Abir Dandis, the mother of the two girls who were murdered in the Negev town of Al-Fura’a last week, couldn't find a police officer to listen to her warnings, neither in Arad nor in Ma’ale Adumim. Both police stations operate in areas where Israel wants to gather the Bedouin into permanent communities, against their will, in order to clear more land for Jewish communities. The dismissive treatment Dandis received shows how the Bedouin are considered simply to be lawbreakers by their very nature. But as a resident of the West Bank asking for help for her daughters, whose father was Israeli, Dandis faced the legal-bureaucratic maze created by the Oslo Accords.

The Palestinian police is not allowed to arrest Israeli civilians. It must hand suspects over to the Israel Police. The Palestinian police complain that in cases of Israelis suspected of committing crimes against Palestinian residents, the Israel Police tend not to investigate or prosecute them.

In addition, the town of Al-Azaria, where Dandis lives, is in Area B, under Palestinian civilian authority and Israeli security authority. According to the testimony of Palestinian residents, neither the IDF nor the Israel Police has any interest in internal Palestinian crime even though they have both the authority and the obligation to act in Area B.

The Palestinian police are limited in what it can do in Area B. Bringing in reinforcements or carrying weapons in emergency situations requires coordination with, and obtaining permission from, the IDF. If Dandis fears that the man who murdered her daughters is going to attack her as well, she has plenty of reason to fear that she will not receive appropriate, immediate police protection from either the Israelis or the Palestinians.

Dandis told Jack Khoury of Haaretz that the Ma’ale Adumim police referred her to the Palestinian Civil Affairs Coordination and Liaison Committee. Theoretically, this committee (which is subordinate to the Civil Affairs Ministry) is the logical place to go for such matters. Its parallel agency in Israel is the Civilian Liaison Committee (which is part of the Coordination and Liaison Administration - a part of the Civil Administration under the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories).

In their meetings, they are supposed to discuss matters such as settlers’ complaints about the high volume of the loudspeakers at mosques or Palestinians’ complaints about attacks by settlers. But the Palestinians see the Liaison Committee as a place to submit requests for permission to travel to Israel, and get the impression that its clerks do not have much power when faced with their Israeli counterparts. In any case, the coordination process is cumbersome and long.

The Palestinian police has a family welfare unit, and activists in Palestinian women’s organizations say that in recent years, its performance has improved. But, as stated, it has no authority over Israeli civilians and residents. Several non-governmental women’s groups also operate in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem, and women in similar situations approach them for help. The manager of one such organization told Haaretz that Dandis also fell victim to this confusing duplication of procedures and laws. Had Dandis approached her, she said, she would have referred her to Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, which has expertise in navigating Israel’s laws and authorities.

John Kerry revealed his long-awaited plan for peace in the Middle East on Sunday, hinging on a $4bn (£2.6bn) investment in the Palestinian private sector.

The US secretary of state, speaking at the World Economic Forum on the Jordanian shores of the Dead Sea, told an audience including Israeli president Shimon Peres and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas that an independent Palestinian economy is essential to achieving a sustainable peace.

Speaking under the conference banner "Breaking the Impasse", Kerry announced a plan that he promised would be "bigger, bolder and more ambitious" than anything since the Oslo accords, more than 20 years ago.

Tony Blair is to lead a group of private sector leaders in devising a plan to release the Palestinian economy from its dependence on international donors. The initial findings of Blair's taskforce, Kerry boasted, were "stunning", predicting a 50% increase in Palestinian GDP over three years, a cut of two-thirds in unemployment rates and almost double the Palestinian median wage. Currently, 40% of the Palestinian economy is supplied by donor aid.

Kerry assured Abbas that the economic plan was not a substitute for a political solution, which remains the US's "top priority".

Peres, who had taken the stage just minutes before, also issued a personal plea to his Palestinian counterpart to return to the negotiations.

"Let me say to my dear friend President Abbas," Peres said, "Should we really dance around the table? Lets sit together. You'll be surprised how much can be achieved in open, direct and organised meetings."

Thick locks hug the front gates of shuttered shops, now covered in graffiti and dust from lack of use. Only a handful of customers pass along the dimly lit road, sometimes stopping to check the ripeness of fruits and vegetables, or ordering meat in near-empty butcher shops.

