|
-
On the eve of the sixtieth anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba,
how do you evaluate the stage that the conflict with the Zionist
project has reached?... where did this project fail?... where did
it succeed?... what has really been achieved by the resistance
forces, the people of Palestine and the nation at large?... and,
what is the role of these forces in this dangerous stage of the
conflict?.
At the beginning,
it must be noted that answering this question would not be
possible through only a few lines or a few pages, as the issue in
question is rather a comprehensive computation project aimed at
grasping the harvest of the sixty years of Nakba and the previous
history of conflict.
Starting with ourselves, the sum was regrettably a series of
defeats and retreats, whereas Arabs and Palestinians failed to
achieve the objective of liberating Palestine. As for what had
been achieved in terms of steadfastness and limited or partial
victories , during the past decades, some of these achievements
were aborted- as has been the case with the 1973 victory- through
Egypt's recognition of Israel and the signing of Camp David
accords, while other achievements – such as the resistances'
victories that prevented the loss of rights and the liquidation of
the cause- could not reach the objective of liberation, which is
the responsibility of the whole nation….
Regarding the harvest of the Zionist project, it succeeded in
establishing the Israeli entity on the land of Palestine. However,
it failed to transform this land into a safe homeland to which all
Jews of the world could be brought…. Today, the number of Jews
inside this entity is about five millions. Even though, the entity
still suffers from a sharp identity crisis, either in terms of
ethnic strifes, or as a result of conflicts between secularist and
orthodox Jews. Moreover, this entity failed to merge into the
region, and, despite all its breakthroughs recognized by some Arab
regimes, it still acts as a fortress , a barracks or a ghetto, as
witnessed by the racist wall in the West Bank… for the peoples of
this region, it will always be a bizarre entity which must be
removed… but the worst failure tested by the Zionist project was
that it could not do away with the Palestinian people, neither
through genocide, as once perpetrated by the Americans against the
red Indians, nor through completely uprooting it from its land,
for, today, the Palestinian presence on the land of historic
Palestine makes up a population of over five million people,
approximately the same size as the Jewish presence there, and
serves as the best guarantee to protect the Palestinian cause from
liquidation… it is the duty of resistance forces, for their
mission- under the current power balance- is far from achieving
victory, but rather safeguarding the Palestinian cause against
liquidation and preventing the loss of the nation's right in it.
-
What are the causes of Arab defeats and failures throughout the
history of conflict, against the causes of the Zionist project's
success in creating the Israeli entity... would it be possible to
deepen the failures of this project and make use of them in
managing the conflict?
By retail, the causes of defeats and the people responsible for
them differed according to the conflict stages- the causes of the
first Nakba, back in 1948, were much different from the causes of
the second Nakba, later in 1967, and the two were different from
those behind the transformation of the 1973 victory into a defeat,
in Camp David (1978), and the disintegration after the 1991 Gulf
war, up till the occupation of Iraq in 2003.
Generally, however, there are certain reasons that could almost
make "common denominators" or constant factors through all stages…
these are exactly the focus of our attention… they are such
reasons as: the failure to understand the nature of the Zionist
project; division ,split and the absence of national unity;
regimes' and governments' dependence on outside forces; powers'
imbalance ; and the alienation of Islam or the prevention of its
role in managing the conflict on the part of these regimes…
These factors, per se (rather than the inoperative weapons, for
example) were the ones that resulted in the first Nakba.
On the contrary, the Zionist project knew what it really wanted;
it knew the nature of the enemy, carefully identified its goals
and tools and mobilized not only the world Jewry, but also the
superpowers, in its service… those superpowers were ready to play
this role, as the Zionist enterprise had partly been a colonial
one and a spearhead to the whole colonial west… the abovementioned
relation provided the Zionist project with all means of material,
moral, military, political, and organizational strength it needed,
while, simultaneously , placing the Palestinians and Arabs under a
total siege, at a time when these Arabs lived a bitter reality
of division, dependence and backwardness, after some of them
having been involved in conspiracy or deceived by colonial powers'
promises regarding the contribution to the fall of the Ottoman
Empire, as was the case with Sharif Hussein and others who bet on
the west, which came in the first place to divide the Arab and
Islamic Levant (Sykes- Pico, 1916) and the implant of the Israeli
entity (Balfour's promise, 1917). The west had never forgot its
bitter feelings nor its historic or dogmatic vengeances, whereas
general Allenby stood up in Jerusalem in 1918, to say:"… today,
the crusades are over…" and so did the French General Guru, who
kicked Saladin's grave in Damascus and said"… Saladin, we are
back…"!
The British mandate, or occupation of Palestine continued for
about thirty years, during which the Zionist gangs- under the
British umbrella – managed to bring into effect their project,
based upon immigration, land appropriation and perpetrating
massacres (Deir Yassin) in order to terrify the Palestinians and
force them to leave, while the slogan of Arab official
leaderships, inside and outside Palestine, was to bet on "our
friend Britain", as happened during the 1936 strike which the Arab
leaderships aborted trough calling the Palestinian people to relax
and count on Britain's promises and, later, when the British
declared the end of their mandatory rule the moment it became
clear that the Zionist project was ripe and ready to declare the
birth of the Zionist entity on 14/5/1948.
The Arab leadership was responsible for the 1948 Nakba. However,
the causes of defeat did not vanish with the disappearance of the
leaderships… and the nationalists' tide era of the 50's and the
60's was in no better condition, despite the presence of high
morale fueled by a call to liberate Palestine, fight and defeat
the colonists and vanquish Israel… hence, the disaster and defeat
of 1948 tasted much more bitter, with the fall of Jerusalem and
the further occupation of the rest of Palestine in addition to
more than three fold its area of Arab lands in Sinai and the Golan
heights… furthermore, the October 1973 war failed to wipe out the
causes and effects of defeat, as which as it failed to remove the
bearings of aggression… as demanded by the Arabs after their
defeat, because the October victory has quickly been transformed
into another defeat as a result of Sadat's recognition of Israel
and the beginning of new stage in the history of conflict: the
stage of acceptance and recognition of Israel , which had been
perpetuated until the region has arrived at Madrid conference
(1991) and, then, the disaster of signing Oslo accords in 1993,
which presented a revolution in the history of conflict, the
effects of which are still felt today…
The important variant, since the inception of the so called"
Middle East settlement" in Madrid (1991), after the collapse of
the Soviet Union, the victory of the United states in the cold war
and the emergence of what was called a unipolar international
system, has been the rise of Islamic movements' role in the
resistance, especially Hamas and the Islamic Jihad in Palestine
and Hezbollah in Lebanon… from that date on, the Arab regime
almost quit the arena of the Arab- Israeli conflict, as the
alleged peace with Israel has become its strategic choice and the
armed struggle against Israel rested with the resistance forces….
As the United States declared its war against the alleged Islamic
terrorism… (at least most of it) joined an alliance with the
united states, which returned with its new colonial appearance to
occupy Iraq in 2003, with the help and blessings of many Arab
states… this confirms the fact that the nation still foots the
bills for the misperception of the real nature of the conflict
with the Zionist project and the Israeli entity on the part of
those regimes and rulers who once took upon themselves the duty of
managing this conflict…
-
Regarding the nature of the Zionist project and the struggle
against it, there are those who consider "Israel" a colonial
phenomenon, rather than a Jewish one… they say: "Israel is a
functional entity implanted in the heart of the nation"… what is
your opinion of this matter and how do you see the role and
function of this entity? Has this role changed since its inception
until today? What would the future of this role look like in the
light of transformations in international relations and the
changes in the international alliances of the Israeli entity?
