Palestinian armchair quarterbacking

Ahmed Samih Khalidi writes in the Guardian that a Palestinian state would be bad for Palestinians:

Today, the Palestinian state is largely a punitive construct devised by the Palestinian's (sic) worst historical enemies; Israel and its implacable ally, the US. The intention behind the state today is to constrain Palestinian aspirations territorially, to force them to give up on their moral rights, renege on their history and submit to Israel's diktats on fundamental issues of sovereignty...[T]his concept [of a Palestinian state] is less attractive than ever. Olmert demands of Palestinians that they must give up their history.

But what, then, should Palestinians seek? Khalidi offers a rather vague alternative:

Palestinians may just opt for something else. They could evoke Olmert's worst nightmare and call for a more equitable and fair resolution that is built on a different basis; one of mutual respect, equality and mutuality, and a sense of genuine partnership in sharing the land. Or Palestinians could simply continue to say no to a state that does nothing to address its basic needs. Either way, its hard to see how Israel can win this struggle in the long term.

What this "more equitable and fair resolution" would happen to be, Khalidi declines to say. Nor does he explain why it would constitute "Olmert's worst nightmare."

It's hard not to interpret this editorial as saying that Palestinians can win on the battlefield what they would be denied at the negotiating table. The "history" that Olmert demands Palestinians "give up" means the land that is currently Israel. Khalidi is suggesting that that Palestinians not settle for the West Bank and Gaza, and instead try to "win this struggle in the long term."

That kind of rah-rah militarism may work just fine for a scholar safe in his office at Oxford half a world away. But military struggle has done precious little for the Palestinians over the past three decades, and there's little reason to think it would be more successful over the next three. In fact, the main results of Palestinian irredentist warfare have been grinding poverty and the gradual loss of most of the Palestinians' Middle Eastern allies (only Syria and Iran now support continued Palestinian military struggle).

Palestinians would do well to ignore the advice of armchair quarterbacks like Ahmed Samih Khalidi. And the armchair quarterbacks should take a moment to think about whether massaging their own ethnic pride is worth the livelihoods of millions of their supposed countrymen.