30 years later, Oslo's real objectives are clear

The Oslo Accords distracted the international community from Israel's obvious role as an occupying force by dangling the promise of a Palestinian state

Hassan Moharam

The Oslo Accords cemented the fragmentation of the Palestinian national discourse and weakened its political entities. Al Majalla explains how the pact gave Israel a clear advantage.

30 years later, Oslo's real objectives are clear

Majed Kayali

last update on 14 Sep 2023

The 1993 Oslo Accords were secretly negotiated with Israel outside official legislative frameworks. Apart from establishing a Palestinian state, it made grand promises that Palestine could become a new Taiwan, Singapore or Hong Kong.

But while dreams and aspirations are one thing, reality and circumstances are another.

As an armed Palestinian national movement transitioned from outside to inside Palestine, it encountered a starkly different reality.

Inside Palestine, Israel had established overarching control and wields near total decision-making powers. The Oslo Accords did not designate Israel as an occupying entity or the West Bank, Gaza, and Jerusalem as occupied territories. Neither did it promise a cessation of settlement activities, establish clear borders, or make clear what the end result of this agreement would look like.

Against this backdrop, Al Majalla dissects the accord and the circumstances under which it was established.

1. From national liberation movement to "state" authority

First and foremost, the accords cemented the transition of a national liberation movement to an authority operating under occupation.

As an authority, its interactions and dynamics with Israel and its relationships with Palestinian political bodies and the Palestinian people were considerably different than those of the Palestinian national movement.

From then, Palestinians had to contend with an authority that exercised control over them while both the people and the authority lived under Israeli occupation.

Palestinians had to deal with multiple authorities: the Israeli authority, the Palestinian Authority (in the West Bank and Gaza), and the authority of Jewish settlers, who are often given a free hand to operate without explicit state backing.

Israeli settlers march towards the outpost of Eviatar, near the Palestinian village of Beita, south of Nablus in the occupied West Bank, on April 10, 2023.

It's also important to note that Palestinians displayed greater unity, resilience, and boldness in their confrontations with Israel before establishing the authority, in the era preceding Oslo.

The Oslo Accords cemented the transition of a national liberation movement to an authority operating under occupation. From then, Palestinians had to contend with an authority that exercised control over them while both the people and the authority lived under Israeli occupation.

2. A reformed and exclusionary national narrative

The Oslo Accords also cemented a shift in the Palestinian national narrative. It went from one that centred on the Nakba of 1948 which established the state of Israel and created an enduring refugee crisis, to one that focused on establishing a Palestinian state for those Palestinians who remained in the West Bank and Gaza.

By paying lip service to the right of a Palestinian state, the broader issue of Palestinians who fled their homeland after the Nakba was sidelined. Instead of focusing on the rights of Palestinians displaced by the 1948 Nakba, the emphasis was instead placed on the events of 1967, when Israel captured the West Bank and Gaza.

A group of Palestinian refugees walk along the road from Jerusalem to Lebanon on November 9, 1948.

In an attempt to make concessions, the cohesive Palestinian narrative was fragmented.

The cohesive Palestinian narrative was fragmented in an attempt to make concessions. This concession infuriated many Palestinian refugees who complained that their rights were being negotiated away. Arabs and the global community openly questioned the fairness and credibility of the negotiations.

Under the accords, the focus shifted away from liberation and the return of refugees, instead placing a greater emphasis on establishing a Palestinian state. The accords also cemented the exclusion of Palestinian citizens of Israel.

As a result, these two groups — Palestinian refugees and Palestinian citizens of Israel — became peripheral to the central political structures and Palestinian interactions.

3. The intentional weakening of political entities

The third transformation involves the dissolution or weakening of inclusive political entities following the implementation of the Oslo Accord. With the establishment of the Palestinian Authority, the entire Palestinian political elite relocated to the Palestinian territories.

Leaders like the late Yasser Arafat and the current leader Mahmoud Abbas consolidated the roles of PA President, Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman, and Fatah leader, resulting in an unusual concentration of power.

In an attempt to make concessions, the cohesive Palestinian narrative was fragmented. By paying lip service to the right of a Palestinian state, the broader issue of Palestinians who fled their homeland after the Nakba was sidelined.

Advantage Israel

To conclude, the Oslo Accords upended the Palestinian national discourse and fragmented Palestinians as a cohesive entity.

They gave Israel the advantage and were able to distract the international community from Israel's obvious role as an occupying force by dangling the promise of a Palestinian state — one that has yet to be realised.

Israeli journalist Sever Plocker summarised the current reality best when he wrote: "30 years after Oslo, the number of countries that recognise Israel went from 110 to 166, the number of settlers in the West Bank went from 115,000 to 485,000 (excluding Jerusalem), the issue of Palestinian refugees has practically disappeared, and state security spending went from 11% to 5%."

Meanwhile, Israel's GDP went from $100bn in 1993 to $522bn.

On her part, journalist Amira Hass wrote that the Oslo Accords deliberately avoided concrete definitions of territories and established borders. Instead, it was a tool for Israel to gain access to global markets — particularly in the Arab world.

She adds that Israel was able to shirk its responsibilities toward the Palestinian people as an occupying force while retaining control over critical assets including land, water, sea and air space. It controlled the freedom of movement and borders, exploited its economic leverage, and used Palestinians to test, develop and export weapons and surveillance equipment.

On their part, Palestinians were reduced to a cheap labour force for Israel under the veneer of "peace" and "prosperity".

Thirty years after Oslo, it has become abundantly clear that Israel's main goal was to assert its dominance over the Palestinians rather than genuinely seek peace.

+ / -