Democratic Palestine : 19 (ص 5)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 19 (ص 5)
- المحتوى
-
Al Masri, Jordan’s foreign minister, in a speech at the UN two
days ago, stated that the Amman accord still exists. In an
interview with Monte Carlo radio, Zaid Al Rifai, prime
minister of Jordan, said that the accord was not cancelled by
Jordan or the PLO. In addition to these official statements,
there are press reports which may and may not be true, saying
that after the Prague meeting, the PLO leadership sent an
envoy to Jordan to say that the Amman accord was not can-
celled, and that the Prague declaration is an agreement bet-
ween three organizations only. Isn’t it then our right to say that
the Amman accord was not cancelled definietly? What is
happening now is a return to the policy of saying neither yes
nor no. We suffered greatly from this policy and it is a big
mistake to allow it to continue.
I was able to follow the discussions in Prague. The demo-
cratic forces’ proposal stated: «The Amman accord is no
longer in existence.» Naturally, I consider this a flexible for-
mulation, because all of the democratic forces were demanding
cancellation of the Amman accord... Still, this was refused by
the representative of Fatah’s Central Committee, Abu Mazin,
and the negotiations were stalled for nearly 24 hours. The sta-
tement from Prague said that the Amman accord «is no longer
operative.» Notice the difference...
If people were really eager to unify and benefit from expe-
rience, and if there was a true wish to cancel the Amman
accord, why isn’t it cancelled publicly and officially? Then let
the PFLP be tested... In this case, we could understand that the
efforts to restore the PLO’s unity are serious and on a correct
basis. Some say that only the PNC can cancel the Amman
accord, but this is not true, because the Executive Committee
signed the accord as a document, not the PNC... Ask Fatah’s
Central Committee: Did you cancel the Amman accord? Abu
Mazin says yes to the socialist countries, while Arafat tells
Mubarak no...
Comrades, it is not a matter of us putting obstacles. We
want real assurances; we don’t want the people to be disgusted
with us if after restoring national unity on a flexible basis, this
can be broken at any moment. We want to be sure that this
betting (on US solutions), which the Fatah Central Committee
engaged in via the Amman accord, no longer exists.
To the last part of the question: Suppose that the PFLP
found itself in a crisis in its relations with our Syrian allies. (1
am looking at this according to the criteria of nationalism, not
as a leftist or Marxist.) Is this an excuse for me to keep bridges
open to the Camp David regime in Egypt and the Jordanian
regime? When the Amman accord is cancelled and there is no
betting on Mubarak, then we could say to Syria: What are your
remarks on the political line? The accord is cancelled; the door
to Camp David is closed; here we could be effective in reviving
the alliance between the PLO and Syria. No matter how much
we insist on the PLO’s unity... total confrontation of the
imperialist plans requires a unified PLO, allied with Syria. If
we cannot achieve both steps at once, we could achieve the
PLO’s unity in a way that facilitates restoring relations with
Syria. However, with all these zig-zagging positions and
maneuvers, it is impossible to restore this alliance...
Yesterday, Zaid Al Rifai said on Jordanian television that
everything the Jordanian regime is undertaking was agreed
upon with the official PLO leadership, including the (Israeli)
appointments of West Bank mayors... A proof of this is the
case of Zafer Al Masri who is considered a martyr by the
official PLO leadership... We are now fighting a vicious battle
against the Israeli-Jordanian plan in the occupied territories.
Isn’t it in our interests to cancel the accord and organize the
broadest possible front to face these plans?
Of course, I know not to judge the bourgeoisie by the stand
point of the democratic or leftist organizations, but it is our
right to judge the bourgeoisie on the basis of its adherence to
the national position. A bourgeoisie that is trying to have a
hand in both sides, without commiting itself to any one posi-
tion, will not do. We can’t convince the progressive forces or
Syria or a lot of other people in that way. Therefore,the basis
specified by the PFLP is neither Marxist-Leninist nor obstruc-
tionist. Politically, it is nationalist. Organizationally, it means
that the PLO is no longer the personal property of a single
class, as it was for 20 years... If the PLO is common property,
sharing the leadership on the basis of proportional and demo-
cratic representation, we are ready. We think that our position
is the correct one for reunifying the PLO in the light of past
experience...
Some say there is an Arab decision for Jordan to
liquidate the PLO inside Palestine, while other
Arab parties block the PLO’s unity; then the PLO
could be liquidated easily...
Let us assume for the sake of argument that this is true.
Then, the question is how to face this. We can only face it
through a clear political program and collective, democratic
leadership. Then, the PLO would be strong and able to with-
stand such plans...
We propose that the democratic forces consolidate their
coordination and take a firm position for real reformation,
politically and organizationally, in order to achieve results that
guarantee restoration of national unity on a correct basis, to be
able to confront the fierce schemes that aim at spreading
Camp David in the area.
The statement of the PFLP’s Central Committee
mentioned initiatives and communications by your
Politbureau. Do these include dialogue with
Fatah’s Central Committee within the framework
you have defined?
The statement of the PFLP’s Central Committee focuses on
the necessity of providing the political and organizational basis
for unity, and the cancellation of the Amman accord, as a pre-
lude to dialogue. The Central Committee wants our position to
have an influence on the situation. Thus, we will have contacts
that will enable our position to be influential, but the official
overall dialogue will not begin until the prerequisites are met.
Would you comment on Amal’s attack on Rashi-
diya camp a few days ago?
It is painful to me and to all the Palestinian and Arab
masses, to see that our camps in Lebanon are, besieged by
Amal. It is even more painful that this occurs while the Israeli
army is still occupying the South, and refuses to withdraw
before security arrangements are made to protect its borders. It
is painful to see the implementation of plans which aim to des-
troy the Palestinian armed presence which should be directed
against ‘Israel’.
For the last year and a half, the Salvation Front has dealt
with this matter patiently, trying to find common grounds,
namely, the Damascus agreement of June 1985. We worked for
a ceasefire with self-control, but unfortunately the attempts to
strike Palestinian nationalist armed presence continue. To
whose benefit are these conflicts? Based on protecting the
Palestinain masses in Rashidiya and all of Lebanon, and
defending the Palestinian armed presence in order to continue
the fight against ‘Israel’, I call on the nationalist leaders of
Amal and their fighters, I call on our people in the South, on
Hezballah, the Lebanese national movement and Syria - with
its great moral weight, to put an end to this tragedy immediat-
ly.
Yesterday the Salvation Front met with Amal and our Syrian
brothers, and agreed on the necessity of a ceasefire. A delega-
tion from the meeting went to Rashidiya, but unfortunately did
not find any Amal official in the Tyre area. They found that
Amal people insist on the Palestinians’ surrendering their light
and medium weapons before anything else, because I don’t
think there are any heavy weapons in Rashidiya... e
3 - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 19
- تاريخ
- أكتوبر ١٩٨٦
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Position: 73770 (1 views)