“All the shops are closed. I’m the only one open. This used to be the best place,” said 64-year-old Mustafa Sunocret, selling vegetables out of a small storefront in the marketplace near his family’s home in the Muslim quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City.

Amidst the brightly coloured scarves, clothes and carpets, ceramic pottery and religious souvenirs filling the shops of Jerusalem’s historic Old City, Palestinian merchants are struggling to keep their businesses alive.

Faced with worsening health problems, Sunocret told IPS that he cannot work outside of the Old City, even as the cost of maintaining his shop, with high electricity, water and municipal tax bills to pay, weighs on him.

“I only have this shop,” he said. “There is no other work. I’m tired.”

Abed Ajloni, the owner of an antiques shop in the Old City, owes the Jerusalem municipality 250,000 Israeli shekels (68,300 U.S. dollars) in taxes. He told IPS that almost every day, the city’s tax collectors come into the Old City, accompanied by Israeli police and soldiers, to pressure people there to pay.

“It feels like they’re coming again to occupy the city, with the soldiers and police,” Ajloni, who has owned the same shop for 35 years, told IPS. “But where can I go? What can I do? All my life I was in this place.”

He added, “Does Jerusalem belong to us, or to someone else? Who’s responsible for Jerusalem? Who?”

Illegal annexation

Israel occupied East Jerusalem, including the Old City, in 1967. In July 1980, it passed a law stating that “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel”. But Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem and subsequent application of Israeli laws over the entire city remain unrecognised by the international community.

Under international law, East Jerusalem is considered occupied territory – along with the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Syrian Golan Heights – and Palestinian residents of the city are protected under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Jerusalem has historically been the economic, political and cultural centre of life for the entire Palestinian population. But after decades languishing under destructive Israeli policies meant to isolate the city from the rest of the Occupied Territories and a lack of municipal services and investment, East Jerusalem has slipped into a state of poverty and neglect.

“After some 45 years of occupation, Arab Jerusalemites suffer from political and cultural schizophrenia, simultaneously connected with and isolated from their two hinterlands: Ramallah and the West Bank to their east, West Jerusalem and Israel to the west,” the International Crisis Group recently wrote.

Israeli restrictions on planning and building, home demolitions, lack of investment in education and jobs, construction of an eight-foot-high separation barrier between and around Palestinian neighbourhoods and the creation of a permit system to enter Jerusalem have all contributed to the city’s isolation.

Formal Palestinian political groups have also been banned from the city, and between 2001-2009, Israel closed an estimated 26 organisations, including the former Palestinian Liberation Organisation headquarters in Jerusalem, the Orient House and the Jerusalem Chamber of Commerce.

Extreme poverty

Israel’s policies have also led to higher prices for basic goods and services and forced many Palestinian business owners to close shop and move to Ramallah or other Palestinian neighbourhoods on the other side of the wall. Many Palestinian Jerusalemites also prefer to do their shopping in the West Bank, or in West Jerusalem, where prices are lower.

While Palestinians constitute 39 percent of the city’s population today, almost 80 percent of East Jerusalem residents, including 85 percent of children, live below the poverty line.

“How could you develop [an] economy if you don’t control your resources? How could you develop [an] economy if you don’t have any control of your borders?” said Zakaria Odeh, director of the Civic Coalition for Palestinian Rights in Jerusalem, of “this kind of fragmentation, checkpoints, closure”.

“Without freedom of movement of goods and human beings, how could you develop an economy?” he asked.

“You can’t talk about independent economy in Jerusalem or the West Bank or in all of Palestine without a political solution. We don’t have a Palestinian economy; we have economic activities. That’s all we have,” Odeh told IPS.

Israel’s separation barrier alone, according to a new report by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTD), has caused a direct loss of over one billion dollars to Palestinians in Jerusalem, and continues to incur 200 million dollars per year in lost opportunities.

Israel’s severing and control over the Jerusalem-Jericho road – the historical trade route that connected Jerusalem to the rest of the West Bank and Middle East – has also contributed to the city’s economic downturn.

Separation of Jerusalem from West Bank

Before the First Intifada (Arabic for “uprising”) began in the late 1980s, East Jerusalem contributed approximately 14 to 15 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) in the Occupied Palestinian territories (OPT). By 2000, that number had dropped to less than eight percent; in 2010, the East Jerusalem economy, compared to the rest of the OPT, was estimated at only seven percent.

