After the postponement of the elections: a dialogue that begins with review... not with reproduction of the crisis

Writer: Walid Al-Awad

After about six months of preoccupation with the election file, and the broad political discussions that accompanied it, the file was temporarily closed, following dialogues between the Fatah and Hamas movements and a number of Palestinian forces that demanded going to a comprehensive national dialogue before holding it, which was approved by the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization in its meeting held today, Saturday 10-10-2026.

But temporarily closing the election file does not mean dropping it or postponing it for an indefinite period, just as the national dialogue should not turn into a new station for postponing entitlements. Elections are a democratic necessity to renew legitimacy and rebuild the political system, provided that conditions are available that guarantee the unity of the land, the system and institutions, and the free participation of our people, away from plans of separation and guardianship.

The question that imposes itself: Will the dialogue be an opportunity to address the Palestinian political crisis from its roots, or merely a transition from one file to another, while the causes of the crisis remain?

The importance of this question is doubled in light of the unprecedented dangers facing our people three years after the genocidal war on the Gaza Strip, and the killing, destruction, displacement and starvation it left behind, and the accompanying attempts to undermine the Palestinian cause and reshape its future according to external wills.

Therefore, the dialogue should not begin with sharing sites or arranging relations between the political forces, nor should it be limited to the date of the elections and the conditions for holding them. Rather, it should start from a courageous and frank national review of the Palestinian experience, and the choices, decisions and results of the political forces, leading to drawing lessons and correcting the course.

The review is not a political trial or settling scores, but rather a national responsibility that requires frankness with the people.Identifying deficiencies, admitting mistakes without selectivity or ambiguity, and holding each party responsible according to its position and role. It is not acceptable for us to face existential risks by ignoring what happened, exchanging accusations, or reproducing the same policies and waiting for different results.

The review should include the management of the conflict with the occupation, the repercussions of division, the performance of the political system and its institutions, the reasons for the inability to restore unity, and the extent of our ability to protect our people and confront plans for displacement, separation, and guardianship.

At the forefront of this is the necessity of restoring the role and status of the Palestine Liberation Organization as the sole legitimate representative of our people, and rebuilding its institutions on democratic and participatory foundations, in a way that strengthens the unity of national representation, restores respect to the common national program, and protects independent national decision-making.

The review must also lead to redefining the direction of the national project, and moving from the square of authority to the square of the state, as an embodiment of our people’s right to self-determination, independence, and sovereignty. This requires employing the expanding circle of international recognition of the State of Palestine in practical political and diplomatic steps that enhance its position and confront attempts to circumvent its national project.

In this context, there is a need for a unified Palestinian position regarding efforts to impose external arrangements on the Gaza Strip, including what is being proposed under the name of the “Peace Council,” and to ensure that they do not turn into an entry point for guardianship, separating Gaza from the West Bank and Jerusalem, or bypassing the PLO and the institutions of the Palestinian state. The future of Gaza is a Palestinian national matter, and it cannot be decided in isolation from the unity of the land, the people, and political representation.

Preventing the renewal of the war of extermination must be at the forefrontGaza must prioritize national action, through unified political and diplomatic action that ensures the establishment of a ceasefire, stops killing, destruction and displacement, provides international protection, and accelerates the introduction of aid and reconstruction, in a way that preserves the right of our people to remain on their land and live in freedom and dignity.

These tasks are not complete without seriously addressing the issues of people in Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem, responding to their humanitarian and living needs, addressing the crises of employees and affected groups, and rebuilding what was destroyed by the war. A dialogue whose results are not reflected in the lives of citizens, their rights, and the future of their children loses its national and social content.

However, the review, no matter how frank, will not achieve its goal unless it turns into a binding national program, a real political partnership, unified institutions, and clear mechanisms to implement what is agreed upon.

Hence, choosing the date for the dialogue is not a passing procedural issue, but rather a political decision that should take into account the precision and sensitivity of the stage, including the Israeli electoral entitlements and calculations and their potential repercussions on the Palestinian scene. The Palestinian initiative must not remain a hostage to waiting and external developments. Rather, what is required is to set a clear date for the dialogue and a binding time frame for achieving its outcomes.

The elections should not be lost again in the maze of postponement, but rather the dialogue should lead to a clear consensus on the conditions and dates for holding them, ensuring the participation of our people in Gaza and the West Bank, including Jerusalem, preserving the unity of the political system, and preventing the perpetuation of separation between parts of the nation.

Our people, who have paid heavy prices, do not deserve a dialogue to manage the crisis, but rather a dialogue to get out of it. It does not require temporary settlements to be restoredProducing division, but rather a political will that places the national interest, confronting the occupation, and protecting the rights of the people above factional interests and organizational calculations.

A dialogue that does not begin with an explicit review will remain vulnerable to reproducing the crisis, and a review that does not lead to real change will remain merely postponed talk. Between them lies our national responsibility: to be frank with our people, learn from our experience, restore our unity, and open a political path that protects their rights and preserves their national project, leading to freedom, independence, and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.