The crisis of the Palestinian political parties and the phenomenon
of decreasing affiliation of the youth with them have been
associated with both sides of the political map - on one side, the
National Movement for the Liberation of Palestine, Fatah, the
Democratic Palestinian Union (Fida) and, to a certain extent, the
Palestinian People's Party (PPP); and, on the other, the Islamic
Resistance Movement (Hamas), the Popular Front for the Liberation
of Palestine (PFLP), the Democratic Front for the Liberation of
Palestine (DFLP) and others. This situation affected not only the
universities but also the Palestinian population at large. This
article attempts to analyze the present state of the student
movements, exemplified by the state of affairs on the Bir Zeit
University campus.
Bir Zeit's Impact
Bir Zeit University (BZU) was established in 1924, and since then
has played a major role in Palestinian political life. It is
associated with many remarkable politicians and community leaders
who left their imprint on the Palestinian political and social
landscape. Many such names occupying leadership roles come to mind,
such as the founder of the Popular Intifada Committees that led the
Intifada, Tayseer Arouri, lecturer at BZU, and later a member of
the Palestinian delegation to the peace negotiations at the Madrid
conference (1991) and Washington, D.C. Many members of that
delegation were either graduates of or staff members at BZU,
including Hanan Ashrawi, Ghassan Khatib and Nabil Kassis. Also, a
large number of the leaders of the Palestinian parties are BZU
graduates, for example Marwan Barghouti from Fatah, Bassam Al-Salhi
from the PPP, and Yahya Ayyash from Hamas. Others are now leaders
of public and non-governmental organizations and institutes, such
as Ghassan Khatib, director of the Jerusalem Media and
Communications Center (JMCC); Nabil Kassis, minister of Bethlehem
2000, and Issam Arouri, the financial manager of the Palestinian
Agricultural Relief Committees (PARC). These names and others are
evidence of the great influence and power BZU graduates and faculty
have had on the political scene. But what of the current state of
affairs?
The Left, Hamas, Fatah
Between 1979-1982, the time of the expansion of the leftist
parties, the student council was formed by the left coalition (the
former Palestinian Communist Party, now the PPP, the PFLP and the
DFLP), which together used to win the majority, sometimes in
conjunction with Fatah. The head of the student council was usually
from the left, and the leftist movement reached its peak in 1986.
With the rise of Fatah, the balance of power inside the university
started to shift.
At this stage, Fatah began to gain prominence at the expense of the
left until the 1990s, i.e., until the Oslo agreement (1993). Then,
in turn, Hamas took control with the support of many who
sympathized with the bombings organized by the leaders of its
military wing, Ezzedine al-Qassam. One of these activists was Yahya
Ayyash who graduated from BZU Electric Engineering Department. As
expected, the result was tremendous support for Hamas from the
students in all universities and colleges, except Bethlehem
University because of its Christian majority.
The Oslo agreement affected everybody, for better or for worse. The
Student Youth Movement - the student and youth body of Fatah - was
one of the overall losers. The corruption imputed to the
Palestinian National Authority (PNA), the violations of human and
civil rights, and the political, economic and social repression,
reflected negatively on Fatah, including the Student Youth
Movement. Most of the blame for the situation was placed on Fatah
as the ruling party and the main element on the Palestinian
political scene. And since the Student Youth Movement is a part of
Fatah, it was taken to task for the mistakes of the PNA.
This status put the Student Youth Movement in a very precarious
position, since it had to disagree with the PNA and act as the
loyal opposition in order to maintain support. Not only did it fail
to disagree with the PNA and to act as an opposition, but was also
drawn towards the different corrupt security factions in Fatah.
Financially, tens of thousands of dollars were given to the Student
Youth Movement via PNA channels. For these reasons and many others,
the Student Youth Movement lost a large part of its supporters and
members and faced defeat by the extremely fast-growing Islamic
Bloc, the student body of Hamas.
Hamas was, thus, the major party that benefited from the new
situation, from the negative image and actions of the PNA, from the
imprisonment of Hamas members by both the PNA and Israel, and from
the bombings they perpetrated in Israel. In addition to the
political aspect, the religious feelings emphasized in their
speeches and leaflets attracted many students. Another important
reason for their success was the financial support they got, which
enabled them to pay the water and electricity bills and rent for
the students that voted for them.
The Third Pole
On the other side was the leftist student movement, which is a
special case. The Progressive Students Union was involved in a
major conflict with its party the, PPP, when the latter entered the
PNA, a move which was opposed by the Union. Both the Progressive
Students Front - the student body of the PFLP - and the Progressive
Students Unity - the student body of the DFLP - faced a huge
disparity between what their parties stood for and what these
parties really did in practice. All this forced the leftist student
movements to find an alternative which happened to be the
Progressive Democratic Students Pole (PDSP) - or what was called
"The Third Pole" - and which was established in 1995. This new
movement represented the alternative to political repression
represented by Fatah and to the social repression represented by
Hamas.
The real need of the PDSP was to provide an alternative to a very
weak and scattered left movement. It was called a "progressive
student coalition that comprises student bodies and independent
personalities who believe in the democratic option, and who are
ready to fight for a free civil society on the basis of democracy,
and human and civil rights, as an alternative to social and
political repression."
Almost everybody - even left parties - betted against the PDSP and
said that it was a matter of time before it fell apart. Also, many
of those skeptics did their best in order to force its
failure.
At the outset, the PSDP faced major problems, but most of them were
solved or forgotten after the elections of 1998 in which the PSDP
increased its seats in the student council from 8 to 10. So what
really happened after all these successes?
The absence of a clear political program for the PSDP was one of
the main factors for its retreat in the 1999 elections from 10 to 9
seats, when it was expected to win some 12 seats. Another was the
re-establishment of the relationship between the PSDP and the PPP,
as well as the Progressive Students Front after the third
conference of the party [PFLP] in October 1998. This resulted in
competition inside the PSDP among the three original blocs.
The only way to distance the PSDP from the disputes of the
political parties outside the university is to rewrite the platform
on the basis of a coalition in order to guarantee pluralism, which
is vital for safeguarding independence as well as free thought and
political diversity for the original blocs.
A Lack of Content
The Palestinian student movement nowadays is in disarray. It is
ineffective in the face of developments on the ground. All it can
do is strike for a couple of hours (sometimes weeks), prompting the
leaders to make the same superficial and ambiguous speeches. The
only losers from the weakness of the student movement - and
especially the strikes - are the students themselves, since these
strikes accomplish nothing, but force the university to extend the
semester for a couple of additional weeks to allow the instructors
to complete the material.
A look at the leadership of the student movements shows their only
unique characteristic is that they have a vast network of
friendships. And in most internal elections voters don't consider
experience, excellence or merit; instead political affiliation,
personal relationships and good looks take precedence.
The responsibilities of the student movements are now greater than
ever, since they have to deal constructively with the economic and
financial problems affecting all the universities of the West Bank
and the Gaza Strip. Also, they have to face the harsh decisions
made by the administrations of the universities and the different
ministries of the PNA.
Further, they have to deal with a new generation of students that
belongs to the period of globalization and suffers from extremely
shallow minds, devoid of any idea about politics or even social
problems. Any political activity is doomed to failure, because the
students are no longer interested.
Grappling with these difficulties requires a qualitative change in
the work of the student blocs. These should concentrate on the
everyday problems of the students - academic, financial and
psychological. In order for the student movements to have a better
future, they should get closer to the students and try to speak to
them in their own language. The student movements should prepare
realistic political and social programs, and work credibly on their
implementation. Is this possible? Only the student movements can
answer this question, and in deeds, not talk.