“Economic separation resulted in the contraction in the relative size of the East Jerusalem economy, its detachment from the remaining OPT and the gradual redirection of East Jerusalem employment towards the Israeli labour market,” the U.N. report found.

Decades ago, Israel adopted a policy to maintain a so-called “demographic balance” in Jerusalem and attempt to limit Palestinian residents of the city to 26.5 percent or less of the total population.

To maintain this composition, Israel built numerous Jewish-Israeli settlements inside and in a ring around Jerusalem and changed the municipal boundaries to encompass Jewish neighbourhoods while excluding Palestinian ones.

It is now estimated that 90,000 Palestinians holding Jerusalem residency rights live on the other side of the separation barrier and must cross through Israeli checkpoints in order to reach Jerusalem for school, medical treatment, work, and other services.

“Israel is using all kinds of tools to push the Palestinians to leave; sometimes they are visible, and sometimes invisible tools,” explained Ziad al-Hammouri, director of the Jerusalem Centre for Social and Economic Rights (JCSER).

Al-Hammouri told IPS that at least 25 percent of the 1,000 Palestinian shops in the Old City were closed in recent years as a result of high municipal taxes and a lack of customers. “Taxation is an invisible tool…as dangerous as revoking ID cards and demolishing houses,” he said. “Israel will use this as pressure and as a tool in the future to confiscate these shops and properties.”

The Arab Peace Initiative, which was adopted by the Arab League at its summit in Beirut in 2002, is a comprehensive peace initiative first proposed by then-Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, and re-endorsed at the Riyadh summit in 2007. The initiative attempts to end the Arab-Israel conflict, which means normalizing relations between the entire Arab world and Israel in exchange for a complete Israeli withdrawal from all Arab territories occupied in June 1967 and a “just solution” of the Palestinian refugee problem based on United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194.

One of the main elements of the Arab initiative stipulates: “The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since the 4th of June 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.”

The issue of sovereignty and independence is of great interest and importance to Palestinians. They have not experienced independence or sovereignty in modern history. After World War I, Palestine fell under the British Mandate until 1948, and then Israel took control of 78 percent of Mandatory Palestine. The West Bank was then annexed by Jordan, and Gaza was administered by Egypt, both until 1967. As a result of the June 1967 war, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have been living under Israeli occupation.

The Oslo accords, signed in September 1993, led to the creation of the Palestinian Authority over parts of the West Bank and Gaza. They have deprived Palestinians of any elements of sovereignty or independence and kept the Palestinian Authority under total Israeli control. Movement from and into the Palestinian territories is subject to Israeli approval. Commercial exports and imports are also subject to Israeli laws and regulations according to the Paris Economic Protocol.

Sovereignty, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica, is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory. The concept has been discussed and debated throughout history, from the time of the Romans through to the present day, where the notion of globalization has motivated new debates. Although the term has changed in its definition, concept and application, the current notion of state sovereignty is often traced back to the Treaty of Westphalia of 1648, which, in relation to states, codified the basic principles of territorial integrity, border inviolability and supremacy of the state. A sovereign is the supreme lawmaking authority within a specific jurisdiction.

Sovereignty means the right of the state of Palestine to become a full member of the United Nations General Assembly, adopt the U.N. Charter, and conform to international law, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all other related U.N. documents. The state of Palestine will also be subject to its own constitution and legal norms.

“Sovereignty” for Palestinians means a total end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. It means that Palestinians alone will control their territory, air space, electromagnetic field, and water within their own territory. It means the ability to enact laws and implement them over its citizens.

It also means the right of the Palestinian state to form its army and define its national security needs to defend its territorial integrity. It means the ability to defend the territory from outside enemies and aggression. But Palestine will not need to enter into military alliances, an act that violates the terms of peace and normalization with Israel.

A sovereign Palestine means the right to establish and conduct foreign and diplomatic relations with other countries to pursue peace and prosperity. No country can live in isolation from the community of nations. Countries cooperate in political, economic, security and cultural aspects, and Palestine shall be given the right to develop and pursue its diplomatic relations with Arab and Islamic – as well as Western – countries.

