Palestinian Official Argues for Preserving, Reforming Palestinian Authority Post-Oslo
Palestinian politician Nabil Amr stated that judging the Oslo Accords 33 years after their signing as simply right or wrong is insufficient for understanding the current reality. He described the accords as an important promise to Palestinians, but attributed the major setbacks to poor management of the subsequent phase and a lack of Israeli political will to resolve the Palestinian issue. Amr emphasized that the remaining elements of Oslo, particularly the Palestinian National Authority and its institutions, must be preserved, reformed, and have their powers expanded, rather than being abandoned.
Amr recalled being among the majority of Palestinians who supported Yasser Arafat and the accords at the time, acknowledging that supporters were acting on political promises and possibilities without guarantees of achieving their desired outcome. He argued that judging Oslo based on events since October 7th, or the current situation in Gaza and the West Bank, could be unfair to its original proponents. He noted that the agreement was not guaranteed to succeed from the outset, nor was it likely to gain universal Israeli approval.
The accords addressed core issues like Jerusalem, refugees, the right of return, borders, and settlements. However, Amr observed that the course of events has led to a different reality where issues such as freedom of movement, opening crossings, job creation, and Gaza's reconstruction are now prominent daily concerns. He stressed that this does not negate the Palestinian political vision, asserting that discussions about Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine are not unrealistic, especially with over 300,000 Palestinians residing within the Jerusalem Governorate.
While much of Oslo has faded, Amr insisted that what remains, especially the Palestinian National Authority and its established institutions, can be built upon. He considers abandoning these institutions or returning their authority to Israel a mistaken choice, advocating instead for political and Palestinian life reform, genuine change, and an expansion of the Authority's administrative scope.
Amr attributed Oslo's failure not solely to the agreement itself, but also to the Israeli political leadership's inability to offer a political solution and what he described as international dereliction in preventing its failure. Regarding the West Bank, he acknowledged that settlements, checkpoints, and settler violence are daily realities but have not deterred Palestinians from their aspirations. He affirmed their determination to establish their state, despite repeated political setbacks. Amr believes that continued Palestinian presence on the ground, coupled with international sympathy, offers a foundation for the future, noting ongoing shifts in international stances towards Israel in Europe and the United States.
