PFP op-ed in the San Diego Union-Tribune
07 January 2005
PFP op-ed in the San Diego Union-Tribune
‘Free and fair’ elections in an occupied land
By Michael F. Brown
January 7, 2005
Palestinian presidential candidate Mahmoud Abbas is the anointed one. The Bush administration wants him. Europe wants him. The Israelis want him. And, stunningly, it appears the Palestinians want him too. The momentary confluence of interests is perhaps unprecedented.
Yet all is not well with these elections. Israeli officials have made one public announcement after another that they will do all that they can to facilitate free and fair elections. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon specifically stated as much on Dec. 22 with British Prime Minister Tony Blair at his side. But saying this does not necessarily make it so.
While the American press has paid scant attention, Israeli officials have been impeding the movement of Dr. Mustafa Barghouti – the candidate running second to Abbas. In early December, he and his colleagues were beaten up by Israeli troops at the Jeba checkpoint outside of Jenin. Then, on Dec. 27 while campaigning in occupied East Jerusalem, he was detained for three hours of questioning at the infamous Moscobiyyah compound in West Jerusalem.
Both times my office alerted the State Department with our concerns that such behavior could interfere with free and fair elections. On both occasions our concerns were brushed aside, and it was suggested that Barghouti was courting controversy to improve his standing with the voters. We were told that no public statement of concern would be made.
The failure of the Bush administration to call Israeli officials to account for their heavy-handed treatment of a democrat is deeply distressing. It is no longer, however, unexpected.
Administration officials have their story that these will be free and fair elections and they are sticking to it. They are not about to let some unsettling facts get in the way of a predetermined story line.
Secretary of State Colin Powell kept to the party line on Jan. 2 on Wolf Blitzer’s “Late Edition”: “The Israelis know that they have to open the area up to allow people to campaign and to get to registration places and poll places. And we’ve also seen a solution to the problem of Palestinians voting in East Jerusalem. So I think we’re moving forward toward successful elections on the 9th.” He said not a word to the effect that just days before the election Israeli officials are interfering with legitimate Palestinian campaigning.
The Bush administration is convinced that Abbas will play ball with Sharon – and probably on Sharon’s terms. If exhausted Palestinians elect him, then so be it. This is their right.
Palestinian support will be short-lived, however, if a victorious Abbas succumbs to the certain arm-twisting of the Bush administration. And Bush administration support will be short-lived if Abbas stands firm on a full end to the occupation, East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital and the Palestinian right of return.
Leaving aside the likelihood of an Abbas victory and whether or not he will abandon long-standing Palestinian rights, it is imperative that candidates be provided with free movement and not face regular Israeli harassment in the final days before the election. At the moment, Barghouti and other candidates cannot so much as post billboards in East Jerusalem without running up against the might of the Israeli forces occupying their neighborhoods and dictating what political expression is and is not permissible.
Ominously for the Palestinian people, Palestinian powerbrokers connected to the front-running Abbas were evidently complicit in accepting limited campaigning rights in East Jerusalem – for all the candidates.
Whether the Bush administration backs the winner or not, principled U.S. support for Palestinian democracy ought not to convey the impression of tolerating Israeli restrictions against democratic contenders. Israel is an American ally, but this status should not place Israel above criticism when it so clearly infringes upon the democratic processes of its Palestinian neighbors.
The silence of the American government provides no comfort to the true democrats of the region who are anxious to challenge corrupt dictators and the limitations of democracy under occupation. Democracy in the Middle East surely should mean more than the U.S.-favored candidate currying favors from the occupying Israeli power that by right should be extended to all democrats seeking the Palestinian presidency.
In fact, there is time yet for the policy of unfair advantages bestowed by Israel and the United States on Abbas to backfire. If so, the race may turn out to be a bit closer than the projected landslide for Abbas.
Yet whatever the outcome, one certainty is that Palestinians will not want to see their third presidential election take place under belligerent occupation as was the case with the 1996 election and in a few days the 2005 election. No election under such conditions could ever be completely “free and fair.”
The international community will most likely sign off on this election once the votes are tabulated. But the problems with this election emerged before Jan. 9, and so far at least have nothing to do with vote tampering and everything to do with running an election constrained by the meddling and overt physical intimidation of an occupying power.
Honest international monitors have a responsibility to note Israel’s interference in the campaign process.
Brown is the executive director of Partners for Peace, a Washington, D.C.-based nongovernmental organization.