It also means Palestine’s ability to administer and oversee the holy sites within its territory. Palestine is home to the three major religions, thus requiring it to respect and protect Jews, Christians and Muslims. Religious sites, especially those in East Jerusalem and Bethlehem, must be accessed by their respective observers. Palestine must establish a ministry to preach peace, tolerance and acceptance among all people.

Sovereign and independent Palestine will not live in a vacuum. It will be part of the community of nations that respects international law and human rights, and will do all it takes to pursue peace, security and prosperity in the region.

Mkhaimar Abusada is a professor of political science at Al-Azhar university in Gaza. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons-api.org, a Web site publishing commentaries on the Arab Peace Initiative.

The Gaza Strip was known as a very traditional and conservative society long before Hamas seized control of it in June 2007. The densely populated Strip is primarily inhabited by Palestinian refugees who have long suffered from poverty and negligence. But since Hamas took over the Gaza Strip, it has intensified its efforts and activities to Islamize the social life of local Palestinians. Islamization of the Gaza Strip refers to the efforts and process to impose Islamic laws and tradition by force.

The process of Islamization is being imposed by the Hamas government and its security apparatuses as well as volunteer dawa groups who go from door to door asking people to adhere to Islamic laws and hijab conservative dress. Beyond its imposition of Islamic social codes on daily life, Hamas controls the social, educational and religious systems that indoctrinate the residents with Islamic values that have a long-term effect on the nature of Gazan society.

The formal educational system in Gaza (with the exception of UNRWA schools) is completely controlled by Hamas. This was facilitated by the general teachers strike at the beginning of the 2008-2009 school year. Hamas was able to replace them with its own ideologue teachers. The educational system is undergoing a process of Islamization – in August 2009, the beginning of the school year, Hamas’ Education Ministry imposed the hijab on school girls and transferred male teachers to boys schools.

The Islamization process is also facilitated by the tendencies of local residents, both male and female, to adjust themselves and conform with Hamas’ Islamic values. One of the most visible signs is the increasing number of bearded men, and women wearing hijab and veil in the streets of Gaza. Some of them grow beards for religious reasons, but women simply do not want to be harassed by Hamas “morality police” and dawa groups. These dawa groups are a civilian network of Hamas volunteers who belong to Islamic charitable societies, and deal with cultural, educational and religious matters.

The Hamas government stepped up the social Islamization process of Gaza in 2010. According to a statement released by the Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights in mid-September, these efforts included the repression of civil society and severe violations of personal freedom. For example, Hamas banned the smoking of nargilas (water pipes) by women in public places. Smoking and partying in a public place was the reason Hamas police closed the Beach Hotel in Gaza for three days in mid-September, as well as many other tourist places.

The summer of 2010 also witnessed a very stressful relationship between Hamas and UNRWA director John Ging. Extremists burned down UNRWA summer camps and leaflets by an extremist group accused UNRWA of teaching school girls fitness, dancing and immorality. The leaflets were distributed inside and within the surroundings of the Hamas-controlled mosques in Gaza. Even though Hamas condemned the attacks and pledged to track down the perpetrators, nothing about the investigation has been released.

Crazy Water Park, one of the Gaza Strip’s most popular entertainment sites, was closed down in mid-September by Hamas police for allowing mixed swimming. Two weeks later, the site was set on fire by a group of unknown gunmen. The Hamas government issued a strong condemnation and promised to pursue the perpetrators. Although it is not clear which Islamist group was behind it, Islamist militants allegedly supported by Hamas who objected to mixed-gender socializing, are to be blamed.

A troubling development this last summer was the expanded role of Hamas’ “morality police.” The Hamas black-uniformed police began to patrol the beaches of Gaza to ensure that men and women are dressed “appropriately” and that unrelated men and women are not mingling. The morality police are monitoring public places, streets and mixed universities for any suspicious and immoral behavior.

Hamas’ strategy is to Islamize the Gaza Strip step by step to avoid provoking neighboring Arab countries and the international community. Hamas has always denied accusations of turning Gaza into an Islamic emirate, but in a very recent interview with Reuters, top Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar asked: “Is it a crime to Islamize the people? I am a Muslim living here according to our tradition. Why should I live under [Western] tradition?” Zahar defended Hamas laws and efforts, but declined to say how far it would go with Islamization.