…Also, this question encompasses more than one delicate and
complex issue…I will do my best to clarify the picture which may
not look clear enough for many people…
First… is "Israel" a Jewish phenomenon or a colonial
phenomenon?... the answer is simple: it represents the two, yet,
saying the Israeli is not a Jewish phenomenon would be considered-
for us and according to our thought- something ruled out by the
Qura'an and history refused by reality….
Away from the argument about the definition of the Jews and the
"children of Israel" in the Qura'an and history and whether the
Jews are other than the children of Israel… are they the same? are
Today's Jews or children of Israel the same people mentioned in
the Qura'an?... away from this argument, we say the glorious
Qura'an affirms that Jews are the and will be present until the
day of resurrection and will not become extinct… in the Ma'eda (Sura
5 of holy Qura'an) it reads: "we tossed hostility and hatred
among them until resurrection day " verse 64. and in the Al-
A'raf (Sura 7 of holy Qura'an), it says:" So your lord
announced that he would send someone against them who would impose
the worst torment on them until resurrection Day" (Verse 167).
… if the Jews present in Palestine, with those who support them of
world Jewry, were not the ones mentioned by Qura'an, then where
are the Jews whom the Qura'an talks about?... it is widely known
that all Jews of the world, except for a very small and
ineffective minority, support and buttress up Israel's project…
After mentioning them and confirming that someone would be sent
against them who would impose the worst torment on them, the
Qura'an says:"… we split them into nations" (sura: 7, verse:
168). Which means they spread over the whole world… when the
Qura'an describes the arrogance and perversion of the children of
Israel, in the Israa' sura, it says to them:"… settle down in
the land, when the promise about the Hereafter comes along, we
will bring you in as rubble…" (Verse: 104).
… We think this verse describes their coming along to establish
the Israeli entity in this age. Thus, we believe Israel is a
Jewish phenomenon, but also the most powerful and flagrant
expression of this phenomenon in history…. But the important thing
is how understand this issue…
There might be some digression in our discourse. However, it is
useful to make clear that we believe the universal message of
Islam is the seal of heavenly messages to all mankind and all that
came in its original source, the Qura'an, aims to inform and
enable the nation that bears this message to exercise its role in
leading the human kind with Islam- a role which did not end by the
revelation era, but rather continues to the end of the world,
until Judgment day … Hence, what is mentioned in the Qur'an about
the "Jews" and "children of Israel" has not been for the purpose
of amusement through telling ancient stories irrelevant to the
Islamic nations reality or future in the confrontation against
this human group-the Jews … On the contrary, we estimate that ,
when reporting on the Jews or children of Israel's past, in the
revelation era, with such concentration, the Qur'an talks of the
future of the Muslim nations and the danger of the role that Jews
would play in their conflict against this nation. For this reason,
the Jewish phenomenon … actually, the Israeli phenomenon … is
readily and strongly attendant in the Qur'an to explain to us what
had really happened in the history of Jews and the children of
Israel ("… this reading tells the children of Israel most of what
they have been differing over"- Al-Naml (the Ants), Verse 76, sura
27) and what they did in confronting the Islamic message, when
their role ended and their leadership ceased upon the diversion of
the heavenly message they once bore… consequently, this role moved
to the best community produced by God for all mankind ("you are
the best community which has been produced for mankind. You
commande decency and forbid dishonor, and you believe in God..."
(AL- IُMran
(The house of Imran) verse 110, sura: 3)… when we read the text of
this verse, we discover that the rest of the same verse talks
about the Jews ("if the people of the book would you believe, it
would be better for them; some of them are believers while most of
them are perverse…") Al-Imran (the house of Imran), verse: 110,
sura: 3)…
The Qur'anic sequence goes on describing the Jews, their
conditions in the confrontation with the nation of Islam and their
position on the selection of the Islamic nation to bear the trust
of Islam and mono theism and the dismissal of Jewish guardianship
of this, after they failed in the test, as mentioned in the Isra'a
sura: (…We gave Moses the book and granted it a guidance for the
Children of Israel: "Do not accept any defender except Mel…) (Al-Isra'a
[The Night Journey], sura 17, verse:2)… This means the
precondition for such a heavenly selection is belief and mono
theism (… Do not accept any defender except me...).
In the Al-Imran sura (the same verse cited above) we read His
word, be He exalted: (If the people of the book would only
believe, it would better for them…), which means they have failed
in the "belief text", hence the Islamic nation has been "produced"
to lead humankind… However, Jews did not, and would not, acquiesce
to that, and the Isra'a sura talks of the children of Israel's
arrogance, perverted ness, their conflict with Muslims and the
result of this conflict… one con refer to the interpretation of
these verses as there are too many books and studies that explain
the verses on the children of Israel in light of the current
struggle against the Zionist project…
This has been a quick and brief enlightenment of whether or not
Israel is a Jewish phenomenon… Discretions on these subjects are
too abundant and extensive to cover… Yet, what really supports
this reading is history, of which we are interested in the tokens
that paved the way for the establishment of Israel in the Western
world and how the religious became mixed with the mundane or the
Jewish with the colonial, as far as the Jews and the colonial
forces are concerned, in a way that resulted in the convergence of
interests towards the establishment of the Israel: entity. Since
the mightiest superpower that protects and supports Israel in its
sixtieth anniversary is the United State, it would not be
exaggerated if we say, in this memory of "nakba" that the calamity
for the Palestinian people had started since the discovery of
America… This is not just a shear fanciful prose, nor some kind of
empty slogan, as the discovery of America, or what was called the
"new world" at that time, took place in 1425, the same date of
both Granda's fall down and the beginning of the Islamic
civilizantional descent, in spite of the few breakthroughs
accomplished by the ottoman empire – a declination that reached
the bottom on June 5m 1967, when, at the same time, the Zionist
project had reached its peak in terms of atrocity and perversion…
We do not wish to go into the folder of the nation's condition
when the decline started. However, it is important for us to say
that the discovery of America had a profound effect on the western
civilization, with what it offered to Europe in terms of resources
and power to run the colonial machine in all directions… In this
folder, we must search for Jews, their tools, aspirations and
problems in the world… not with the logic of conspiracy, but
rather with the logic of one who seeks to understand the roots of
the problem…
Many in our nation concentrate on Balfour's Declaration as a
beginning of the British and European role in the call for a
Jewish national home in Palestine… It has already been known that
the "story" did not begin with Balfour's Declaration… Napoleon,
whose invasion of Egypt in 1798 had been start for the modern
western Crusade against our nation, promised the Jews a national
homeland in Palestine… Moreover, the intermarriage between Judaism
and western Christianity did not begin in the reign of neo cons
like Donald Ramsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, nor with Zionist –
American evangelists like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falewell… The
alliance and coexistence between Judaism and Christianity began
with Protestantism and Martin Luther King in the nineteenth
century as an alliance that found its embodiment in a combination
of the Jewish Torah and The New Testament in what was called in
the west: "The Bible"… Luther is the one who wrote "Jesus Was
Borne a Jew" (1533) and started what some has called "Judaizing
Christianity"… a Judaizing process that would not end with the
evangelists or clergymen who emplaned the seeds of "Zionist
Christianity" in the Seventeenth Century, like Britman (1588) and
Cromwell (1655) and others like Calischer Hess and Pinsher, who
called for a Jewish return to Palestine… This process encompassed
politicians like British Parliamentarian Sir Menry Fisch, who
called on Jews to return to Palestine in 1615… In 1840,
Palmerstone, the famous British Minister of Foreign Affairs,
talked about the "Hebrews colonization of Syria" (which then
included Palestine as well)… and, when Benjamin Disraeli, the
Jewish evangelical Christian, reaches Premiership in a great
colonial state like Britain, the matter would no more stop at
Judaizing Christianity, but rather the whole world!...
The story of European Jewry and the role of Jewish money in
forming an alliance with the colonial and European greedy
Projects, as well as in the settlement of Palestine (as was the
case with the famous Rothschild capitalist Jewish family) is a
well Known story that has not ended yet… Today, there are dozens
of effective Zionist Christian organizations in the United states
that are primarily concerned with supporting and financing Israel,
including "The American Christian Trust for Israel"… This Zionist
Christian bank finances Jewish settlement constructions in the
West Bank and the rest of Palestine…How ever, when an Islamic
Charity sponsors a Palestinian orphan whom the Jews killed his
father, this charitable association faces the possibility of being
placed on the terror list because of its Islamic feature… where as
a Christian bank that finances Jewish settlement does not face
such a possibility… no objection!..
…True… Israel is a colonial Jewish Phenomenon, as witnessed by
reality… Its Jewish ness, rather than the Trans formation of its
colonial nature, as substitution colonism, is the fact that
explains its survival despite the demise of all the colonial
entities of the Twentieth century… It considers that its fateful
battle is for safeguarding its Jewish nature and establishing
itself as a Jewish state, supported by the United States which
carries the entire western – colonial and mythical – religious
heritage with its Talmudic and Biblical origins that support and
protect Israel… For this reason, we have said that Palestine "nab"
began ever since America had been discovered, as America Provided
Europe with enough strength to implant Israel and is still playing
an direct role in assisting an safeguarding it…
A final point in this respect, after all this prolongation, is
Israel role or function in the region…
True, "Israel" is a functional entity created under certain
slogans and by religious mobilization, with the aim of achieving
political and strategic goals in the western civilization conflict
against our nation… Nevertheless, this role man differs according
to the stages of conflict… Any how, the west has consistently
sought – through supporting the Zionist movement and establishing
the Zionist entity – to achieve several objectives:
1)
Europe's desire for getting rid of Jews and solving the Jewish
problem.
2)
Taking control of the strategic location of Palestine amid the
continents;
3)
Creating a geographic barrier between Egypt and North Africa, on
the one hand, and its Arab depth and extension in the Arabian
peninsula, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, on the other hand;
4)
Establishing division and partition and preventing the unification
of the nation;
5)
Achieving and protecting western interests in the region…
The entity still maintains its role in achieving these goals, with
some changes and details that could come upon a certain goal, such
as making firm the state of division which did not end at Sykes –
Pico but rather goes on in away that further divides the a already
divided Arab and Islamic world and inflames ethnic, sectarian and
confessional seditions… In addition, the western interests in the
region today means, in the first place, the American interests and
keenness on controlling oil supplies and protecting Israel,
regardless of the profound argument over "who protects the
interests of whom?... America or Israel?" Yet, the important thing
in the Israeli role today is that Israel, the population of which
constitute less than one percent of what is called the Middle
East, strives to become the overwhelming great power in this
region – A domination that is no more dependent on western
support, nor on the Zionist military strength, but rather on some
Arab states acceptance of, and even official alliance with
Israel.. For some Arabs, Israel is no more the enemy and the
Zionist movement is no more criminal and racist... As long as the
United Nations has dropped this charge off Israel, why do not the
Arabs follow suit? Even more… having the cheek to openly face
Zionism in the world, to day, is a punishable crime according to
laws and who ever dares to do that would certainly be charged with
anti – Semitism…
Even in some Arab countries… alas… In Egypt, for example, criminal
laws were amended to delete the term "Zionism" and other
expressions related to certain actions that the Egyptian statutes
had previously considered a political and national crime which
calls for the severest punishment… In more than one Arab country,
there are attempts to change school curricula and omit Qur'anic
verses and prophetic Hadith [traditions] that refer to Jews… In
addition to that, we have lived, seen and headed of an Arab
Israeli security coordination, as Israel's security has become
part of Arab national security for some Arab regimes, while
resisting Israel and confronting its aggression against Arabs have
become a threat to the Arab security!!
Concerning Israel's preparations to face any change in the power
–balance and International alliances, the Israelis have been
working to maintain the closest military, security and economic
relations with rising great powers like India and China, in
addition to their presence in and infiltration of most countries
of Southeast Asia, the former Soviet Union, East Europe and
Africa… They also try to stretch out, like an octopus, in order to
reach the most remote place in the world…
Inspire of all this, we are neither totally frustrated nor
desperate regarding the confrontation with Israel, no matter how
strong it is... Arrogant, perverse and false as it is, Israel is
in clash with the Devine will, before being so with humankind… and
the Qur'an, in the verses of Al – Maida sura which we Have
previously talked about, affirms this fact about the Jews: […Every
time they kindle a fire for war, God snuffs it out. They rush
around the earth creating havoc. God does not like those who
create havoc…] (Al-Ma'ida [The Table]. Sura: 6, verse"64)… Their
fire has been blazing up in Palestine for more than a century… We
are sure that God (be He exalted) will snuffs it out, not with a
miracle, as was the case with the fire of Abraham (peace be upon
him), but rather on the hands of td mujahideen [strugglers] and
believers; God's soldiers who merit his support and assistance,
until the Devine promise is realized ([…our army will be
victorious over them…] [(Drawn up in) RANKS – AL – Saffat, Soura:
R3, verse: 173]).
-
Let us return back to the causes of defeat… there are those who
think Arabs and Palestinians have lost too many chances and, if
they had adopted a flexible and realistic policy from the
beginning and agreed to the partition of Palestine, for example,
things would not have gone this far today… what would you say
about that?
…Regrettably, these are fallacies spread by advocates of
compromise… it even reaches the level of prosecuting the history
of our struggle, all the way to the extent of actually
"apologizing" to Israel or paying "compensations" for all our wars
and confrontations with it… As Mo'ammar Qathafi ironically said in
the last Damascus Arab Summit, mocking the current Arab stance in
dealing with the Palestine cause and the Zionist – American
invasion in the region.
