Ziyad Clot writes for the Guardian on why he leaked PA documents to al-Jazeera.
In Palestine, the time has come for national reconciliation. On the eve of the 63rd commemoration of the Nakba – the uprooting of Palestinians that accompanied the creation of Israel in 1948 – this is a long-awaited and hopeful moment. Earlier this year the release by al-Jazeera and the Guardian of 1,600 documents related to the so-called peace process caused deep consternation among Palestinians and in the Arab world. Covering more than 10 years of talks (from 1999 to 2010) between Israel and the PLO, the Palestine papers illustrated the tragic consequences of an inequitable and destructive political process which had been based on the assumption that the Palestinians could in effect negotiate their rights and achieve self-determination while enduring the hardship of the Israeli occupation.
My name has been circulated as one of the possible sources of these leaks. I would like to clarify here the extent of my involvement in these revelations and explain my motives. I have always acted in the best interest of the Palestinian people, in its entirety, and to the full extent of my capacity.
My own experience with the “peace process” started in Ramallah, in January 2008, after I was recruited as an adviser for the negotiation support unit (NSU) of the PLO, specifically in charge of the Palestinian refugee file. That was a few weeks after a goal had been set at the Annapolis conference: the creation of the Palestinian state by the end of 2008. Only 11 months into my job, in November of that year, I resigned. By December 2008, instead of the establishment of a state in Palestine, I witnessed on TV the killing of more than 1,400 Palestinians in Gaza by the Israeli army.
My strong motives for leaving my position with the NSU and my assessment of the “peace process” were clearly detailed to Palestinian negotiators in my resignation letter dated of 9th November 2008.
The “peace negotiations” were a deceptive farce whereby biased terms were unilaterally imposed by Israel and systematically endorsed by the US and EU. Far from enabling a negotiated and fair end to the conflict, the pursuit of the Oslo process deepened Israeli segregationist policies and justified the tightening of the security control imposed on the Palestinian population, as well as its geographical fragmentation. Far from preserving the land on which to build a state, it has tolerated the intensification of the colonisation of the Palestinian territory. Far from maintaining a national cohesion, the process I participated in, albeit briefly, was instrumental in creating and aggravating divisions among Palestinians. In its most recent developments, it became a cruel enterprise from which the Palestinians of Gaza have suffered the most. Last but not least, these negotiations excluded for the most part the great majority of the Palestinian people: the seven million Palestinian refugees. My experience over those 11 months in Ramallah confirmed that the PLO, given its structure, was not in a position to represent all Palestinian rights and interests.
Tragically, the Palestinians were left uninformed of the fate of their individual and collective rights in the negotiations, and their divided political leaderships were not held accountable for their decisions or inaction. After I resigned, I believed I had a duty to inform the public.
Shortly after the Gaza war I started to write about my experience in Ramallah. In my 2010 book, Il n’y aura pas d’Etat Palestinien (There will be no Palestinian State), I concluded: “The peace process is a spectacle, a farce, played to the detriment of Palestinian reconciliation, at the cost of the bloodshed in Gaza.” In full conscience, and acting independently, I later agreed to share some information with al-Jazeera specifically with regard to the fate of Palestinian refugee rights in the 2008 talks. Other sources did the same, although I am unaware of their identity. Taking these tragic developments of the “peace process” to a wider Arab and western audience was justified because it was in the public interest of the Palestinian people. I had – and still have – no doubt that I had a moral, legal and political obligation to proceed accordingly.
Today, I am relieved that this first-hand information is available to Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory, in Israel and in exile. In a way, Palestinian rights are back in their holders’ possession and the people are now in a position to make enlightened decisions about the future of their struggle. I am also glad that international stakeholders to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can access these documents. The world can no longer overlook that while Palestinians’ strong commitment to peace is genuine, the fruitless pursuit of a “peace process” framed according to the exclusive conditions of the occupying power leads to compromises which would be unacceptable in any other region of the globe.
Finally, I feel reassured that the people of Palestine overwhelmingly realise that the reconciliation between all their constituents must be the first step towards national liberation. The Palestinians from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Palestinians in Israel and the Palestinians living in exile have a common future. The path to Palestinian self-determination will require the participation of all in a renewed political platform.
P U L S E 
I appreciate that you helped to make the Palestine Papers public.
Because of Israel’s unique ownership and/or control (90% in USA)of mainstream media most of the USers thought it was the Palestinian side that was stubborn, uncooperative and demonized as vicious terrorists. The opposite is true.
I clearly recall President Clinton placing the responsibility for failed peace talks on the back of Yasser Arafat. Though Clinton later recanted those remarks of blame, but that bell can never be unrung.
I would never take any zionist statement at face value, the history of lies, deception, omission and lawyerly cunning is too overwhelming.
From “a land without a people” to ‘self-defense’ on Mavi Marmara to the anguished question of Saeb Erekat,”what more can I give them?”
Israeli deception reigns supreme.
The racist zionist experiment has given the world 63 years of bloodshed, legalized torture, targeted assassination, piracy, kidnapping, refugees, amputees, indefinite detention, pollution of the Holy Land with depleted uranium, dense inert metal explosives and white phosphorous, the crumbling Dimona nuclear reactor, along with constant torment of the indigenous population.
None of this bothers average Israelis, most have dual citizenships, other homes in other countries, they will simply move on after wringing Palestine’ natural resources dry.
But the zionist propaganda masters would have us believe that the fun loving, coffee drinking, militarized Israeli citizens have brought progress to an historic area.
If progress is destruction, ruination and deliberate provocations to divide & conquer, at such cost,who among the the rational would agree to this devil’s bargain?
What happened to morals?
Where is there any desire for peace on the zio side?
Does the world want such perpetual,noxious warmongering along with Israel’s refusal to honor humanitarian and international law?
A classic example of the rhetoric of the hate Israel loony in action. She deliberately neglects the genocidal attacks of Palestinian Arabs on Jews in the period before the creation of Israel, their rejection of the partition compromise and their attempt to make Israel Judenrein following the Nazi example which is still popular in much of the Arab world. One can hardly be concerned at whether she takes statements by Israel seriously since she has shown herself in this post to be little more than a moral leper. Even the BBC for example recognized that the Mavi Marmara was a deliberate attempt to provoke conflict and was not a humanitarian mission at all. What has happened to morals indeed that the ravings of genocidal terrorist thugs of Hamas and Hizbollah are granted legitimacy by these moral outcasts like Ms Bates as opposed to those of a democracy- which has created one of the highest standards of living in the Middle East for Jew and Arab alike. It is hardly surprising for example that a recent survey showed that a plurality of East Jerusalem Arabs stated they would rather move than lose their Israeli citizenship should East Jerusalem fall under the domination of the PA and Hamas. It is fascinating how little concern these moral hypocrites have for what the people on the spot want. Israel will continue to thrive in spite of the ill will of these lepers, but the prospects of a complete peace currently seem dim with the intransigence displayed by the Arab thugs in Hamas- soon to be part of the “Palestinian” government. The likes of Bates will not be satisfied except with massive genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Jewish peopulation- they however are dooned to disappointment.