Mansour Abbas, head of the United Arab List in the Israeli Knesset, told Al-Quds Al-Arabi that no one can outdo the Islamic Movement, the parent movement of the United Arab List, which has been dedicated for decades to maintaining a presence in Jerusalem and at Al-Aqsa Mosque. He emphasized that he is seeking understandings and agreements on a division of roles between his movement and the other Arab parties, and on the necessity of working according to the principle of "averting harm and bringing benefits."
Despite the declared agreement by the Arab parliamentary parties within the 1948 territories to join a joint list, efforts to establish it are faltering. Yesterday, a meeting in Nazareth that brought together its politicians ended without a result, with an agreement to reconvene on Tuesday and again on Thursday to resolve the matter.
In January, under pressure from the Arab public, the Arab parties announced in Sakhnin their agreement to form a joint list again. However, progress has been slow and without concrete results, despite the fact that they have met only three times.
Last month, the four Arab parties participating in the Israeli Knesset elections agreed on the principle of a "technical pluralism" list, meaning that each party would be free to act as it sees fit after the elections.
The "National Reconciliation Committee," headed by the writer and literary figure Muhammad Ali Taha, clarified that this designation means preserving each party's right to remain in the opposition, participate in an alternative governing coalition to the current Israeli government, contribute to providing it with a "safety basket," or form a "blocking bloc."
Despite the Arab parties' agreement on this, the "United Arab List," headed by MK Mansour Abbas, expressed doubt that the other parties would agree to the "technical" approach.
In the last meeting, the United Arab List demanded a commitment to refrain from accusing its politicians of treason and apostasy should it decide to participate in an alternative coalition after the general elections next September, if Netanyahu's government does indeed fall.
It also demanded that the other parties commit to not participating in bringing down such an alternative government, as happened with the change government headed by Lapid and Bennett.
The other Arab parties—the Democratic Front for Peace and Equality, headed by MK Ayman Odeh; the Arab Movement for Change, headed by MK Ahmad Tibi; and the National Democratic Assembly, headed by Sami Abu Shehadeh—reject this.
These parties believe it is impossible to determine a position on an alternative government that has not yet been formed, and whose participants and policies on national and civic issues are unknown.
Al-Quds Al-Arabi learned from a source who participated in the aforementioned meeting that Ahmad Tibi asked Mansour Abbas: "What do you want our position and your position to be if, for example, ministers of the future government storm Al-Aqsa Mosque?"
In response, Mansour Abbas told Al-Quds Al-Arabi that no one can outdo the Islamic Movement, the parent movement of the United Arab List, which has been committed for decades to maintaining a presence in Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa Mosque.
When asked, Abbas stated that he is seeking understandings and agreements on a division of roles between his movement and the other Arab parties, emphasizing that there are "bittersweet" options and that it is necessary to consider and act according to the principle of "averting harm and bringing benefits." The
United Arab List had presented the other parties with a written proposal for all aspects of political partnership at the last meeting, which the other parties considered a step backward and an attempt to stall and waste time.
During that meeting, Tibi reminded the United Arab List representatives that it had previously rejected two partnership proposals put forward by the three parties months earlier. Mansour Abbas denied this, asserting that the United Arab List's proposal is comprehensive, takes into account all considerations and needs, and views the situation from a broader perspective.
At the meeting, Tibbi called on the “United” to accept a working paper presented by the “Reconciliation Committee,” and continued: “We in the three parties agree to it, so join us, and in doing so we will move out of the political debate and move to settling the issue of arranging the seats on the electoral list, its leadership, the election campaign, etc.”
Zero point
Following Sunday's negotiations, the National Democratic Assembly issued a statement expressing its deep concern over the continued stalling of negotiations to establish a joint list, despite the progress made in recent weeks and the responsible concessions offered to overcome obstacles and reach an agreement that meets the aspirations of our people and strengthens their unity in the face of the unprecedented challenges confronting our nation and society.
The Assembly added: "The Assembly has adopted a clear and responsible position in recent weeks. While it prefers a joint list based on a political agreement and a shared program, it has also expressed a clear and public willingness to establish a technically based joint list that preserves the independence and political and organizational distinctiveness of all parties."
Ahmad Tibi addressed Mansour Abbas with the question: “What would you like our position and your position to be if, for example, ministers of the future government stormed Al-Aqsa Mosque?”
The National Democratic Assembly (Balad) recalled a tripartite statement in which the Democratic Front for Peace and Equality (Hadash), the National Democratic Assembly (Balad), and the Arab Movement for Change (Ta'al) expressed their acceptance of the proposal, which formed a realistic basis for progress toward reaching an agreement.
Balad believes that Mansour Abbas's return to the idea of a "political joint list," in line with the United Arab List's approach but under a technical guise and in a format that includes prior political commitments guiding the positions and future choices of other parties—including pushing for support for a government in which he is a partner or defining and controlling the form of opposition—contradicts the principle of a technical list and respect for the autonomy of the parties. It constitutes a retreat from this principle, returns negotiations to square one, and represents a new attempt to prolong them instead of moving toward the desired agreement.
Balad emphasized that the path to achieving a joint list is clear and well-known: establishing a technically based joint list without political oversight or imposing commitments that contradict the independence of the parties and their political positions.
The National Democratic Assembly called on all parties to act with national responsibility, refrain from introducing new conditions or reopening previously settled issues, and work seriously and immediately to finalize the agreement and complete the joint list. This is essential to meet the aspirations of our constituents and their need for the broadest possible unity and solidarity at this critical juncture.
The Assembly's delegation affirmed in yesterday's meeting that the party's bodies will review the results of the current and upcoming rounds of negotiations, as agreed upon, and will then make decisive decisions on this matter by the end of this week. This adherence to the agreed-upon timeframe, which was set as the deadline for finalizing the joint list, will allow us to present our constituents with a clear agreement that fulfills their aspirations and strengthens their political presence.Al-Muwahida's comment
In its response to the negotiations and the position of the three parties, the United Arab List stated that the fundamental difference between its stance and that of the other parties in the ongoing negotiations is that the United Arab List articulates its demands clearly and is fully aware of them. This is part of its approach; it does not operate with an opposition mentality.
The United Arab List stated that it entered the negotiations fully aware of its objectives and presented a list of points, some of which are fully binding, while others constitute understandings or are open for negotiation.
The other side, unfortunately, does not articulate its demands and merely objects to one point or another, or even just a section of a point, without actually presenting its own position.
The statement continued: “We agree with the parties on the necessity of forming the Joint List to oust Netanyahu, but is it reasonable for ousting Netanyahu to remain merely a slogan, as it was in the past?”
She asserted that she was speaking from the perspective of someone with experience, not a theorist. She had effectively brought down Netanyahu and was part of the coalition government, while other parties scrambled to devise laws in collaboration with Netanyahu, Smotrich, and Ben-Gvir to topple that coalition government.
She asked, “Is it reasonable to return to the same scenario without agreements that guarantee the achievements and interests of the Arab community? Is it conceivable, for example, to replace Netanyahu today without recommending Naftali Bennett or Eisenkot as alternatives? Will we go back to selling slogans to the people and deluding them into believing there are hidden or unrealistic options in Israeli politics?”
She continued, “We aspire for the parties to understand the demands of the Joint List, to broaden their horizons and set aside their egos. It’s not enough to simply tell people we want a joint list and repeat this just to avoid criticism. The important thing is to explain how this list will function, how it will replace the right-wing government, and how it will contribute to keeping the right wing in the opposition.”
Tags:
asiawest