If the prosecution of our history begins with taking the partition
plan as a start point or feeling regret at the loss of a chance to
act moderately, then, we ask:… What partition plan are they
talking about? that of 1937, 1938, 1944 or 1947, or maybe they are
talking about the White paper of 1939?... The colonial powers,
especially the United States and Britain, had been trying to turn
Palestine and the nation in it into and experimental ground where
projects were engineered based on maneuver and deception, in order
to buy time and impose a fait accompli that would allow the
establishment of the (Zionist) entity's state and realize the
promises made to Jews by the West…
It has been widely known that Arabs rejected the partition plan of
1947 as it gave the Jews 55% of the total area of Palestine,
whereas the Jewish control did not exceed 6% of the land at that
time… in addition, the Jewish population of Palestine, which had
been increasing as a result of the accumulation of immigration
waves since the end of the nineteenth century, constituted no more
than 33%... Also, the Zionist intentions were well Known and
clearly declared… …Ben – Gurion, who rejected – in 1938 – the
partition plan suggested by the British Technical Commission, as
he did before to the peel commission project, said in front of the
Jewish Agency: "…We shall work on removing the Arab – Jewish
partition and controlling all Palestine, after the Jews have grown
stronger.." This is exactly what happened… As for the Jewish
acceptance of partition, it was but a maneuver to gain legitimacy…
If non – Arab and non – Islamic states like Greece, India and Cuba
had rejected partition and other countries, such as china and
Britain, refrained from casting a vote for the resolution in the
United Nations, what do you think the Arab position could have
been?... Even America, which agreed to partition, was about to
back down on the partition idea and suggest regency as an
alternative… However, as noted in historical sources, Haim Weizman
went to New York to meet secretly with President Truman in March,
1947, where the two agreed that United Stares continues to support
the partition project which lent legitimacy to the establishment
of a Jewish state on the land of Palestine… At that time, Truman
promised Weizman to recognize the (Jewish) state once declared…
The same historical sources also reveal that as soon as it was
known, on May 14, that the Jewish state will be declared that
midnight, Tel-Aviv local time (or six a.m., Washington mean time),
Truman's Zionist – Christian chief advisor, Clark Cliford, asked
Elyahu Ebstein, representative of the Jewish Agency in Washington,
to send on official message to President Truman before noon, the
same bay, demanding the United states recognition of Jewish state
upon declaring it.. Evstein turned to Jewish lawyers (proposed by
cliford) for assistance in phrasing the letter... But, then a
problem came up: No one Knew the name of the would – be state…
Finally, it was agreed to refer in the message to "The Jewish
State" and that the envoy carries that message to the White House,
according to some sources, and listens on the way to the radio, to
Know the name… when he knew it, the envoy crossed "The Jewish
State" and wrote "Israel" in its place… and the rest of the story
is well known – Truman recognized Israel only 11 minutes after Ben
– Gurion had announced the creation of the state… when Israel
demanded, later in 1948, to join the united Nations, only two
members of the security Council – the United States and the
(former) Soviet Union – agreed to that demand…
We most confidently say: The real position of the Jews was that
they refused partition because their aim was the whole land of
Palestine… Even more, Ben – Gurion saw that Israel's northern
borders must be along the Litani River in Lebanon, not to mention
the ultimate goal of extending Israel borders from the Nile to the
Euphrates…
Hence, when Count Bernadot, the U.N mediator, proposed his
"Partition Plan" regarding Palestine, in September 1948, giving
the Negev area to the Arabs, he was assassinated by Jews for that
reason... Today, after sixty years, Bush comes to celebrate the
creation of Israel and resurrect the term "Jewish state", which
the message carrier to the White House had crossed out long ago,
not as an alternative (name) to "Israel", but rather as a property
and an identity…
Through this narration, or prolongation, we wanted to recall some
facts that can probably highlight the real nature and identity of
the conflict, before someone tries to impose on us a single choice
or path to solve it: the oath of settlement adopted by advocates
of realism and rationalism... and such depictions!
Those have already tried their luck… What was the result? Some who
had previously blamed the Arabs for refusing to divide the land
back in 1947 went to Oslo, in 1993, and accepted to divide the
land "and the people"… Even more, the partition of land and people
began with the 1974 staged program which demanded a "Palestinian
Authority" inside the 1967 border lines, discounting other
Palestinians in Diaspora and in the 1948 territories…
Since then, they have been transforming the Palestinian people
into a "Guinea pig" inside the laboratories of political
descent... In 1977, during the thirteenth session of the National
Palestinian Council, the Ten-Points or Staged – Program
"Authority" was turned into a "Palestinian State" and, in the
sixteenth session, later in 1983, they demanded a "confederation"
with Jordan… Then the "State" was degraded once more to a
"Palestinian entity" linked to Jordan within the scope of a
confederation (Amman Agreement – 1985) and, in 1988, under the
"Declaration of Independence" (Algeria), they went back to "The
Independent Palestinian State" and accepted – a settlement based
upon Resolution//242//… …Accordingly, at the end of the same year,
Arafat recognized Israel, accepted U.N. Re so lution//242// and
rejected the armed resistance by disavowing "violence and
terrorism" and making null and void the "National Covenant" which
once called for the destruction of Israel.. Until they arrived at
Oslo Agreements and the official recognition of Israel… What was
the result? By all measures, the Oslo Agreements are more
dangerous than both calamities of 1948 and 1967… If we called the
loss of land and the forceful displacement of its people a
"calamity" (nakba), then the land and right to exist on this land
is more dangerous... it is the utmost calamity…
The Palestinian recognition of Israel grants it measure of
legitimacy which it can never be granted by any one else, even if
the Whole world – other than the Palestinians – recognized
Israel's existence… Yasser Arafat was aware of that and, when he
tried to go beyond the limits of the text or scenario sketched by
decision – making circles in Tel – Aviv and Washington, what was
the outcome?... Arafat was liquidated… the same fate awaits anyone
who refuses to liquidate the Palestinian cause…
In short, contrary to what some Arabs and Palestinians think,
there is no peaceful solution that can redeem our right under the
current power – balance… A bitter and longstanding conflict still
goes on over an indivisible land… Ben –Gurion himself understood
this and said: "…There is no solution… As for his position on the
partition idea, he repeatedly noted that land is a one whole that
can never be divided and that the conflict is between two sides,
but land can belong to only one of them… For Israel, the whole
land of Palestine belongs to the Israelis and the Israelis are the
rightful owners who have the right to lay hold of it by force,
deception or even by end less negotiations and evasive methods
that can buy more time, according to Shamir…
For us, it is not an issue of realism or unrealism... as the
conflict is between two sides, one of them has the right and does
not have a strength equivalent to his enemy's, but can acquire
power or transform the simplest weapon into a lethal and deferent
one (as is the case with martyrs operations) in order to set a
"terror balance, similar to what happened in the first intifada
[uprising], while the other side has strength, might and ferocity,
but has no right… In this equation, land must belong either to the
first side, who has the right, or to the other, who has the
strength…
Today, the Arab "regime" says: "…Take whatever crumbling offered
to you by Israel, because today we have not got enough power to
face neither it nor America!" Which means this right – in the
culture of the Arab "regime" – is the one that can only be
established by means of force and made by the Israeli Merkava
tank…? However, their problem is that the Palestinian people has
been capable of destroying this tank and, in July 2006 war, the
Lebanese resistance turned the Merkava – once a source of pride
for the Israeli Industries – into a laughing – stock to world
armies and weaponry…
In memory of the calamity, we ask advocates of settlement in the
Arab "regime"… and the Palestinian regime: "…What did this
settlement bring on us other than destruction and negligence of
our right!? Since the Summit of 1982, Arabs have chosen the path
of settlement and advocacy of the right of all people of the
region to live in peace, in an indication to Israel… They also
showed readiness, time after time, to pay the price for peace: to
let Israel have security in the region, as if the usurper,
aggressor and gladiator were the one who needs security! Yet, what
was the result? Has Israel changed its doctrine and strategy in
dealing with Arabs and Palestinians? Perhaps Israel's announcement
of building more settlements in the West Bank, in the aftermath of
Annapolis "Carnival", holds the answer to this question!
-
How does The Islamic Jihad Movement view the fate of negotiations
between Mahmoud "Abbas" Authority and Olmert's government in light
of the United States insistence on resuming these negotiations and
achieving important results, as noted by Bush during his visit to
Palestine to declare Israel a Jewish state, in the sixtieth
anniversary of the "nakba" and the creation of the (Zionist)
entity?... is there still a chance to establish an independent
Palestinian state based on June 67 borders?
Let
us begin with the last point and say: The two – state – solutions
or, indeed, the project of an independent and sovereign
Palestinian state along the 67 borders, is improbable, but also
impossible in light of reality and the facts imposed by Israel on
the ground… For us, it has always been so and this is our view
according to our understanding of the Zionist entity's nature and
objectives... Regrettably, however, others have been stickling!
With regard to negotiations, the prospect of reaching the so
called "final solution" by the end of this year (2008), as sought
by President of the Palestinian Authority, is almost – or maybe
totally – hopeless… We think all that can be reached in this
respect is a new "declaration of Principles", The aim of which is
to keep the settlement alive because, failing an agreement capable
of reviving the same old promises and illusions, the whole
settlement process, as well as the "Authority project", would most
certainly collapse… and I do not think the players can afford
letting things go that for… …In the context of the Authority's
oppressive actions against and pursuit of the resistance in the
West Bank, in coordination with the enemy and according to Oslo
and the Roadmap, they need some kind of agreement which may serve
as a cover to this role and a justification behind the existence
of the Authority in the West Bank and the services offered by
Israel to its "men", allowing the continuation of the delusion
that the settlement process is still on…
In case an agreement has been reached, regardless its nature and
content, we think such an agreement would precipitate the
liquidation of the cause, as it would either involve new
concessions or make May for future ones… The reason is that the
Palestinian interlocutor has no leverage to support and
consolidate his stance... The domestic situation in Palestine,
under the Fatah- Hamas split, is in its worst state and the Arab
support claimed by Arab countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and
Jordan, is not aimed at preventing a slide that would entail new
concessions, but rather comes in the context of a seemingly
anticipated readiness to provide an Arab cover for any agreement,
no matter the size of concessions it takes… This goes against the
Arab Position which Yasser Arafat fell back upon to escape the
trap set to him in Camp David – 2000, when he demanded that
Clinton and Barak obtain Saudi and Egyptian approval of any
concession regarding Jerusalem and the refugees' right of return…
Today, there is a conviction that the Arab official posture is
regrettably ready to any bargain, irrespective of the price (the
important thing is that we get relieved of this "head ache" called
"the Palestine cause")!
Any how, we can repeat again that the prospect of establishing an
independent and sovereign Palestinian state along the' 67 borders
is hopeless and, in our opinion, the Road map never included such
a Promise… Here comes Bush to talk about "identifying the features
of the Palestinian state", rather than the establishment of such a
state before the end of his presidency… No one knows how many
years it would take to reach statehood guided by such features, or
whether reaching statehood would be possible on any account! We
think the self – government project will remain the basis for any
settlement with the Palestinians… As for the "features" imagined
by Bush and other, they may – at best – lead to a certain form of
a "Jordanian alternative", involving a role for Jordan in the West
Bank, as well as an Egyptian role in Gaza Strip where – as a
result of Oslo agreements and the reality forced on the ground,
with what has been established as a reflection of the current
division – the Palestinian "state" would be no more than an entity
totally detached from the West Bank Moreover, the declaration of
and insistence on the principle of Israel's "Jewishness" threaten
the fate of the 48 Palestinians whose elimination has long been
the dream of the entity's leaders… Even more, complexities of the
situation on hand, over lapping regional files and the entity's
perception of the existential danger may ultimately drive Israel
to try to make true its historical dream of "transfer" or what is
called "purging by mean of deportation"… something it had
previously done in 1948 and would not mind doing it again through
the displacement of the rest of the Palestinians from Palestine if
the current power – balance remained as it is.
-
Some believe there has been a certain development in the political
thought of Hamas… they also believe it may try to duplicate the
experience of fatah Movement as the latter declared its acceptance
of a Palestinian state along the 67 borders and, most recently,
during a meeting with Carter, in Damascus, Fatah showed readiness
to agree on whatever final solution Mahmoud Abbas signs, on
condition that the Palestinian people also agree on the proposed
solution in a referendum.. On its part, the Islamic Jihad Movement
considered this "extremely dangerous"… What is the real position
of the Jihad Movement on these developments? Do you refuse the
principle of conducting such a referendum? What is the Islamic
Jihad Movement's strategy with respect to the political project
set to tackle the Palestine issue vis-à-vis the settlement
strategy advocates and also Hamas' strategy, especially that some
people claim the Islamic Jihad lack a clear strategy and have
nothing but refusal?
Let me begin with the strategy question… If it were permissible
to use the self defense logic against accusations of lacking a
strategy, I would confidently and humbly say that no one has a
strategy like that of the Islamic Jihad Movement… So would be the
case if we accept the fact that a strategy means some kind of a
vision capable of producing goals, a path and the proper tools to
achieve these goals... The problem is that some people do not
accept this description of strategy… Today, the prevailing mood
urges you to use the language of politically marketable bargains
in the international political stock market; otherwise, you would
most certainly be accused of lacking a strategy… Yes, we have a
profound vision on the conflict in Palestine, based on our world
view, the locations of our nation and our enemies on the global
map, and also on the future of this conflict and this map,
according to a human action consistent with the universal and
historical norms set by God, whom we believe in, be he exalted, as
stated in the Holy Qur'an: […He alone is God in Heaven and God on
Earth...] (Al-Zukhruf [Luxury], sura: 43, verse: 84)… As for those
who believe that "…He" is God in Heaven…" and "America" is God on
earth, are not expected to acknowledge our strategy… Our view,
regarding the whole world, ourselves (as Arabs and Palestinians),
Palestine and Israel (which was created on its ruins in the heart
of the nation and the world), simply makes us all the more
insistent on that our strategic goal is the "liberation of
Palestine", the whole Palestine, which means our strategy, is a
"liberation strategy"…
Still, we understand that this goal can not be achieved under the
present power – balance and that this mission is not exclusively
the mission of the Jihad Movement, but of the entire nation…
However, we can not abandon it… under any circumstances… The means
of achieving this goal is "Jihad": resistance and armed struggle…
For governments and armies, it is the way of "regular wars"…and
the nation has waged wars for Palestine… For peoples, it is the
option of armed popular resistance… Regular wars may stop but the
armed popular resistance would continue… However, even if the two
stopped, we shall never relinquish our will to liberate, struggle
and resist, nor shall we replace it with the "will to compromise",
as the will to liberate is the one that generates the "will to
resist"…But if and when we are lead to feel desperate regarding
the "liberation goal", no one would even think of shooting one
bullet or prepare himself to do that, as was the case with
president of the Palestinian authority – Mahmoud "Abbas – and the
people around him…
As for our selves, we say: …In the absence of liberation or Jihad,
for the sake of liberation, the alternative is patience and stead
fastness, until god permits a better situation… If our enemies
seek to exploit our hapless state in order to have our signature
on a "cession of rights and home land", this will never happen,
not even of one inch of our land...
This is the case in principle... On the practical side and in our
struggle and political movement, facts have proved that the Jihad
Movement have been the most consistent – in the Palestinian arena
– with their basic grounds and objectives… in each and every
expressed position on our part… we refused to be dragged down to
any political program or project that may keep us away from our
goals or deviate our compass… This does not mean that we are
suffering from any defect or incapacity… Only God is perfect…
With regard to the posture of our brothers in Hamas and the
Movement's development on the level of political thought towards
the acceptance of staged performance and subdivided objectives, we
do not claim that Hamas duplicated the Fatah experience… How ever,
it the Islamic Movement, benefit from this experience… During
twenty years, from the partial Arab victory of October 1973 till
the Oslo calamity in 1993 and, on the Palestinian scene, form the
staged program to the [Palestinian] Liberation organization's
recognition of Israel, in spite of the fact that the latter
occupies the whole Palestinian soil, our brothers in Fatah have
completed a horrible down falling cycle of the life time of a long
standing historical conflict like the one that still goes on for
Palestine… Since the partial concession is but a step towards the
solution that redeems all rights… Yet, what was the result?
