Democratic Palestine : 17 (ص 16)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 17 (ص 16)
- المحتوى
-
settlement-building, the Committees for the Defense of the
Land were formed, as a broad framework for all social groups
ready to struggle against the enemy and its policies in this field.
Through their broad uprisings, our masses were able to force the
Zionist enemy to refrain from establishing the Elon Moreh sett-
lement on the chosen site near Nablus, although the enemy did
not cancell the idea of building it.
Another case is the defense of the Jerusalem District Electric
Company, the largest Palestinian national institution in the
occupied land, when the Zionist authorities attempted to take
over some of its concessions. Our masses, first and foremost the
workers of the company, achieved a political and moral victory
in this battle which is still going on.
Our masses in the occupied land have shown heroic resis-
tance, confronting the Zionist authorities’ deportations of
Palestinian national leaders and activitists, despite the enemy’s
forceful continuation of this policy in flagrant disregard for
international law. Our masses have been able to reverse some of
the deportation orders, foiling for example the decision to
deport Bassam Shakaa, the legitimate elected mayor of Nablus.
In line with confronting the occupation, our militants in the
Zionist prisons are continuously struggling against the enemy’s
measures to liquidate them physically and kill their spirit. There
are many examples of the prisoners’ steadfastness and confron-
tation of the occupation. The most significant was the hunger
strike in Nafha prison which lasted over five weeks.
I have mentioned some examples to indicate that the enemy
will not succeed in subordinating a people who are determined
to free themselves from occupation and exercise their national
identity by establishing an independent state where they rule
themselves. The leaders of ‘Israel’ themselves have begun
openly admitting that their methods did not succeed in subor-
dinating the Palestinian people under occupation. Zionist
figures indicate that there were 1224 operations against Israeli
military targets in 1985. These are constantly on the rise, in
addition to other forms of ongoing resistance.
What is your position on armed struggle within the
territories? Is it the right of all Palestinians to resist
the occupation by whatever means? In your view,
should the armed struggle be waged outside the ter-
ritories any longer?
Our position on armed struggle is the natural position of a
people whose land is subject to invasion and occupation. Our
position on armed struggle against the Zionist invasion and
occupation, is the same as that of the European peoples during
the Nazi occupation of their countries. It is the same position as
that of the Vietnamese people vis-a-vis the US invasion of
Vietnam. It accords with the position of the United Nations
which gave the right to those peoples who are subject to invasion
and occupation, to struggle by all means, including armed
struggle.
Weare a peace-loving people. We love freedom; and we know
that the price for peace and freedom is very high, especially as
we are facing an invader like Zionism which is supported by the
strongest imperialist power in history. We distinguish
clearly between Israeli civilian targets and military
targets, in contrast to what the enemy forces are doing
against our people inside and outside occupied Palestine. Didn’t
the Zionist occupiers commit a mass poisoning against our
people in 1983, in occupied Palestine? Didn’t the Zionist enemy
commit a horrible massacre against unarmed Palestinians in the
Sabra and Shatila camps, after we left Beirut in 1982? Don’t the
Zionist settlers attack our people daily in the West Bank and
Gaza Strip, using all methods of terror? It is the Zionist enemy
that does not distinguish between civilian and military targets.
The Zionist enemy is the one commiting massacres and breaking
international law.
Having said this, I confirm that our right to confront Israeli
occupation does not differ from the right of any people to con-
front any foreign occupation. The methods which we use do not
differ from the methods used by the different peoples of the
world confronting occupation.
As for armed struggle from outside the occupied territories, I
can compare it with the resistance of the Algerian people against
the French occupation, from areas outside French control in
16
Tunisia and Morocco. We can compare it with the Vietnamese
resistance against the US intervention, from outside what was
called South Vietnam.
If that was the case, then our people have the right, just like
other people of the world, to struggle against occupation from
within and beyond the occupation lines. This is especially so in
view of the feeling of the Palestinians living in the Arab coun-
tries surrounding Palestine, that Palestine is their usurped
homeland, that the people under occupation are their people
whom they have the duty to support in confronting the occupa-
tion and freeing them from its control. This is the role of the
armed struggle from outside Palestine. It is one of supporting
our people under occupation to help them get rid of the occupa-
tion. It is the right of any people’s liberation struggle seeking the
restoration of national rights, as stated in UN resolutions and
international law. It is the right of the Palestinian people until
our occupied land is liberated and an independent Palestinian
state established there.
How should the people of the occupied territories
view the disunity and conflict of the past years
within the ranks of the Palestinian leadership? What
would you say to those in the occupied territories
who despair of their leaders coming together, who
feel that their cause is weakened by infighting?
The Palestinian people rallied around the Palestinian revolu-
tion and the PLO with its national platform and the programs of
the legitimate Palestinian National Council sessions, which
represent a consensus among the different resistance organiza-
tions. On this basis, the revolution and the PLO received
popular and official support on the Palestinian, Arab and
international levels.
In the light of this, the departure of Yasir Arafat and his fol-
lowers in Fatah’s Central Committee from the national plat-
form and the consensus resolutions adopted by the PNC, prior
to the 17th session, damaged the Palestinian cause and the
PLO’s unity. This departure, and its organizational conse-
quences had the worst effect on the morale of our people. It also
damaged the political, diplomatic and militant gains of our
people.
Look, for example, at the recent calls of King Hussein for the
Palestinian people to choose a substitute leadership for the
PLO. Heis constantly calling into question the legitimacy of the
PLO’s representation of the Palestinian people. King Hussein
would not have dared to do so, were it not for the agreement he
signed with Yasir Arafat on February 11, 1985. That sinister
agreement included a concession by Arafat, that compromised
the right of the Palestinian people to establish an independent
state, instead positing a confederate state with Jordan. That
agreement also compromises the PLO’s right to be the sole,
legitimate representative of the Palestinian people at any inter-
national conference or forum that would discuss the Palestinian
cause.
King Hussein, the Zionist leadership and the US administra-
tion are trying to exploit the current weakness of the PLO,
which resulted from the policy pursued by Arafat beginning in
1982, and especially after the signing of the February 11th
agreement. The enemy forces began a carefully planned and
organized campaign, aiming to plant despair in the minds of our
people, to get them to question the national struggle and its use-
fulness. This reached such an extreme that King Hussein
equated the Palestinian struggle with the Zionist terror, and
asked Arafat to condemn armed struggle. Arafat responded to
this and announced, in Cairo, that he condemns armed actions
outside the occupied territories. .
In order to prevent our people’s enemies from benefitting
from the PLO’s current weakness, we in the PFLP have con-
stantly called for adherence to the national platform and the
resolutions of the legitimate PNC sessions, the last of which was
the 16th session held in Algiers. We consider that this possibility
is conditional on cancellation of the February 11th agreement
by Fatah’s Central Committee. We have also said that safe-
guarding the PLO from the present dangers and the conspiracies
planned for it, requires a serious review of the previous course
of the PLO. It requires reinstating a political and organizational - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 17
- تاريخ
- يونيو ١٩٨٦
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed