 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 18 - 24 May 2000 Issue No. 482 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 18 - 24 May 2000 Issue No. 482
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Focus Features Heritage Travel Living Sports Profile People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Other objectives to fulfil
By Sherine Bahaa
Although at 75, George Habash is known, among other things, for his reticence in granting interviews, he opened his heart to Al-Ahram Weekly in an exclusive interview. The founder of the Arab Nationalist Movement in 1952, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) in 1967, Habash, or Al-Hakim as he is widely called in reference to his early career as a physician, was taking a break in Cairo with his wife after 48 years of continuous work, for the Palestinian cause but also for what he calls "the Arab nationalist project." Habash spent almost 10 days in Cairo, during which he met with a number of officials and political figures, including Foreign Minister Amr Moussa and presidential advisor Ossama El-Baz. Habash also met his old friends, first among them Mohamed Hassanein Heikal, the renowned political writer.
Having announced his resignation earlier this month as PFLP secretary-general, Habash says this is only a pause along the way, not the end as many have surmised. This Greek Orthodox physician has declared that he will continue his political activity, but as a researcher. Habash said his work will focus on the question of "why the Arabs were defeated, and why the Zionist project has won."
Clearly seeking to refute reports that he has resigned due to poor health, Habash stood up straight to greet this reporter. He described reports that he is ill as "mere fabrications" and, to prove his point, disclosed for the first time a copy of the speech he delivered at the opening of the PFLP's sixth congress, held last month in Damascus.
The fighter may be getting on in years, but he is by no means old; he complains bitterly, however, of what he perceives as a scheme to sideline him. "Imagine, no one from the Palestinian embassy has even phoned us since we arrived here. We met members of the Palestinian negotiating team here at the hotel and they did not greet us," his wife, Hilda, told the Weekly. Of course, it was not easy to meet his old partners in this manner at such a significant moment. This week, Israel is celebrating the 52nd anniversary of its creation -- an event known to the Arabs as Al-Nakba, or the catastrophe. Meanwhile, the Palestinians are moving negotiations from one place to another, trying to collect as many fragments of their homeland as possible.
In 1948 and the ensuing period, Habash's family was forced out of the town where it lived, in what is now northern Israel, along with hundreds of thousands of refugees. A graduate of the American University in Beirut, Habash's life has been dedicated to the struggle for Palestinian liberation.. Habash has urged Arab countries to review their position vis-a-vis Israel, "in order to facilitate the process of separating the nationalist and progressive forces from the reactionaries and agents of Zionism."
The PFLP, the second largest faction within the PLO after Palestinian President Yasser Arafat's Fatah group, has been very critical of the Oslo peace process, calling repeatedly on the Palestinian National Council, or parliament in exile, to look closely at the results of Arafat's peace strategy.
When were you last in Egypt?
I came to Egypt in mid-1969 and met with Gamal Abdel-Nasser. I see Egypt as the base confronting the Zionist project, which is not a threat to the Palestinians alone. The Palestinians are not the target of the 200 nuclear bombs Israel owns. Israel has occupied and is still occupying [Arab land] without using nuclear weapons. Israel's nuclear arsenal is turned against the region as a whole, and Egypt in particular.
The Zionist project seeks total hegemony. This is quite clear in [Shimon] Peres's book about the Middle East; the words may be fancy but the target is clear. The main obstacle to Israeli hegemony is Egypt.
How were your talks with Egyptian officials?
When Camp David was concluded it became clear that Israel wanted to exclude Egypt from the Zionist agenda until it could establish its supremacy over other parties, like Syria and Lebanon. Then it could turn to Egypt once more. This idea is understood by Egyptian officials. I am gladdened with what they are doing to confront the Zionist project. They are really intent on bringing Israel into the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and they are doing everything they can to bring this about.
What brings you to Egypt at this time?
(photos: Mohamed Mossad)
I love Egypt very much. I always say Palestine, Lebanon and Egypt are my homeland. Also, I want to deliver to the Egyptian officials the point of view of the other Palestinians. In all my contacts, I was trying to convince officials to hear the other side of the story. Why should the Egyptian understanding not try to contain the view of PFLP, led by someone called George Habash?
What are the main reasons for your resignation?
I have been thinking about it for the past 10 years. I even decided to hand it in at the fifth congress of the PFLP in 1993, but then I received letters from the Occupied Territories and from prisoners in Israeli jails asking me not to resign, so I yielded. Now I believe I should have stuck to my decision.
As for the reasons for the resignation, I want to set a precedent for secretaries-general and for Arab regimes. There should be a rotation of power -- it is totally unrealistic to keep me as secretary-general of the PFLP until doomsday when there are other people in the Front.
