Palestinians and their supporters are justified in celebrating the victory of the leftist presidential candidate, Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, in Brazil’s runoff election last week. But da Silva’s victory is incomplete and could ultimately prove ineffectual if not followed by a concrete and centralized Palestinian strategy. Da Silva has proven, throughout the years, to be a genuine friend of Palestine and Arab countries. For example, as president in 2010, he spoke of his dream of seeing “an independent and free Palestine” during a visit to the occupied West Bank. He also refused to visit the grave of Theodor Herzl, the father of Israel’s Zionist ideology. Instead, he visited Yasser Arafat’s tomb in Ramallah. Later that year, da Silva’s government recognized Palestine as an independent state within the 1967 borders. Da Silva’s rival — soon-to-be former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro — is an ideologue who has repeatedly professed his love for Israel and had pledged in 2018 to follow the US government’s lead in relocating his country’s embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Unlike other pro-Israel world leaders, Bolsonaro’s affection is ideological and unconditional. In a 2018 interview with the Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom, he said: “Israel is a sovereign state … If you decide what your capital is, we will follow you. You decide on the capital of Israel, not other people.” In a final and desperate move to win the support of Brazil’s evangelical Christians ahead of last week’s runoff, Bolsonaro’s wife, Michelle, donned a T-shirt bearing the Israeli flag. That gesture alone speaks volumes about Bolsonaro’s skewed agenda, which is symptomatic of many of Israel’s supporters around the world. Da Silva’s victory over Bolsonaro is testament to a changing world, where loyalty to Israel is no longer a guarantor of political success. This has proven true in the case of Donald Trump in the US, Liz Truss in the UK, Scott Morrison in Australia and now Brazil. Even the Israelis seem to have accepted this new, albeit unpleasant, reality. Interviewed by The Times of Israel, Brazilian scholar James Green explained that it behooves Israel to revise its view of da Silva. Green said that the newly reelected president should not be seen “as a radical, because he’s not, and in this campaign, he needed to show his moderation on all levels.” A willingness to engage with da Silva, though begrudgingly, was also expressed by Claudio Lottenberg, president of the Brazilian Israelite Confederation, the country’s largest pro-Israel Jewish organization. He last week issued a note expressing the group’s “permanent readiness for constructive and democratic dialogue” with da Silva. Brazil’s political transformation is sure to benefit the Palestinians, even though the fact da Silva leads an ideologically diverse coalition makes it more difficult for him to explore the same radical political spaces into which he ventured during his previous presidency between 2003 and 2010. It is also worth noting that Bolsonaro was a relatively important player in the global conservative, far-right political camp that attempted to legitimize the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Following the Australian government’s recent reversal of a 2018 decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, Bolsonaro’s defeat is another nail in the coffin of Trump’s so-called deal of the century. True, geopolitical changes are critical to the future of Palestine and the Palestinian struggle, but without a responsible Palestinian leadership that can navigate opportunities and confront growing challenges, da Silva’s victory can, at best, be seen as a symbolic one. Palestinians are aware of the massive changes underway regionally and globally. That has been demonstrated through the repeated visits by Palestinian political groups to Moscow and last month’s meeting between Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Kazakhstan. The latter meeting provoked the ire of Washington, which is incapable of lashing out in any meaningful way as that may push the Palestinians entirely into the Russian camp. Da Silva’s victory over Bolsonaro is testament to a changing world, where loyalty to Israel is no longer a guarantor of political success Ramzy Baroud Palestine is also becoming, once again, regionally relevant, if not central to Arab affairs, as indicated at last week’s Arab League summit in Algeria. However, for all these dynamic changes to be translated into tangible political achievements, Palestinians cannot proceed as fragmented entities. There are three major political trends that define Palestinian political action globally. First, there is the Palestinian Authority, which has political legitimacy as the legal representative of the Palestinian people but no actual legitimacy among Palestinians, nor a forward-thinking strategy. Second are the Palestinian political groups that are ideologically diverse and, arguably, more popular among Palestinians, but lack international recognition. Finally, there is the Palestinian-led international solidarity campaign, which has gained much ground as the voice of Palestinian civil society worldwide. While this has moral legitimacy, it is not legally representative of Palestinians. Additionally, without a unified political strategy, civil society achievements cannot be translated into solid political gains, at least not yet. So, while all Palestinians are celebrating da Silva’s victory as a victory for Palestine, there is no single entity that can alone harness the political and geopolitical change underway in Brazil as a definite building block toward helping the collective struggle for justice and freedom in Palestine. Until Palestinians revamp their problematic leadership or formulate a new kind of leadership through grassroots mobilization in Palestine itself, they should at least attempt to liberate their foreign policy agenda from factionalism, which is defined by a self-centered approach to politics. A starting point might be the creation of a transitional, non-factional political body of professional Palestinians with an advisory role agreed upon by all political groups. This can take place via the Palestine Liberation Organization, which has been marginalized by the PA for decades. This entity’s main role can be confined to surveying the numerous opportunities available on the global stage and to allow, however nominally, Palestinians to speak with one united voice. For this to happen, of course, major Palestinian groups would need to have enough goodwill to put their differences aside for the greater good; though not an easy feat, it is possible. • Ramzy Baroud has been writing about the Middle East for more than 20 years. He is an internationally syndicated columnist, a media consultant, an author of several books, and the founder of PalestineChronicle.com. Twitter: @RamzyBaroud