It is safe to say that Hamas’ ultimate goal is to Islamize the Gaza Strip gradually and present it as a successful model for moderate political Islam. But Hamas will have to take into consideration international and regional reactions to its Islamization efforts, and to avoid any provocation with its southern neighbor, Egypt.

Mkhaimar Abusada is a professor of political science at Al-Azhar University in Gaza. This commentary first appeared on bitterlemons.org, an online newsletter.

The decision of the Executive Committee of the Palestinian Liberation Organizations to approve so-called proximity talks between the Palestinians and Israelis marked a shift in Palestinian politics. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas had previously stated that there would be no such talks until Israel halts all settlement expansion, including in East Jerusalem. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, on the other hand, has not veered from his vow that building in Jerusalem is like building in Tel Aviv.

The move is seen as a success for the US Middle East peace envoy, George Mitchell, who has been shuttling between Tel Aviv and Ramallah, as well as many other Arab capitals, for the past 16 months. Indirect talks will be based on more Mitchell shuttle diplomacy between Abbas and Netanyahu. In spite of this, the indirect talks can be considered a low point in Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, which have shifted from direct bilateral talks to indirect ones.

The administration of US President Barack Obama is confronted with a complicated situation in which both parties are not particularly interested in peace talks. During the previous Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, the United States had to be pushed by Palestinian and Israeli interests in the peace process before Washington got involved. The Obama administration, however, considers the continuation of the stalemate in the peace process to be dangerous to its interests in the region generally.

Hamas and many other Palestinian groups have voiced their rejection of indirect talks. Hamas described the notion as absurd and argued that the move would only legitimize Israel’s occupation and be used as cover for its land confiscations, settlement expansion and other aggressive measures against the Palestinian people. The PLO argues that the move serves the Palestinian national interest and shows its willingness to reach a negotiated peace with Israel on the basis of the two-state solution. Hamas simply says the PLO should “stop selling illusions to the Palestinian people.”

The PLO also says that it has received assurances from Washington that any party that resorts to provocative measures will be publicly fingered by the US. Indeed, one positive thing about indirect talks is that the US, as represented by George Mitchell and his team, will be at the table, unlike in previous bilateral talks in which the balance of power favored Israel to dictate its will to the Palestinians on the basis of “take it or leave it.” Israel negotiates for the sake of negotiating, all the while creating new facts on the ground that make it impossible for the Palestinian side to continue. This time, Palestinians hope the Americans will not allow Israel to dictate its vision of peace.

The PLO statement on the proximity talks confirmed that all final-status issues – borders, Jerusalem, refugees, water and security – will be on the table. This is also a small victory for the Palestinians, because although the parameters for peace between them and Israelis are well known, the Netanyahu government would prefer to start the talks from point zero and limit the topics discussed.

The proximity talks are expected to continue for only the four months approved by the Arab foreign ministers. If they prove successful, indirect talks will be upgraded to direct talks. Netanyahu has stressed that final-status issues cannot be resolved without direct negotiations. Mitchell and his team will utilize all the tools at their disposal to make indirect talks successful.

But any move on the ground by Netanyahu could endanger the talks. Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erakat recently affirmed that Palestinians want to give negotiations a chance, but that success was mainly up to Israel, whose actions could doom the peace process. He added that the Israeli government has a choice, either peace or settlements, and it can’t have both. The Palestinians do not want to be blamed for obstructing indirect talks but will not hesitate to pull out.

Hence, the chances of success depend on Netanyahu’s willingness to depart from his own right-wing positions and policies. If Netanyahu chooses ideology over compromise, the results are obvious. But the price of failure will be very costly. These indirect talks mark the last chance for peace, and the Palestinians have long ago started to search for other options and scenarios.

The failure of indirect talks will harm Abbas and discredit what is left of his leadership among the Palestinians. If that happens, the United States and the international community will have to be prepared for a volatile period in Palestinian politics.

Mkhaimar Abusada is a professor of political science at Al-Azhar University in Gaza. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons.org, an online newsletter that publishes contending views of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

With dueling authorities running the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, the Palestinian people find themselves in the middle of an experiment.

In Gaza, where Hamas is in charge, the high price of armed resistance to Israel has discredited any attempts to revive the conflict. In the West Bank, which is under Fatah rule, negotiations have gone nowhere. Neither track of Palestinian politics – resistance or negotiation – offers hope of achieving independence. As a result, the Palestinians face their most difficult challenge since 1948.