…what was the harvest of two decades of this experiment? The
partial concession has become a step towards total concessions… In
our opinion, it was a corollary… because, the moment you put your
feet on the path of this political game, you will find yourself,
in time, a prisoner of this prisoner of this game, over whelmed by
its rules, in a context set under a power – balance that would
force you to make concession and strip you of your rights, but all
this would happen through political deception, so that the
concessions look acceptable… It is natural… If the power – balance
had been in the Arabs and Palestinians' favor, Israel would have
long disappeared from the map… but such thing did not happen, as
leaders of the Zionist project have been to tally aware of what
they always wanted, as we have mentioned above.
If we compare the course of the Zionist project to the experience
of the Arab or National Palestinian Liberation Movement, we shall
come to an amazing conclusion: The difference is strikingly
drastic… Since the first 1897 Zionist conference in Basel -
Switzerland, until the establishment of the entity in 1948, the
Zionist project has not changed its goals nor backed down on the
establishment of the entity by means of wars and hostilities… In
the 1951 twenty third Zionist conference, in Jerusalem, after the
creation of the entity, the goal was to support and protect Israel
and call for more Jews of the world to immigrate to it, according
to what was called "The Law of Return" which Ben – Gurion had
obtained from the Israeli Knesset in 1950… During fifty years
(1897 – 1947), the Zionist project accomplished the creation of
Israel with out changing even one letter with regard to this
objective… As for the National and Arab Liberation Movement, what
happened to the P.L.O's covenant and objectives during ten year's
(1964 – 1974)? And, in the course of thirty years, until 1994?
What was the "harvest"? The P.L.O's leadership returned to west
Bank and Gaza Strip, under an Israeli occupation, to be the
enemy's partner in safeguarding Israel's security and oppressing
the Palestinian resistance which they disgraced and depicted as
"Terrorist"!...
Of all this, what is important to us is to warn against rolling
down to the "checker of breaking political taboos"… When, for
example, [Abd – El-] Nasser agreed on Rogers plan in 1970, before
negotiating Israel on the basis of U.N. resolution 242 (which
meant the recognition of Israel), Fatah Movement refused that,
driven by the fact that the logic of a revolution is different
from the logic of a state… In other words, the logic held by fatah
as a revolution was other than that of Egypt the state… However,
breaking taboos by an Arab leader of Nasser's gravity implanted
the seeds of Israel's acceptability on both sides, "Egypt the
state" and "Fatah the revolution", which resulted in the signing
of Camp David (accords) and the peace treaty, by Sadat, in 1979,
and – later – Oslo and the official Palestinian recognition of
Israel in 1993…
Those who talk of Hamas' duplication of the fatah experience think
Hamas is trying to shorten time and jump over stages… In our
opinion, measuring time is not the important thing in this matter!
The Important thing is to identify the turning point or the
beginning of deviation in the [political] course… Previously, we
said in other occasions that some kind of "mixing up the cards"
has been taking place in the Palestinian arena since Hamas first
entered the elections and took part in government… what some of
the movement's leaders call "the democratic game"… Since then,
observers have held two pictures of Hamas: "Hamas the Authority"
and "Hamas the resistance" – two much different profiles, as
"authority" is something, observers can not tell the difference as
who is talking: is it "Hamas the authority" or "Hamas the
resistance"? …Until this moment, Hamas is still trying to keep
some distance between the two profiles or, at least, control the
relation between them… However, it is rather difficult and
troublesome to maintain this process… to combine two antipodes
like "authority" and "resistance" and draw clear cut boundaries
between what is strategic and what is tactical, not to mention the
difficulty of identifying "red lines" that can not be over
stepped… This is a rather difficult and dangerous issue…
For example, if we take the issue of recognition or unrecognizing
of Israel… this issue belongs to the strategic dimension in
managing the conflict… which means it is a strategic issue that
should not be touched or maneuvered at, neither directly nor
indirectly… As for Hamas, the position is still stead fastness at
this point… and we declare our support and backing to the movement
in this regard, though we are not part of the authority on any
account… How ever, when Hamas sometimes expressed unclear stances
that may implicitly mean a recognition of Israel (i.e. accepting a
state along the 67 borders), we feel we are close to the circle of
danger that affects the strategic issues… and, when Hamas quickly
an announce that their acceptance of a state along the 67 borders
does not mean their recognition of Israel (what we really believe
is the case), Hamas' posing of this idea (a state along the 67
borders) becomes worthless in the eyes of those who have been
targeted with this posture by the movement… Nevertheless, we
believe the negative effect of such rhetoric outweighs its
positive one, as it does not serve the interests of "Hamas the
authority" as much as it harms the interests of "Hamas the
resistance"… The evidence of this is that we can find strategic
Jewish figures, like Henry Kissinger, shlomo Gazit and Ari Shabit,
who demand ignoring Hamas' posture on the issue of accepting or
rejecting the recognition of Israel and call for a recognition of
and a dialogue with the movement about settlement… why? …No only
because Hamas enjoy considerable gravity in the Palestinian arena,
but also because those are interested the generalization of the
settlement rhetoric and culture, so that settlement becomes a
general climate in which every one in the region can take part… In
such stances, they simply say: "…Let us get Hamas enter the
settlement arena and become a player in the brain – wash workshop
still lacks legitimacy in the eyes of the peoples who hate and
reject Israel… But when the Islamic and resistant Hamas talk on
behalf of these work shops owners, things would certainly look
different from that with others…
When, for example, a prominent Hamas leader says: "…No peace can
be made without Hamas…" after the pattern of "…no war can be waged
without Egypt and no peace can be made without Syria"…, Then, what
does this mean? What Kind of peace is referred to here?
As you know, there is peace that Israel wants – a peace that
Israel wants – a peace without Palestine, but also a "peace for
food", as they used to say in the days of Sadat… which means:
Palestinians should relinquish most of their land and their total
sovereignty over and, in return, they would be allowed to live
there, on certain small parts of this land, as human beings that
do nothing but eat and drink!.. There is also peace as desired by
the "Arab regime" and Oslo Authority – a peace with Israel for the
purpose of security… The goal of this sort of peace is to
guarantee and safeguard Israel's security, which means it is not
substantially different from "Israel's peace"! finally, there is "Hamas'
peace", with the whole land of Palestine from the river to the sea
and without Israel… We all know that the power – balance which
prevents the production of a peace desired by the "Arab regime"
and Oslo Authority is the same one that makes it impossible to
achieve a "Hamas' peace"… In spite of this, the west, Israel and
the "Arab regime" would certainly welcome such a rhetoric because,
when a rhetoric of this kind comes from Hamas, or any one in the
movement, in a time when the world of politics seems full of talks
about final solution negotiations (we all know that such a
solution, no matter how it looks, would be based upon final
recognition of Israel's existence), then this rhetoric –
regardless of its real intentions – would ultimately serve the
settlement project and boost its credid through spreading the
settlement's rhetoric, lingo and terminology… and I do not think
Hamas would want such thing, nor would the movement's public,
allies and all those who bet on it…
Here, we come close to the referendum issue concerning any final
solution reached by Mahmoud Abbas and Israel… As for intentions,
we are not worried about the substantial position of our brothers
in Hamas… I know their Speech is a kind of political maneuver…
Yet, this raises an important question: does this "final
solution", in the frame – work of the ongoing settlement process,
fall in the "strategic" or "tactical" category? I believe every
one knows the answer, to the extent that there is no need to
discuss it! This is on the one hand… On the other hand, what is
the position on the referendum issue, principally and practically?
