Palestinian Activists Reject Shamir Plan for Elections

In a formal rejection Wednesday of Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir’s plan to hold elections in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, leading Palestinian activists insisted that such a proposal would be acceptable only if Israel indicated how the vote would lead to independence.

The statement, called simply the Political Document, was signed by 83 activists and described Shamir’s proposal as “nothing more than a maneuver for the media to save Israel from its international isolation.”

The document attacked Shamir’s plan as “a project which ignores the essence of the conflict.” It argued that “this isolated occurrence of elections does not illustrate how it will lead to the end of occupation and to Palestinian national independence.”

The statement studiously avoided a total rejection of elections, hinting that the plan could be revived as part of an “entire political process with clearly defined principles” of creating a Palestinian state.

Sari Nusseibeh, one of the signers and a college professor who supports the Palestine Liberation Organization, explained: “This is a rejection of what has passed from Shamir’s lips so far. We are willing to go for elections, but it has to be made clear what they are about.”

During a visit to Washington in early April, Shamir proposed elections among Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to choose delegates to work out a five-year period of Palestinian self-rule under Israeli sovereignty. Talks on the final status of the land would follow the five-year “testing” period.

Shamir has said the occupied lands belong to Israel but that its 1.7 million Arab inhabitants should be allowed to manage their lives. He opposes Palestinian independence.

After Shamir made his election offer, numerous Palestinians offered responses. Arab activists say that Wednesday’s unified statement was designed to end such free-lance declarations.

Among the signers were Faisal Husseini, considered a key PLO contact in Jerusalem; Hanna Siniora, the editor of the Al Fajr newspaper; Gabi Baramki, head of Beir Zeit University; and known nationalist leaders in all the major towns in the territories.

Palestinian sources also emphasized that the Political Document was meant to dampen speculation that there are Arab partners for elections in the West Bank and Gaza Strip who are willing to exclude the PLO from peace talks. The PLO claims to have the loyalty of the large majority of Palestinians in the territories; Israel says the PLO’s grip is maintained by terror.

Both the PLO and the local Palestinian leaders insist that Israel negotiate with the PLO at an international conference. Israel has refused.

The Political Document concluded with a call for Israel to respond, indicating an effort to put Israel on the defensive in the international give-and-take over peace talks.

At its headquarters in Tunisia, the PLO publicized its conditions for holding West Bank and Gaza elections. The conditions included electoral supervision by the United Nations, withdrawal of the Israeli army and a guarantee that the vote be linked to independence. The PLO is likely to discuss the Shamir plan and its own response at its next meeting with U.S. officials expected by early May.

Publication of the Political Document here coincides with an increase in Palestinian fatalities in the face of Israeli suppression of the Arab uprising. During the past 10 days, at least 12 Palestinians have died in clashes with Israeli troops. On Wednesday, three were killed; one was an 8-year-old boy in the Tulkarm refugee camp on the West Bank.

The mounting toll has raised the influence of hard-liners in the West Bank and Gaza who are growing impatient with the pace of diplomacy, Palestinian sources said. The most recent leaflet of the clandestine leadership of the uprising pressed for an escalation of violence and in recent days, half a dozen accused collaborators have been killed by Palestinians on suspicion of spying for the Israelis. One was killed Wednesday, by the unusual means of automatic rifle fire, two on Tuesday.

The hard-liners, including a growing cadre of Muslim fundamentalists, contend that the only way to end Israel’s occupation is to turn from stone-throwing to armed rebellion and increase Israeli casualties. More than 400 Palestinians have been killed in the uprising, compared with about 15 Israelis.

The more moderate voices are arguing that diplomacy should be given a chance. Their argument has prevailed in part because militants are persuaded that Israel would win any armed showdown.

All sides rejected the elections as proposed by Shamir, one Palestinian analyst advised, because the plan presupposed an end to the intifada, as the uprising is known. The intifada is considered the sole tool for pressuring Israel to end its occupation.

The rejection of Shamir’s plan by the Palestinians challenged a main assumption of the prime minister: that local Arabs could be persuaded to sign on because it is in their interest to settle with Israel. Instead, the local leaders have publicly repudiated the vote they view as a half-measure.