Israeli threats of renewing its war on Hamas in the Gaza Strip are taken very seriously. The scenes of devastation are still vivid in the streets and neighborhoods of the territory, more than one year after the conflict there, and Hamas is taking no chances when it comes to provoking Israel into a new war. The fighting cost Hamas two of its top leaders, Saeed Siam and Nizar Rayan, and it significantly weakened its military capabilities. Only recently have these been rebuilt.

Hamas finds itself in a difficult position, since its policy calls for a resort to strong resistance, alongside politics. Yet this policy has failed. Hamas has put pressure on all the resistance groups in Gaza to refrain from provoking Israel. In an unprecedented statement, Mahmoud al-Zahhar, a top Hamas leader, said that any missiles fired at Israel from the Gaza Strip would be deemed “betrayal missiles.”

Instead, Hamas has turned its attention to the West Bank, where it has no political authority. It has called on Palestinians there to launch a new intifada against Israel, even as the movement has insisted on maintaining calm in the Gaza Strip.

Fatah, which runs the West Bank, wants no part of another Palestinian uprising. President Mahmoud Abbas has made no secret of his objection to such a strategy. But, with their government unable to do anything about the expansion of Israeli settlements, including those in East Jerusalem, as well as the conflicts over holy sites in Hebron, Bethlehem, and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, West Bank Palestinians are extremely frustrated. Recent street demonstrations could easily turn into an outbreak of ongoing resistance to Israeli rule.

The Palestinian Authority, which runs the West Bank, is afraid that a popular, non-violent intifada might quickly turn violent. If so, Israel might use it as a pretext to crush the Palestinians and their newly built institutions. This has happened before, during the last intifada in 2002.

There is another scenario that also terrifies Fatah leaders. An outbreak of violence could strengthen Hamas and its military wing, the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, in the West Bank. This, in turn, could produce a repeat of the scenario that brought Hamas to power in the Gaza Strip in June 2007, when all Fatah authority in the area collapsed after the Israeli withdrawal from the territory.

Yet the peace process has been stalled for more than a year, greatly reducing Fatah’s credibility in the West Bank. Abbas has repeatedly described peace as a strategic choice for the Palestinians. However, 17 years after the signing of the Oslo agreement and the launch of bilateral talks between the Palestine Liberation Organization and Israel, there has been very little movement toward establishing a Palestinian state. In the mind of many people, negotiations have reached a dead end.

Arab diplomats have also shown few signs of optimism. At its recent summit in Libya, the Arab League failed to agree over the proximity talks proposed by the United States’ peace envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell. The Arab position is that no proximity talks can be held until Israel freezes its settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Palestinian and Arab opinion is waiting for the United States, as Israel’s ally, to intervene and press for concessions.

Though the Palestinian economy in the West Bank has improved greatly under Premier Salam Fayyad, this is no substitute for serious peace negotiations. In August 2009, Fayyad announced his vision of establishing a Palestinian state within a two-year timeframe.

Under his blueprint, which has received strong financial support from the United States and the European Union, the political, economic, and security infrastructure of the Palestinian state would be ready by August 2011. Fayyad has also gained the backing of Fatah and most other Palestinian groups in the West Bank.

Fayyad’s strategy for international recognition of a Palestinian state is to fight a legal battle against Israel in the United Nations Security Council and other international bodies. He is convinced that establishing a Palestinian state would serve the interests of all parties, and that the odds favor the Palestinians in international political struggle.

Hamas does not share this view, and Palestinian reconciliation efforts have reached an impasse. The Arab League has given Egypt the lead role in bringing the two sides together, but Hamas has spurned Egypt’s proposals. Now, with questions about President Hosni Mubarak’s successor arising, Egypt has put aside these talks. Palestinians are looking, instead, to Iran, Hamas’ ally, for signs of any revival in discussions between Fatah and Hamas.

The Palestinians’ choices are limited, and there is no consensus among them on how to proceed. But there is a growing sense that the waiting game cannot last much longer. Whatever comes next will most likely come soon.

Mkhaimar Abusada is a professor of political science at Al-Azhar University in Gaza, and has written numerous articles on Palestinian politics. THE DAILY STAR publishes this commentary in collaboration with Project.