If the aim of the referendum is to hear what people say about a
certain matter, then, no objection… this is "Shura"
[consultation]… and it is a duty… no question... (…and consult
with them on the matter…) Al – Imran [The House of Imran], sura:
3 verse: 159)… (…and whose business is [conducted] through
mutual consultation among themselves…) Al – Shura [consultation],
sure: 25, verse: 38)… However, the question remains: in what
matter? and whom are we to consult with?
As for the first part of the question, we all know that the
suggested referendum is no a constitutional law of a sovereign and
independent state, as is the case in some countries, nor is it
something like the position on abortion in democratic and secular
states or on the standardization of currency, as happened in
Europe… what is offered to us in Palestine is to ask people about
or seek their opinion of whether Palestine belongs to us?
This is what we mean by saying "…constants are not subject to
consultation"… We say that… our brothers in Hamas also say that…
our "constant" is Palestine... the whole Palestine... However, the
problem is that no one will ask us the question in the form of:
"…Does Palestine belong to you?..." whatever the question is and
regardless of its mood or form, our people will answer it under
the following purport: would you feel satisfaction at death
hunger, and siege?... or would you accept a solution according to
which you of death, hunger and siege and you can live in a freak
entity with a flag and a national anthem… in an entity that
embodies the dream and symbol of "Peace for food"?!...
With regard to our stance on such a referendum… Imam Abu Hanifa
(May God be pleased with him) said: "…Do not question a man who
has no flour in his house…" This means that people are hungry…
and, a man with the occupation knife plunged in his flesh and
blood and death hovering over his head and about to fall on him,
must not be asked about the fate and future of Palestine…
With respect to the people expected to be included in the
referendum… Does the referendum in clued part of the Palestinian
people, which means the people of the West Bank and Gaza Strip?
Does it involve the entire Palestinian people all over the world?
Does it include all Arabs and Muslims? Our answer is the same as
the one presented by Hamas in the movement's covenant: "The land
of Palestine is an Islamic "Waqf" [endowment]" which means the
land of Palestine belongs to all Arabs and Muslims... It is also
known that Waqf does not relate only to one generation…
consequently, under this reality of weakness, defeat and power
imbalance, the current generation is not entitled to decide the
fate of Palestine or confiscate the right of future generations in
it, blocking the road in front of these generations and preventing
them from acquiring enough force to achieve liberation…
Hence, the Jihad Movement's position considers accepting the
referendum principle concerning any final solution to the
Palestine cause an extremely dangerous matter… especially when
proposed by Hamas, a movement that still enjoys the confidence and
respect of millions of Arabs and Muslims…
Above all, we shall not forget that both Oslo agreements, and the
reality they produced, had not come into being as a result of a
referendum and that Fatah Movement – or the P.L.O – had not
consulted with any of the Palestinians… If they had not consulted
with any one at the beginning of this ill-gotten bargain, (Oslo
bargain), why then propose a referendum on its catastrophic
consequences?!... If the whole world were serious in considering
the referendum a way of giving the Palestinian people their
rights, let the world then give the Palestinians their right of
self determination instead of concluding bargains inside closed
rooms as a result of force-imbalance in the interest of Israel,
before asking the Palestinian people to express their opinion of
something that is imposed on them by force of arms…
At the beginning of Oslo, they promised our people a new
Singapore, but they forgot, or maybe pretended to have forgotten
that the state of Singapore had been cut out of the Muslim state
of Malaysia, when the Chinese inhabitants (most of them had been
brought from abroad) were given the right of self – determination
and decided to dissociate them selves from Malaysia… thus,
Singapore was established… In the Palestine Case, they promised us
a Singapore under occupation, rather than after liberation or as a
result of practicing the right of self – determination… It is a
pattern of injustice, falsity and misguidance practiced against
the Palestinian people since the outset of the conflict… Yet, they
want us to participate in this and be part of these misleading
ceremonies! However, under no circumstances shall we become part
of this game, because we refuse even consulting with the entire
Palestine… our talk about self determination was to show the
enormity and ugliness of the unjust and double – standard – acts
practiced against our people and our nation by the west and its
foster child Israel…
As for the fate of Palestine, it is the responsibility of the
nation at large, since – for us – Palestine is a verse of the
[Holy] book and any one who squanders even a part of it is as
negligent as the one who wastes the Book… Hence, consulting with
people about Palestine is equivalent to consulting with them about
the Glorious Qur'an! We have always said that…
To conclude, I would like to encapsulate the purport of our
discourse in the following: Yes, we have a vision and a strategy,
how ever, it would not be adequate that only the members of
"Islamic Jihad" be satisfied with this strategy, while others may
call it a strategy of rejection, with all injustice and unfairness
included in such a depiction… In Hamas, we have developed vision
and positions… However, some might fear that we duplicate the
experience of Fatah Movement… In order to get out of this paradox
and of the impasse witnessed in the Palestinian arena, we must dot
the (i's) and cross the (t's) and
acknowledge the presence of two projects and two programs in the
Palestinian sphere: The settlement program and the resistance
program… To prevent the transformation of the resistance program,
intentionally or unintentially, into an element that may serve the
settlement project, a unified strategy must we set for the
resistant forces… a "liberation strategy", as opposed to the
"settlements strategy" adopted by the "Arab regime" and the P.L.O…
We understand that Hamas, The Islamic Jihad and the resistance
forces can not accomplish what our all nation were unable to
achieve in this age… But the liberation goal must never terminate…
On this account, out of concern about our sister Hamas, as a
strategic partner in the resistance program and as a faction that
takes the lead in the Palestinian national project. We say that
the strategy of power sharing, which involves a double profile of
"Hamas the authority" and "Hamas the resistance", needs revision,
in parallel with serious work on a unified strategy for the forces
of resistance, so as not to disperse power and efforts and lest
the harvest of blood and sacrifices goes to the mill of enemies
and adversaries, from where we know or from where we don't… This
strategy should be based upon differentiation between practicing
power under the umbrella of Oslo and the occupation, on the one
hand, and practicing resistance against occupation… Authority is
something and resistance is something else… leave the authority,
with all its misdeeds, to its adherents… and let the resistance,
with all its brightness and cleanness, remain the path of its
adherents... and, between these two subgroups of the same people,
should lie all the needed, but also recommended co-existence,
rather than clash, so that confrontation remains only against the
Zionist enemy…
Do you think the enemy would initiate a new regional war against
Iran, Syria and Hezbollah in the foreseeable future? How do you
see the enemy's prime minister Declaration regarding his entity's
readiness to completely withdraw from the Golan (heights) and how
serious is this proposition? …Is it just a maneuver on the
Palestinian negotiation course, or would it really open the door
for peace with Syria? and, is the region still open to the
prospect of war?
