Last September, Israeli Prime Minister Rabin stated with characteristic crudeness, "I would like to wake up in the

morning and find that Gaza has drowned in the sea, but since that won't happen we must seek a solution". He now seems to have found such a solution. The agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organisation has been portrayed as a turning point in Middle East history. Indeed it is; but, far from being the first step in a process which will inevitably lead to full Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied in 1967 and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, as has been argued even by some on the left, the agreement represents a significant defeat for the Palestinian masses - the workers, peasants and refugees whose victories in the 5 year Intifada are now to be overturned by the Palestinian bourgeoisie and the external leadership of the PLO. The agreement, which reflects the setback to the PLO following the Gulf War, in effect formalises the status of the Palestinians as a colonised people. Except for one important, but symbolic, aspect, nothing in this agreement was not implied in the 1978 Camp David agreement between Israel and Egypt, which was rightly denounced by the PLO and the left. Indeed, in many ways this deal falls short of the principles agreed between Begin and Sadat, since it confines the area of Palestinian 'autonomy' to the Gaza Strip and the town of Jericho. It does not end the occupation, even in Gaza and Jericho; instead, it replaces direct with indirect Israeli rule and coopts the PLO, which has effectively agreed to police the occupation on Israel's behalf. The one symbolic innovation is Israel's recognition of the PLO, previously regarded by Israeli leaders as 'terrorists', 'two legged animals' and even 'cockroaches'. This major shift in Israel's position has not come because the Israeli government has suddenly become convinced of the justice of the Palestinian cause; it is the price Israel has had to pay in order to continue its control over the Palestinian people. As the Evening Standard commented, in this project the PLO is 'Israel's surprising natural ally'. The reason for this convergence of interests is to be found in the dual nature of the Palestinian Intifada, which erupted in December 1987 after over 20 years of Israeli occupation and has continued ever since, achieving both national and class gains. The national gains of the Intifada are well known. It has united the Palestinian people against the Israeli occupation, and destroyed Israel's system of control. In the early stages of the occupation, from 1967 until about 1970, Israel repressed any expression of Palestinian resistance with a massive army presence. During this period, a network of local collaborators and informers was established; this development allowed Israel to mediate the occupation through its local agents rather than with a continuing massive armed presence, and enabled Israeli propagandists to peddle the myth of the 'benign occupation'. The Intifada has eliminated this collaboration as a systematic method of controlling the Palestinian population, obliging Israel to flood the occupied territories with troops in order to maintain control. This has proved costly, not only financially but also in terms of public discontent, resistance of reserve soldiers, and Israel's overseas image. In class terms, the Intifada represented a new stage in the Palestinian struggle. Unlike earlier bouts of unrest, which were based largely around the colleges and universities of the occupied territories, the Intifada has been based among the poorest and most deprived sections of the Palestinian people - the refugees, the peasants (whose land is increasingly being confiscated for Zionist settlements), and the day labourers in the Israeli economy. Their importance can be seen not only in their preponderance in the casualty lists, but also in the class nature of many of the demands on the Palestinian bourgeoisie - demands regarding work conditions, wages, prices, rents, women's rights. It was this aspect of the Intifada that inspired popular risings in other Arab countries, notably Jordan; and it is in opposition to this class struggle that a common interest has developed between Israel, the PLO leadership, the Arab regimes, the USA and the World Bank. These forces have now joined forces in order to turn back the class gains of the Intifada. In addition to recognising the PLO, Israel has agreed to train a Palestinian police force; the World Bank has promised economic aid totalling $4 billion over the next ten years (Israel receives $5

billion annually from the USA). These offers are not charity, but an expression of a shared interest in supporting the new regime. But the success of the plan is far from assured, and Arafat faces serious opposition. Several leading figures have resigned from the PLO executive and denied the legitimacy of Arafat's leadership; the agreement has been denounced by the left opposition within and outside the PLO, by the Islamic movements, and by significant forces within Fatah; his only consistent support comes from the former Palestine Communist Party. Meanwhile, PLO offices around the world are being closed down, and the International Network of NGOs involved in Palestine has decided to cease meeting. In Britain, the Joint Committee for Palestine is considering winding up its operation, while the Palestine Solidarity Campaign maintains an embarrassed silence. Socialists can be in no doubt that this imperialist agreement is a setback for the Palestinian people. Their struggle, however, will continue; we must deepen and strengthen our solidarity.