Citizenship is a cornerstone of civil peace in any society. However, the Palestinian context is complex, positioned between a governing authority aspiring to become a state and a national liberation phase aiming to end the occupation and achieve independence. This gives the concept of civil peace a particular significance.

In 2003, the Palestinian Authority issued the Basic Law and adopted a series of laws, with an established judiciary. Despite the ambiguity surrounding these laws, the absence of elections, lack of peaceful power transitions, decision-making by decree, legal division between Gaza and the West Bank (a result of the political split), and the dominance of the executive over the judiciary, one can still argue that a legal framework exists that can regulate the relationship between the citizen and the authority (the state).

It’s worth noting that the Basic Law is based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the philosophy of equal citizenship as laid out in the Palestinian Declaration of Independence issued by the Palestinian National Council in 1988.

Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza live under harsh conditions and face existential challenges aimed at liquidating their national cause, most notably through the genocidal war waged by the Israeli army on Gaza since October 8, 2023, a pattern also replicated in the West Bank through attacks on refugee camps and partial ethnic cleansing.

This aggression compels a renewed national liberation approach to confront the grave and existential threats facing the Palestinian people.

The ideas and actions of the fascist Israeli government clearly target all Palestinians. Smotrich, for example, declared that 2025 would be the year to resolve the conflict and annex the West Bank. Meanwhile, Ben Gvir’s call to annul the Oslo Accords through a new law in the Knesset reflects a desire to collapse or undermine the Palestinian Authority.

These declarations come amid expectations of Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency, a figure seen as unconditionally supportive of Israel. This support has manifested recently in projects like the forced displacement of Gaza residents and the idea of turning Gaza into a "Middle Eastern Riviera."

Therefore, the Palestinian Authority’s policy of neutrality or reliance on external changes is ineffective in the face of an Israeli government convinced that now is the ideal moment to liquidate the cause and carry out displacement—even if labeled as “voluntary.”

To safeguard civil peace, work must be done institutionally by forming a national unity government as per the Beijing Declaration, promoting political partnership within the PLO by integrating all national forces, making consensual decisions on war and peace, and redefining the PA as a service authority that strengthens citizen resilience and implements the rule of law from a citizenship-based perspective. This requires holding comprehensive elections to ensure inclusivity among all political factions.

On the societal level, efforts must be made to unify the social fabric and address the negative phenomena resulting from aggression—especially in Gaza—including war profiteering, inflation, theft, looting of aid, family and political tensions, and individualism. These differ greatly from the spirit of solidarity and mutual aid that prevailed during the first Intifada.

Israel continues to impose geographic and demographic fragmentation and division within the Palestinian community itself.

There’s now a growing psychological and cultural gap between Gaza and the West Bank, and within Gaza itself—between north and south, those displaced to Egypt and those who remained, refugees and citizens, as well as political factions deepened by the Fatah-Hamas split. Similar divisions also exist in the West Bank along regional, familial, and political lines.

Pointing out these divisions doesn’t diminish the positive resilience of the Palestinian people, especially Gaza’s legendary steadfastness during 15 months of aggression, including the symbolic return of displaced residents from south to north upon the ceasefire, affirming their commitment to the land and identity.

Highlighting negative phenomena is not self-flagellation; wars naturally produce both negative and positive behaviors. Bringing attention to these issues is a call to action—to find tools and mechanisms to fill gaps and restore cohesion in society’s structure.

Political actors, human rights organizations, civil society institutions, and civil peace bodies face a major challenge: to reestablish a cultural foundation based on solidarity and cohesion to strengthen social unity, and to build an institutional legal system rooted in equal citizenship and participatory, transparent governance.