In
order to understand this thorny and delicate subject and as it
relates – first and foremost – to Israel and its security, we have
to start with the Israeli view of the regional situation,
especially after Israel's defeat in the July, 2006 war…
…Israel sees itself on the threshold of an existential dangerous
era, in the face of many threats… The first is what they call the
threat of the Iranian nuclear file, with Hezbollah and their
missile power, the bifurcate Palestinian threat of the Palestinian
resistance and the Islamic state of affairs represented by Hamas
and the Islamic Jihad in the west Bank and Gaza Strip…, in
addition to the presence of the 48 Palestinians in the beard of
the (Zionist) entity… and, then, there is Syria, an ally to all
those, with its occupied land and on going effort to rebuild its
military strength…
How would Israel deal with all these threats? Many people believed
– and still believe – that war will erupt in the region before the
wind – up of Bush presidency at the end of 2008, either with an
American strike leveled at Iran (perhaps unlikely at present), or
with an Israeli war against Hezbollah and Syria… …Since we believe
war against any of these parties would any how affect Israel, as
it is Israel war, we shall focus on the Israeli position on war…
In our opinion, there is a certain equation that manipulates
Israel's decision in terms of going or not going to war: if and
when Israel feels that the costs of accepting the current
situation, occupied by such threats to its existence, are higher
than that of and war initiated by its existence, it would most
certainly consider war a rightful choice…
In our view, Israel has not reached this moment yet... The
Israelis are certain that the cost of any war (after the
experience of July, 2006) would even be much higher than that of
all dangers and threats of the current situation…In addition, the
most dangerous threat, as far as the Israelis are concerned (the
Iranian nuclear file) is a future, rather than direct or
instantaneous one… Here, there exists a breach from which war may
erupt: if Israel makes a comparison between any future threat and
the chance offered by the presence of Bush and Dick chinney at the
white House… This could lead Israel to risk another battle against
any party, particularly Hezbollah, and say to the United States
that a certain danger threatened its existence, so that to force
the Bush Administration into joining in… However, we think that
the prospect of such scenario being realized is still feeble and
that Israel still believes – according to our evaluation – there
is enough time to cope differently with the components of this
existential threat:… through dissociation, siege or buying time to
watch the regional situation and buttress up the home front –
Israel's most salient weakness in any potential war (as of July,
2006)… Hence, the Israelis opted for a settlement with Syria,
showing readiness to withdraw completely from the Golan (Heights)
– a serious offer, we think, in spite of Israel's desperate need
of the Heights from a strategic point of view, especially in terms
of safeguarding water supplies… Never the less, Israel needs to
isolate Iran and besiege Hezbollah and Palestinian resistance
forces more any thing else, particularly in this stage…
But, how much does this cost? In Israel, there are those who
argue… especially in the military establishment...
That if the price was to return the Golan Heights, and then it
must be paid in order to achieve these objectives, in addition to
[peace] with Syria, as a pretext to reach comprehensive peace and
naturalization with the rest of the Arabs… Through such an
approach, perhaps Israel wants to repeat the Sinai experience with
Egypt, where, where it managed to drive the Egyptians out of the
Arab – Israeli conflict and returned Sinai to them, without
actually returning it thanks to certain security arrangements…
Then it did the same thing, to a lesser degree, with respect to
Gaza Strip, where it walked out, without actually parting the area
as sovereignty remained in the hands of the Israelis…
Now, Israel may think of taking Syria away from Iran and out of
the regional "resistance and rejection axis" by returning the
Golan Height and adopting security arrangements similar to that of
the Sinai model: leave without really parting!...
As for the connection between this subject and the Palestinian
dossier, we think it is greater and more dangerous than sheer
maneuvering and playing on courses, although something like this
also exists… The same Israeli argument advocating there turn of
Golan Heights to Syria involves Israel's readiness to deal with
the prospect of eventual collapse of both the settlement process
and the Palestinian Authority… There is a difference between the
collapse of settlement and Authority, when the resistance forces
in Palestine can still find in the Iranian Syrian and Hezbollah
position an "incubator" that fosters them and the resistance, and
the collapse of the settlement process – an already disintegrated
axis, when Syria is in peace with Israel… Even the advocates of
the settlement project in Palestine would feel as if they were
strangled and the horizons of their project would become extremely
limited… which means settlement with Syria would besiege the
settlement and resistance in Palestine – an anticipated trend of
Israeli thinking…
In spite of the perceived seriousness reflected by the enemy prime
minister's proposition and his personal need to settlement with
Syria, in addition to a similar need on behalf of the Turkish
mediator, there remain several obstacles to peace on this track,
most importantly:
= The American position towards Syria;
= The Israeli internal opposition;
= The Syrian stance, in light of perceived Israeli devious
methods, whereas the Syrians understand these methods very well
and know the difference between their relation with Iran and
Hezbollah, their presence on the "rejection axis" against the
American policy and occupation of Iraq and the price Israel would
pay for severing this relation and getting Syria off this axis!
Hence, I think the clarification of the over all picture would
take a relatively long time as the Israeli domestic arena (the
political one in particular) does not seem prepared to accept such
a project and the political race in Israel (until the 2010
elections) would be driven by stringency and the preparation for
war, rather than the desire for settlement and peace-making!... In
addition, the American posture makes an essential element in this
matter – if the Republicans win the coming elections without
reaching a certain settlement concerning the Iranian nuclear
dossier, then war in then region would be inevitable… not
necessarily this year and regardless of the potential front (Iran,
Syria or Lebanon)… war is surely coming… The Iranian nuclear file
remains the password in the eyes of Israel and the U.S.
Administration… When some sources indicated that the United States
would attack Iran on any account, using tactical nuclear weapons
in the war, former British Foreign Minister Jack Straw was amazed
and noted, in April, April, 2006, that such a step would be sheer
madness... However, he lost his post only one month after that
talk! In the West, there is a widespread conviction the British
minister said that only after he had heard that the nuclear
attacks would really happen!
Even if some surprising events took place to change the course of
regional issues and Israel managed to drive Syria away from Iran,
Hezbollah and Palestine and agreed on a settlement concerning the
Golan Heights, the remaining essential problem in the region would
still be "the Palestinian cause"… Egypt withdrew from the conflict
and restored Sinai; however the con flick is not over yet… The
Golan [Heights] could be returned to Syria tomorrow, but the
conflict would not end as its basis and axis are "Palestine"… We
are confident that Syria would not compromise the nation's right
in Palestine nor hand over one inch of the Golan, because the
Syrians know more than anyone else that the danger threatening
them and the entire nation was not the loss of Golan Heights nor
the occupation of Gaza, but rather was – and still is – Israel's
existence on the map and in the neighbor hood.. School children in
Syria learn that their conflict with the Zionist project and
Israel is existential and not just a border dispute… Israel's
nuclear weapons and long-range missiles are not to deter the
Palestinian people, nor to bomb Gaza or Ramallah, or even to hit
Damascus or Beirut, but rather to threaten every Arab and Muslim
on the most distant sports of the globe… especially in Egypt and
the Saudi Arabia, for their considerable weight in the Arab world…
Israel, to borrow Moshe Dayan's words, "…Should always act as a
mad dog in the region…" The danger of this "dog" has never been
considered to threaten the Palestinian people alone, though it
keeps biting the Palestinian flesh around the clock… The danger of
Israel has never excluded anyone and, now that Afghanistan and
Iraq have fallen under occupation, while Iran and Syria are being
threatened, we find ourselves in front of a complicated and fierce
Zionist – American project aimed at subjugating the whole region…
Responding to such danger, or con fronting it, can not be done by
turning a blind eye at the danger of Israel, nor by creating
illusionary dangers, either among Arabs or between the Arabs and
Iran…
Although Israel has reached its sixties, it came to realize that
any Arab regimes confession of impotence against the Zionist
project and that the final and historical Arab acceptance of
Israel's existence has never happened… and will never happen…
because it is in the hand of the masses, rather than the
rulers…The whole matter lies with God (be he exalted) (…with God
lies command, both before and later on…)… (Al-Roum [The (East)
Romans], sura: 30, verse: 4)…
God promised us and he never breaks his promise… He promised us
that Israel will not persist, but rather will vanish, God willing…
(…Thus the warning about the next one came along to trouble your
persons, and so they would enter the Mosque just as they had
entered it in the first place, so they might utterly annihilate
any thing they overcome…) (Al-Isra'a [The Night Journey], Sura:
17, verse: 7)…
|
