Democratic Palestine : 27 (ص 6)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 27 (ص 6)
- المحتوى
-
were one organization of the revolution and behaved in this
way.
The biggest question we asked ourselves at that time was:
What is the political, ideological and social nature of our
Organization? We outlined our answer in the light of
developments experienced by the Palestinian branch of the
ANM, ideologically and class-wise. We considered ourselves
an organization of the Palestinian working class, i.e., the
organization that represented the ideology and political think-
ing of the working class. In short, the second stage meant
keeping the name PFLP, despite the realization that we were
an organization of the working class...
The third stage witnessed intensification of internal discus-
sion between the leading figures of the Palestinian branch of
the ANM.
These discussions focused on whether or not the PFLP,
given its new situation after the PLF’s withdrawal, could be
transformed into a working class organization. There were two
viewpoints. The first viewpoint was held by those who still lead
the PFLP. They maintained that the PFLP could be
transformed into a leftist, Marxist -Leninist party, represen-
ting the Palestinian working class. They held that in the
transformation process, although it might be long, the PFLP
would be able to acquire Marxist-Leninist theory.
The second viewpoint maintained that this was impossible,
that PFLP, as a petit bourgeois party, could not be
transformed into a working class party. The maximum they
thought could be reached by the PFLP was to have leftist
elements, but not to become a Marxist-Leninist party. This
Stage ended with the group holding this view splitting
from the PFLP in February 1969, to form the Democratic
Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
Naturally, this was not the only issue of contradiction that
caused the split. There were many political and organizational
differences, but the main issue that led to the split was the issue
of transformation. I thought that we could have managed to
solve the political and organizational differences had the
viewpoints on the transormation process been reconciled.
The fourth stage: After the DFLP’s split, the PFLP entered
the fourth stage in its development - the stage of transforming
into a Marxist-Leninist party, a party for the Palestinian
working class. We are still in this stage which is near successful
conclusion. This stage, which started after February 1969, is
divided into several substages, which we can review through
our national congresses: The second congress, which was held
in February 1969, issued «The Strategy for the Liberation of
Palestine», which outlined the PFLP’s aspirations and future
(organizational) form.
Between February 1969 and March 1972, the PFLP’s
leadership worked to crystallize the Front’s leftist nature
through its political positions and slogans, whether concerning
the position on the Jordanian regime, the Jordanian masses
and nationalist forces, or the PFLP’s understanding of the
concept of Palestinian national unity. In all these positions, we
worked to crystallize our leftist political identity as a Palesti-
nian organization for the working class.
In the third congress, in March 1972, we reviewed the
organizational structure of the PFLP and outlined the big
shortcomings in this. We examined the factors of this short-
coming and outlined organizational guidelines to overcome
this. The congress adopted the internal rules and regulations of
the PFLP, which are the rules for a communist party. Then
started the long, hard process of advancing the organizational
6
situation of the Front to the level outlined in the internal rules
and regulations, particularly to enact democratic centralism
which is the basis for all working class parties. This was one of
the most difficult stages through which the Front has passed,
and many questions were raised about its capability to succeed
in the transformation process. However, around 1979, we
began to feel that we had successfully passed this stage.
In the fourth congress, April 1981, we were able to register
our satisfaction with the progress we had achieved in the
transformation process, on both the political and organiza-
tional levels. We outlined the headlines for our future tasks: to
conclude the transformation process by strengthening the
theoretical knowledge of our leadership and cadres.
These are the stages undergone by the Front in its transfor-
mation into a Marxist-Leninist party. As you noted, they were
intertwined. It is difficult to totally separate the one from the
other. I have simply distinguished them in terms of our main
concern at each stage...
THE PFLP AND THE SPLITS
Who was responsible for the splits in the PFLP?
What caused them and were they inevitable or not?
To what extent has the Front overcome the
possibility of splits in the future?
First, let us distinguish between what happened in 1968,
when the PLF withdrew, and what happened in 1969, when a
group split to form the DFLP. In the first case, it was not split,
but the termination of a partnership between several organiza-
tions, exactly like when the PFLP terminated its partnership
with the Salvation Front in April 1987... As for the second
case, it was a real split. A group from our ranks split and
formed a new organization, after it was impossible for them to
coexist with the mother organization, especially since the dif-
ferences focused on a central issue, that of transformation.
In 1972, the PFLP again faced a split by a group which call-
ed itself the Popular Revolutionary Front for the Liberation of
Palestine, but this was of little importance in terms of this
group’s size or political-theoretical ideas. The disappearance of
this organization from the Palestinian political scene proves its
weakness, but in any case, it was a split.
The PFLP has constantly reviewed this issue of splits. In the
past, we laid all the blame on the group that split. We used to
study the reasons behind the split, as claimed by the splitting.
group. We blamed left opportunism or selfishness or fac-
tionalism, etc., as the causes for the split. However, with the
advance in the transformation process, we have changed our
way Of analyzing this issue and its causes. In the organizational
report of the fourth national congress, we said that in addition
to the factors for which the splitting group bears the main
responsibility, the internal situation of the PFLP’s leading
bodies at that time was also partly responsible for the splits.
I believe that given the state of the Front’s leadership at the
time, these splits could not have been prevented. Hadthesituation
been different, we might have succeeded in containing and
minimizing them. Today, after two decades, history has given
us an answer to the outcome of this experience. Had the PFLP
disappeared or shifted to the right or remained in bourgeois
ideology and practice, we could say that the viewpoint of the
comrades of the DFLP was correct. However, since the con-
trary has occurred, and the Front has made great progress in
the transformation, to a Marxist-Leninist party, the PFLP’s
viewpoint was proven correct. I don’t want to go into details in - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 27
- تاريخ
- ديسمبر ١٩٨٧
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed