Democratic Palestine : 1 (ص 10)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 1 (ص 10)
- المحتوى
-
Interview with Comrade Habash
In anticipation of the PFLP’s 16th anniversary, we had the opportunity to interview Comrade George
Habash, General Secretary, in late November. We focused on issues that are of principle and historical
importance for the PFLP’s political line and course of struggle.
Comrade Habash, in PFLP Bulletin no. 69, we printed your
speech on the crisis in the Palestinian revolution, where you
touched on the relation between this crisis and that of the Arab
national liberation movement. Today, we ask you to
concentrate on the crisis of the Arab national liberation
movement - its roots and solutions.
It is impossible to evaluate the present Palestinian crisis,
or to foresee the future of the Palestinian revolution without
seeing the real interrelationship between the Palestinian
revolution and the Arab national liberation movement. To
illustrate this, suppose that Egypt at present was ruled by the
party of the working class. Suppose Egypt had a strong
alliance with the Soviet Union. Suppose this was the case in
other Arab countries surrounding Palestine. Then the situation
of the Palestinian revolution would be completely different.
Concerning the Arab national liberation movement, we
must distinguish between two features of its crisis: One is the
class structure and leadership of that branch of the movement
which assumed state power in a number of Arab countries; in
this case, with the exception of Democratic Yemen, the crisis is
structural. The second feature is the relative weakness of the
working class and its parties; concerning this branch of the
movement, the question is a different one.
To explain the roots of the structural crisis, we must go
back in history and see which class forces were leading the
Arab national liberation movement at each stage, and what
they achieved.
Anti-colonial struggle
Historically, we can trace the roots of the Arab national
liberation movement back to the last quarter of the 19th
century. At that time, the aim was freedom from the Ottoman
Empire and having a united Arab state, especially in this part
of the Arab world, the Mashraq (east). No social demands
were raised at that time. The slogans were those of dignity,
freedom, unity, Arabism, etc. By the way, certain Lebanese
figures, including Maronites, played a positive role in the
cultural movement that was a prelude to the political
movement.
During World War I, the leaders of the movement
decided to cooperate with the Allies, hoping that after the
French and British defeated the Ottoman Empire, they (the
Arabs) would have freedom and unity. Of course, before the
end of the war, the Sykes-Picot agreement (to divide the area
between Britain and France) was exposed by the Bolsheviks.
When the war was over, the Arab national liberation
movement found that the French and British had replaced the
Ottomans. The traditional leaders of the movement, Hussein,
Sharif of Mecca, and his sons, Abdullah and Feisal (the
Hashemites), decided to cooperate with the plans of the
colonial powers, but the mainstream of the movement
rejected this. The victory of the October Revolution in Russia,
and the new incentive it gave to the oppressed peoples,
increased the Arab people’s motivation for struggle.
From 1918 and through the twenties, the movement tried
to fight for the previous slogans, but as you know, the reality
was that the area was divided. The leaders raised the same
10
slogans - freedom and Arab unity. In practice, they began
fighting the new form of imperialism in each country: Fighting
the British Mandate in Palestine, the French in Syria, and the
British in Iraq. There was armed struggle: In Syria, the revolt
led by Sultan al Atrash in 1925, and another revolt in the
Alawite area in the north; in Palestine, the 1936-39 revolt; the
1919 revolt in Iraq, etc. Until the second world war, the
struggle continued mainly against French and British
colonialism.
The outcome of World War II changed many things:
Britain and France became secondary powers in relation to the
US. There was the victory of the Soviet Union and the
emergence of the socialist camp. There was a general change
on the international level as seen in the United Nations Charter
and the slogans of freedom, peace, self-determination for the
peoples, etc. On this basis, the Arab national liberation
movement was able to attain some victories. Of course, we
must evaluate the character of these in relation to the slogans
that had been raised. These victories were limited to gaining
independence in Syria and Lebanon, their joining the UN,
having a flag and national anthem, etc. This was formal
political independence without unity.
We can relate the nature of these victories to the class
leadership of the movement at that time. From the last quarter
of the 19th century until World War II, the leadership of the
national movement was in the hands of the feudalists and the
emerging bourgeoisie. During World War II, the bourgeoisie
had expanded, especially in Palestine and Lebanon, and in
Syria to some extent, because it was in the interests of French
and British imperialism to facilitate the growth of a local
bourgeoisie; they needed more local production to supply the
needs of their soldiers. Thus, in the late thirties, we saw a new
phenomenon in the area - the growth of a bourgeoisie, which
was, however, subordinate to the imperialist powers.
The demise of the feudal leadership
1948 was a turning point in the history of the Arab national
liberation movement. At this time, it became apparent to the
Arab masses that these feudal and bourgeois classes, which
had received formal political independence, were not at all
able to defend the people’s real interests. What happened in
Palestine in 1948, exposed the meaning of this independence:
that it was superficial; it meant nothing in terms of the people's
interests or ability to face the Zionist attack.
I experienced this time; even without a class analysis, it
was very easy for me and the masses to see that there was no
independence, no dignity. One could see that these newly
formed states must disappear in order to have a truly
independent Arab state and the unity required to face Zionism
in Palestine. At this time we said, “Traitors, traitors, they only
want to keep their thrones”. There was broad popular rage
against the rulers. The class leadership of the Arab national
liberation movement, represented by the feudal lords, and this
‘ type of bourgeoisie, had failed. If the movement was to fulfill
its aims, it would have to be reconstituted. It is thus not a
coincidence that in the following period we witnessed the
formation of the Baath Party and the Arab Nationalist - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 1
- تاريخ
- يناير ١٩٨٤
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed