Towards an Effective Constitution for Resilience… Not Another Farce

The most dangerous thing facing the Palestinian people today is not only the ferocity of the aggression but also the erosion of the national capacity to organize resilience and transform it into a revival project. We are facing a moment where both the balance of power and the balance of meaning are disrupted: when the accused of genocide becomes a partner in determining the fate of his victims, and when "aid" turns into tools of political control rather than an entry point for restoring dignity and sovereignty.

In the West Bank, land appropriation is accelerating, and the realities of a settler state are solidified under the protection of the occupation army, while decision-makers in Tel Aviv grapple between two options: dismantling the authority all at once, or keeping it weak and drained while it fulfills its security and administrative functions until the dismantling of the national cause is completed slowly. In both options, there is no place for an authority with national sovereign content, but rather for a temporary function in a permanent system of dependency.

In Gaza, the moral paradox is even more glaring: Israel, accused of genocide before international courts, is practically in the seat of determining the fate and trajectory of the region. It controls the crossings, regulates the relief efforts, and decides the pace of reconstruction, all while Palestinians are asked to accept management under direct or indirect Israeli control.

Here emerges what can be termed as “the crumbs of administrative arrangements” offered by Washington to the authority. This is not about real political empowerment, nor control over the crossings, nor an independent decision in reconstruction or security; rather, it’s about limited coordinating roles restored through channels such as the "Mladenov Liaison Office," which is merely an administrative facade without sovereignty, and a symbolic role designed to say that “the authority exists,” while the actual decision remains in the hands of the occupation.

This is not a transitional solution but rather a reproduction of an intermediary function between the occupation and the international community, managed under the banner of “stability,” while stability is drained of its moral condition: justice.

It is more dangerous that this scene accompanies an Arab and Islamic silence that approaches the limits of passive complicity. No one openly proclaims acceptance of Israel's seat in determining Gaza's fate, yet no one exerts their political weight to prevent it. Regional calculations, balance of alliances, and fear of clashing with Washington lead many capitals to limit themselves to minimal humanitarian support that does not touch the core of the political equation.

As four months pass since the ceasefire, the mass killings have not ceased, and nothing fitting for the dignity of people emerging from genocide and rubble has entered Gaza. There is no adequate relief, nor a single mobile home restoring even the minimum degree of stability. Collective punishment appears to continue with other tools, and reconstruction seems to be used as a card for political blackmail rather than an original humanitarian right.

The Deeper Crisis: Selling Illusions Instead of Building Strength

In this context, the ruling authority continues to place bets on international and regional changes that have done nothing in the face of money piracy, the acceleration of settlement, or the re-engineering of Gaza under a mandate. The rhetoric of waiting is being reproduced as if external transformations will achieve what we have failed to build internally.

But betting on the outside, amid an imbalance of power, is not a strategy but a political habit. The worst is when this coincides with an exclusionary policy towards the living forces of society at a moment when the highest levels of national partnership are needed.

The crisis is not only about losing land but also about the fragmentation of representation. When national decision-making is reduced to a narrow circle, the political system loses its ability to endure and becomes more susceptible to pressure and containment. The question is no longer who governs Gaza? But how do we safeguard the survival of a people and prevent the liquidation of their cause?

Towards an Effective Constitution for Resilience

What is needed today is not an additional statement, nor a technical settlement, but rather a moral political covenant that redefines priorities on the basis of dignity rather than function, according to the following priorities:

First: Priority of Dignity Over Formal Roles

Any acceptance of a non-sovereign administrative role in Gaza, under the roof of Israeli control, is an entrenchment of the fragmentation of the nation, not an entry point to unify it. Moreover, this role has no meaning unless it achieves relief, reconstruction, and saving lives.

Second: Rebuilding Representation on the Basis of Partnership

It is impossible to confront a replacement project with a mentality of exclusive decision-making. A comprehensive national framework is required, even if transitional, that includes political and social forces and is based on a minimum program: lifting the siege, protecting the land, transparent management of reconstruction, and preparing for the renewal of legitimacy through comprehensive elections.

Third: Transforming Resilience from Reaction to Policy

Resilience is not a heroic waiting under fire; rather, it is organizing society, supporting threatened villages, enhancing the local economy, and building networks of solidarity independent of donor moods.

Fourth: Separating Relief from Blackmail

The reconstruction of Gaza is a non-negotiable right, and it should be managed through a transparent national professional mechanism that prevents the transformation of suffering into a leverage tool.

Fifth: Shifting the Center of Gravity to the Interior

The balance of power begins with society: unions, universities, national economic powers, the diaspora, and popular movements. When this bloc becomes an organized force for pressure, the rebuilding of the political house can be imposed.

Sixth: Popular Resistance

Giving the people the freedom to defend themselves and their right to exist. This is not just a statement but a work strategy that rebuilds the Palestinian case starting from its essential function, which is empowering people's ability to endure.

The hope in the Palestinian experience is not a transient emotional reaction nor a mobilization discourse, but the ability of a people to regain initiative when options narrow. Nations are not saved by mere wishes but by an awareness of themselves, their confidence in their latent strength, and their ability to rearrange their internal house whenever storms intensify.

It is true that Israel bets on the fragmentation of our national structure, and that some in the world bet on exhausting our will to the point of fatigue, but history teaches us that peoples that understand the meaning of their unity through a rational revolutionary reading are not drained but rather renewed. The real danger does not lie solely in external pressures but in our acceptance to redefine impotence as "realism," or to replace the liberation project with a permanent management of dependency.

Pursuing an effective constitution for resilience does not mean adding a document to the archives but rather restoring politics to its tangible meaning, a free expression of collective will, not a function subordinate to the conditions of others. It means rebuilding national representation on the basis of partnership, legitimacy, and dignity, so that national decision becomes a product of mutual trust between the leadership and the people, not a reflection of external pressure balances.

We stand at a historical crossroads, but it is not a closed fate. We either reestablish our political home with a spirit of responsible national review that is based on trust in the people and their competence, or we leave our vacuum to be filled by the maps of others that do not recognize our right to freedom, return, self-determination, and sovereignty.