian state. Once the diagnosis is clear, the solution is equally clear: Not just "one state"—the colony is also "one state"—but one Palestinian state, on all of Palestinian land.
This is the foundation for the answers to Kilani's questions. Who makes up the "all" in "equal rights for all"? All who wish to be part of that Palestinian state, subject to its sovereignty. What does it mean to be "equals" when one group of people has built their collection of rights and privileges by stripping them from others? It means to dismantle all aspects of "Jewish privilege" in Palestine, including laws, including naturalization and the right of return; the curriculum; the distribution of capital, land and resources; the use of colonial force, all the way up to genocide; and all other aspects that discriminate on the basis of identity. Do Israelis have collective rights? There was no Israeli citizenship before the establishment of the colony and will no longer be after its dismantling; however, the Palestinian state will protect the rights of all of its citizens. Of course, many details will be left to negotiations that precede (and shape) liberation, but the guiding principle is clear today—Dismantling the settler system of hegemony and replacing it with its antithesis: A Palestinian state that does not segregate on the basis of identity.
Palestinians need to revive and articulate their vision for liberation
Of course, there is a pressing need, on the Palestinian side, to further articulate this basic vision. First, because it guides our efforts today. For example, is redirecting investments from the West Bank to 1948-occupied Palestine a victory? Are joint efforts like "No Other Land" normalization or co-resistance? The answer depends on what constitutes liberation. Second, because it affects the balance of power today. The colony wages narrative warfare, and imposing the question "A Jewish state or a democratic one?" is cultural resistance that corners zionism. And third, because when the balance of power tips in favor of liberation and negotiations are imposed on the colony, the Palestinian side will need a vision to negotiate over—green, orange and red lines, so to say.
It is with this in mind that the "Tomorrow's Palestine" manifesto, signed by close to 25,000 Palestinians, does not shy away from issues viewed as problematic such as the fate of Israelis after liberation, binationalism or the stance on armed resistance. Two recent Palestinian political conferences in Beirut (given the impossibility of holding it in Palestine) and Madrid also focused on the need for a political vision to guide liberation efforts.
Non-Palestinians have a role to play
Many welcome such Palestinian efforts but shy away from supporting them. This is the point of view of Sara Kershnar, who argues that "Jewish advocacy for a one-state solution represents a form of Zionism that centers Jews in Palestine's future". There are a number of comments to be made there. First, what is required is not mere "advocacy", but organized political efforts that analyze the network of power that allows the colony to exist in order to break it. Second, these efforts should not be Jewish or center Jews, but they should include Jews, particularly given their key role in delegitimizing zionism that claims to act in their name. And third, instead of a vague "one-state solution" —the colony is also "one state"— we should be working for one Palestinian state.
Back to the crux of Kershnar's point: Should non-Palestinians stand for the establishment of one Palestinian state on Palestinian land? Well—What is your stance on any other land? Do you not think that there should be one Vietnamese state in Vietnam or one Algerian state in Algeria? Why would your stance be any different when it comes to Palestine? Is it bowing to Israeli exceptionalism, not standing with Palestinians' rights to a free Palestine, that is "a form of zionism".
Some object, wondering what Palestinians think about it, citing the "State of Palestine's" support of the two-state problem. There is a number of responses to this. First, when the Nazis invaded France, imposing a de facto two-state problem, did the world wonder what the French thought about it, or give any credence to the Vichy collaboration government's stance—or did they organize to liberate France? Second, can we imagine Palestinians actually wanting a settler state to exist on their land? Do you not think that —except for rare cases of traitors— the minority of Palestinians who support the two-state problem are doing so out of despair, settling for whatever crumbs they think the colony will throw them? Shouldn't allies use our privilege to fight for Palestinians' right to live in a free Palestine? Third, why are we discounting the fact that one Palestinian state that welcomes peaceful Jews as equal citizens is the historical Palestinian vision for liberation, one that is still supported by Palestinian leaders from all resistance factions, including Yahia Sinwar, Osama Hamdan and Musa Abou Marzouk from Hamas; Ahmad Saadat from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine; Mohammed Al Hindi from the Palestinian Islamic Jihad; Nayef Hawatmeh from the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, to cite only a few?
Democratic states are the means by which societies self-determine. Failing to stand with the establishment of a single democratic Palestinian state in all of Palestine against the "two-state solution" in the name of Palestinian self-determination is akin to calling rape "a two-body solution" and tolerating it in the name of consent. The colony has proven to be what Palestinians have been saying it is for almost 80 years now: An ethnic razing machine. In addition to that, the identitarian logic of zionism—that a person's identity grants them political rights and that those can only be guaranteed by a state exclusive to them— is a danger to all societies in the world. In the name of basic humanity, we must organize to dismantle the zionist settler state imposed on Palestine and establish its fundamental antithesis: One democratic Palestinian state, from the river to the sea.
