Palestinian Thawabit: The Constant Non-Constants

Par Samah Jabr

On March 11, 2025, the Palestinian National Liberation Movement (Fatah) accused Hamas of attempting to conceal secret negotiations with foreign entities. Fatah claimed that Hamas is making continuous concessions on the thawabit—the so-called national constants.

In 1977, the Palestinian National Council declared a set of inviolable principles, branding them as thawabit.

When Palestinians invoke thawabit, they refer to principles that seem carved in stone, immutable, and beyond negotiation: the right to resistance, the right of return, Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine, and self-determination. These words echo in speeches, political statements, education, poetry, and banners. But are these constants truly constant? Or are they political constructs that shift according to interests and necessity? Do they protect Palestinians, or are they used to control and manipulate them?

The excessive use of thawabit in media and political discourse has not strengthened them—it has rendered them meaningless in practice.

The Contradictions

The right to resistance—a vague and elastic concept. Does it refer to nonviolent resistance, armed struggle, or both? Does it justify individual operations or only organized movements? The interpretation changes depending on the speaker’s political position.

The right of return—a sacred right in public discourse, yet behind closed doors, some leaders discuss “creative solutions” such as resettlement and compensation, others simply dismiss it as impractical.

Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine—a phrase uttered with pride at political rallies, yet officials do little to stop its Judaization. Some Palestinian leaders meet Israeli officials within the very city they claim as their capital, as if acknowledging the occupation has become an unspoken reality.

What Is Truly Constant?

Thawabit can serve as an excuse for inaction. There is a fundamental difference between thawabit as guiding principles that protect Palestinian rights and thawabit as empty slogans used to intimidate opponents and justify political paralysis.

When the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was forced out of Beirut in 1982, it declared: “Our thawabit will never change!” Yet, years later, the Oslo Accords marked a dramatic shift, violating nearly every previous constant. These concessions were not the result of national debate or a referendum but were justified under the guise of “political pragmatism,” leading to disastrous consequences.

Can we discuss the Thawabit?

The most pressing question is not only what the thawabit are, but who has the authority to define them.

Are they defined by the factions? Yet factions themselves are divided, each claiming to uphold the true thawabit.

Are they dictated by the Palestinian Authority? But this same authority has made concessions in the name of “political realism.”

Do they belong to the people? But the people themselves are caught between conflicting narratives: one of fiery resistance in public discourse and another of quiet adaptation to a grim reality.

Even Palestinian official documents reveal contradictions—some declare the thawabit “non-negotiable,” while others speak of “tactical flexibility,” often an euphemism for concessions.

A new Palestinian generation, having grown up amid failed peace agreements, political fragmentation, and siege, is beginning to ask questions that were once taboo:

• >If thawabit are so sacred, why do their definitions keep changing?
• Why have they failed to prevent factional divisions and the collapse of the national project?
• How can a discourse filled with unwavering principles coexist with a reality full of concessions?

In the besieged Jenin camp, as smoke rose from the ruins of yet another home, an old man wiped the dust from his face and said:

“They preach thawabit like a holy doctrine, but here, under siege, we’ve learned the truth—principles don’t protect you, maybe resistance does.”

Some may fear that questioning the thawabit weakens the Palestinian cause. But the real danger lies not in re-examining them, but in using them as a doctrine, to silence critical thinking and prevent meaningful change.

The goal is not to abandon our core rights, but to redefine them in a way that makes them practical and actionable, not just ceremonial phrases. Palestinians need thawabit that belong to all of us, reflecting our evolving struggle, rather than empty political rhetoric imposed from above.

* Dr. Samah Jabr is a consulting psychiatrist practicing in Palestine, serving the communities of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and former head of the mental health unit within the Palestinian Ministry of Health.
She is an associate clinical professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at George Washington University in Washington, DC.
She is also a member of the scientific committee of the Global Initiative against Impunity (GIAI) for International Crimes and Serious Human Rights Violations, a program co-financed by the European Union.

March, 12, 2025 – Transmitted by the author – French version