Second, I want to write my autobiography. I feel my experience will be of interest to future generations, and to do this while I am secretary-general is totally unrealistic. I am not resigning from political life, however -- I can't do that. Still, after all these years of political activity I have developed other objectives that I want to fulfil. I want to establish a strategic research centre to confront the Zionist project. I've decided to call it the Research Centre for Arab Future Studies. The centre will study the potential of the Zionist project and why it has succeeded. We will also be looking at the Arab situation and how to develop the role of the Arab nation. We have geographic potential, a historical heritage, above all we are the sons of [the Prophet] Mohamed. So why have we failed in confronting the Zionist project?
Are you resigning to allow your deputy, Abu Ali Mustafa, to continue the national dialogue initiated here in Cairo last August?
I am not against dialogue with Fatah, but I want it to be real, i.e. collective talks, not between one front and another. Anyway, I no longer trust Abu Ammar [Yasser Arafat]. We were together all the time and suddenly we found him going to Oslo. This sort of individual leadership is totally unacceptable.
[Abu Ali Mustafa moved to the Occupied Territories two months after starting the dialogue with the Palestinian Authority. However, other rounds of talks have not taken place since.]
You once said that if we cannot obtain our rights through international legality then revolutionary legality is the solution. Do you think this is possible now?
A popular revolution is no longer viable. But we have to agree that a solution to the Palestinian cause is only possible through the establishment of a democratic state. For the Jews, too, the only solution is a democratic entity.
The Jews were divided into two main schools of thought a century or so ago. The first called for their integration within the states where they lived. The other called for an independent state. Today, this state exists, and we have to look at what it has done to Palestine, the Arabs and the whole region. It is also important to decide whether the Arab regimes will confine themselves to this position. I believe this is impossible.
If you were in Abu Ammar's shoes given the current situation (no Soviet Union, little Arab support, a unipolar world supporting Israel), what would you have done?
First, I reject this form of policy-making. Abu Ammar should have refused a settlement of this sort outright. If I were him, I would concentrate first on putting the Palestinian house in order. We will never be able to confront the Zionist project if we are this fragmented.
Abu Ammar understands the Zionist project and he knows very well that we cannot face it without national unity. Then we can resort to international law. I will not cite resolutions but rather I would suggest an international conference to be attended by the United States, China, Europe... This idea was put forth before the dissolution of the Soviet Union, but Israel refused. When the Soviet Union disappeared from the international arena, the solution became 'forget about the international conference and adopt the solution sponsored by the world's sole superpower, the US -- i.e. peace talks.'
You say the Arabs have been defeated. Why has the Arab elite failed to put nationalist or Marxist movements to effect to counter the Zionist project?
This is a big issue. We should not take the present moment and analyse the situation; we have to follow the whole story over the past century. Many positive things took place, whether in the Palestinian cause or on the Arab level. We have the revolution of 1936, the Intifada... Unity between Egypt and Syria. We should register these developments and assess the results. The clear result is the entrenchment of the Zionist project.
I think we have to know why the Zionist plan was successful while the Arab project has failed. In my opinion it is a question of democracy. I love Abdel-Nasser, and the first thing I did on my arrival was to visit his tomb. He did a lot not only for the poor of Egypt but on the Arab and international fronts. He led Egypt into the pan-Arab project -- but unfortunately he failed to confront the Zionist project in 1967.
What is your assessment of the current situation of the Arab-Israeli conflict in general, and of the Palestinian-Israeli peace process in particular?
The collapse of the Soviet Union and the disintegration of the Arab order has had a negative impact on the Arab liberation movement. The United States and Israel saw this as a chance to impose their hegemony and thus implement the Israeli project. From here came the idea they call the 'peace process.' In fact, it is total hegemony over the region. They want to implant the Zionist project in Palestine, they want to prove to the whole world that Israel's presence is legal in the full meaning of the word.
There is a Palestinian struggle and a Palestinian cause which the US and Israel cannot ignore, however, and therefore they started thinking in a more practical way. They exploited the nature of the Palestinian leadership -- this was a basic aspect. Unfortunately, by the Palestinian leadership we mean Abu Ammar. He wants something he can call a state regardless of its shape and nature. The US and Israel exploited this point and proposed something they call a state; but it was at the expense of certain issues fundamental to the Palestinians and the Arabs in general. A Palestinian state with 57 per cent of Palestinians living in exile -- imagine! I am outside, my wife is outside, my comrades in the Front are outside, the majority of the Palestinians are in exile.
It looks like they are telling Abu Ammar 'Take a state, but forget four main points: refugees, Jerusalem, settlements and the area of the state.'
Abu Ammar is obsessed by the idea of a state. He is dreaming about red carpets and presidential protocol. I am afraid this could prompt him to give up other things. This framework is rejected by most of the Palestinians. I believe that Arab officials should not support this kind of settlement. Egypt is a great country. I and all the Arabs see Egypt as a central regional power.
