25 April - 1 May 2002
Issue No.583
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 25 April - 1 May 2002 Issue No.583 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Enough is enough
The godfather of the Palestinian cause, Haidar Abdel-Shafi, told Sherine Bahaa that the minimum he expected from those Arab countries that neighbour Palestine was that they severed ties with Israel
Haidar Abdel-Shafi, who led the Palestinian delegation at the Madrid peace conference in 1991, speaks out about how a flawed peace deal can lead to an overall regional explosion. From his house in Gaza, the 79- year-old political leader says that he is disappointed with official Arab support and attributes it to the lack of democracy in the region. Following are extracts from the telephone interview:
How do you view the current invasion in the Palestinian territories, and what is the significance of its timing?
I believe that the current invasion is linked to the second Intifada which, in turn, erupted as a means of expressing the disaffection that the Palestinians feel with the unravelling of the negotiating process.
The negotiations have not proceeded even one step forward, a result of Israel's violations. The Intifada was meant to reiterate the Palestinian right to self-defence. However, the Israeli response was tremendously violent and ignored international principles and values.
Before his meeting with Powell last week, Arafat issued a statement in which he condemned "terrorist attacks" against Israeli and Palestinian civilians. Do you believe that Arafat was forced to issue this statement as a precondition to meeting Powell?
The statement was balanced in that it linked Palestinian actions to Israeli violence. I believe that it was a canny move by Arafat. We, as Palestinians and Arabs, have our shortcomings in that we have failed to inform the international community and the West, in particular, about the daily injustices that we witness within our territories. This might explain the full condemnation that greets any military operation that the Palestinians perform and, in particular, those which result in civilian casualties. Thus, both Israel and the international community have insisted on formally condemning these acts.
But I still believe that the Palestinian response was too apprehensive. In any case, Israel did not accept Arafat's statement. They described it as nonsense.
The Intifada has restored national unity to the Palestinian factions as well as a long- absent climate of support for Arafat. Do you think this will last for long?
We have been calling for a long time for the establishment of what we call a National Unity Leadership. By this we mean the participation of all Palestinian political movements -- Fatah, the Islamic movements, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. They must merge together with a number of independents and form a national unity government that would be responsible in such a situation for decision-making. In short, we should all be committed to one unified policy.
In this way, democracy will develop and decisions adopted through opting for the majority- support possibility. Unfortunately, I feel that there is a deficiency in our leadership and an unwillingness to accept such a demand. This is the reason behind our current suffering. Yet, we, the Palestinian Authority and other parties, respect the Intifada and its main objective. The message is clear -- almost 10 years of negotiations have proven futile and at the expense of the Palestinians' rights. This is mainly due to a prevailing state of imbalance.
The second part of the message that we have communicated through this Intifada is our decision to fight in defence of our rights. We cannot go back to the negotiating table as such because this would violate the Intifada's objectives. If what is going on now will lead us back to the negotiating process without any preconditions being set, then we totally reject this. I personally believe that our lack of national unity created a pretext for Sharon and his government to use a maximum amount of force against our people. There should be a concrete and clear gain before we return to the peace process. This could be as simple as the halting of any further expansion of the settlements.
What is the likely outcome of what's going on now?
Until now Israel has adopted a hard-line position that has received strong US backing. There is nothing on the horizon which holds for us any promise. But we are clinging hard to our principles and our rights and this remains our message to the world.
The international community has to be fully aware that we are in a defensive posture at the moment. We have to remain steadfast to the end and steadfastness is our only weapon right now, given that we cannot beat the Israeli forces militarily.
How do you view the official Arab reaction to what is going on in the territories?
Unfortunately, I believe that the Arab position is not a balanced response to the current developments, whether to the United States or Israel. The United States has provided unchecked support to the Israeli actions, even after the massacres that were committed in Jenin, Bethlehem, Tulkarem and in Palestinian villages. The US position is extremely hostile to the Palestinians.
Seeing the Arabs just standing and watching is outrageously shameful. We have always opted for a unified Arab position with regard to the US and Israel. I was always sure that the Arabs could do this, but I have been disappointed. I attribute the inaction to the lack of democracy in the Arab world. If we had some sort of democracy there would not be this vast gap between popular and official reactions.
Some argue that if things deteriorate between the Arabs and Israel to the point of war it will lead to total destruction in the region. Would a national liberation resistance movement, however, be more acceptable?
We do not want war. Our cause has been clear from the start; self-defence. If the US is adopting an adverse position, then this is a contemptible attack, coming from the world's sole superpower, and an action that helps Israel's attack on us, especially since the Zionist movement has set power and aggression as its declared motto. I believe that this Zionist invasion is a national responsibility; a direct Palestinian responsibility but an Arab responsibility by extension.
We do not want to have high expectations about what the Arabs can do by themselves but there are still a lot of measures that our neighbours can adopt -- for example, in terms of their relationship with Israel. It is totally unacceptable to maintain diplomatic relations between Israel and any of the Arab countries, given the current level of aggression against our people. This is obvious to us. However, we also want to maintain the minimum level of Arab accord possible and not cause rifts.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page