Thus guaranteeing that regardless of whether there actually were chemical weapons being developed or manufactured, regardless of whether the Assad regime actually was intending to use them against the Syrian people, the Syrian people now HAVE been exposed – and in a totally uncontrolled fashion – to not only the known toxic effects of whatever was in the facility, but also to the unknown effects of the random mixing of such chemicals under conditions of extreme heat, and their dissemination who knows how far, causingwho knows what extent of environmental and health damage.

Assad mustn’t be permitted to do it – but Israel can – and with US blessing.

Israel’s “right to defend its interests,” Obama immediately called it.

Others would call it a cold-blooded murderous attack on the Syrian civilian population.

Others wouldcall it terrorism.

State terrorism.

Since the Twin Towers attacks in 2001, the use of pre-emptive strikes by both the US and Israel to ‘counter terrorism’ or ‘defend security interests’ have escalated to become the single most potent military threat to civilians anywhere on the planet.

Massacre after massacre of civilians by drones, by rockets, by misguided ‘targeted assassinations’ in Afghanistan, Gaza, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan – the list goes on. The list of perpetrators, however, is short – only two. The United States and Israel.

Are such peremptory attacks permissible in international law?

No – international law is very clear on this. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter only allows military actions in self-defence when under direct attack.

Did Syria attack Israel?

No.

Did Syria make any kind of threatening military action towards Israel?

No.

Israel carried out an indefensible-in-international-law military strike in Syria causing direct – and very real – harm to a large civilian population.

A more clear – and potent – case of state terrorism would be hard to find.

Did the US condemn this act, which exposed Syrians to the very harm Obama was trumpeting around the world his intention to protect them from?

No.

The US president defended Israel’s attack.

A more clear – and potent – case of abject hypocrUSAy would be hard to find.

If the world is not to degenerate into a complete USraeli military dictatorship, the international community must act immediately to curtail this latest slide down the slippery slope of human rights derogation, where notions such as international law and due process are merely quaint antiquities, and self-determination a notion reserved solely for Yanqui and Zionist imperialists – or it won’t just be the end of the alphabet we have reached.

And for those in the US who doubt your country’s role in Israeli military activities, take a look at where your tax-dollars are going. Take a look at this photograph of the remains of the rocket fired by an Israeli military plane at a building housing media agencies in Gaza in November 2012, destroying civilian property and persons. YOU are financing these atrocities. Yes, YOU.

You – and the United Nations – should be reminded of the UN General Assembly’s Measures to prevent and combat terrorism contained in the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy of 2006, where it stated its resolve to “…find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts…”

The world is waiting, especially all the Syrians just exposed to the cocktail of chemicals the US was claiming to protect them from – while defending Israel’s right to toast them with it.

Will Samer Al-Issawi die in an Israeli jail, just like Maysara AbuHamdiya? Or will the international community move today, the International Day for Palestinian Prisoners, to save his life?

GAZA CITY — These are the questions today preying on the minds of 32 sick Palestinians in Israeli jails. Along with, “Which of us will be next?”

Maysara AbuHamdiya, a prisoner for over ten years, died this month following lack of timely medical treatment for throat cancer. Samer Al-Issawi faces imminent heart failure after more than 270 days hunger striking in protest against Israel’s policy of administration detention, and inhumane conditions in Israeli jails.

“My health has deteriorated greatly but I will continue my hunger strike until victory or martyrdom. This is my last remaining stone to throw…” Al-Issawi said in his last letter from prison.

Palestinian Ministry of Detainees and Ex-Detainees reports that as at 31 March 2013 there were 1,200 sick Palestinians prisoners inside Israeli jails, 14 of whom have cancer and 18 of whom are confined in the Ramle Prison Clinic.

Israel shows no signs of introducing minimum standards of medical care anytime soon. In a report titled The Palestinian Prisoners Hunger Strikes of 2012 Physicians For Human Rights-Israel made recommendations regarding the urgent need to transfer prison medical services from the Israeli Prison Service (IPS) to the Ministry of Health, due to the dilemmas of dual loyalty of IPS medical staff and the primacy given to political and security considerations at the expense of prisoners’ health and well-being. It is not to be.

In response to their recommendations, “…the Ministry maintained that supervision and control over the medical services of prisoners would remain under the auspices of the IPS, thereby thwarting our request…” Physicians For Human Rights-Israel stated on their website this week.

Thus despite the best efforts of even local Israeli human rights groups, the dire situation for ailing Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails remains unchanged.

Will Al-Issawi be the 204th Palestinian to die in Israeli custody since 1967? Or will the International Day for Palestinians Prisoners spur the international community into snatching him from the jaws of death?

Issued by: MAD – Media Activists for Detainees, Gaza
Contact:madinfo@hushmail.com

###

About MAD

Who is MAD? We are! We are Media Activists for Detainees, a collective of young Gazans who are MAD about the use of administrative detention by Israeli authorities to imprison Palestinians without charge. We are MAD about the torture to which our brothers and sisters are subjected during interrogation. We are MAD about the conditions under which they are held in Israeli jails, from lack of timely and adequate medical treatment, to years of solitary confinement, rotten food, strip searches of both detainees and visiting family members, violent midnight cell-raids, random beatings, and the with-holding of family visits.

We are MAD, and we are dangerous – but only to those who with-hold basic human rights from detainees in Israeli jails – and only by exposing their abuses to the world.

I have not yet been able to confirm that food distribution will continue, if and when relief and distribution centres in Gaza will reopen – or even if they already have.

Unlikely – only two out of eight UNRWA numbers called were answered, and one was to the mobile of a person who informed me they were on leave in London.

The other, to a Public Information Officer requesting information on the current situation, received the response that they will “get back to me.”

Stay tuned.

UNRWA’s response to protests in Gaza against the cutting of ‘services’ which saw a few dozen people enter the UNRWA regional headquarters has been to suspend all food deliveries to Gaza refugees.

A more clear-cut example of collective punishment would be hard to find. Punishing more than 25,000 people for the actions of a few dozen by with-holding such a basic necessity as food is a grossly disproportionate response, and completely indefensible under any circumstances.

If individuals break the law, punish the individuals – not the entire population.

Hamas security forces have guaranteed that UNRWA staff and facilities will be protected, and have assigned personnel to ensure the conditions exist for them to safely perform their functions.

This is apparently not enough for UNRWA. Following the invasion of the regional headquarters by a few dozen people during protests on Thursday, they announced the suspension of all food deliveries.

The protests were in response to an UNRWA announcement that they would be cutting the 40 shekels a month (a little over USD $10) allowance each refugee registered for assistance receives. Not every refugee in Gaza is registered for assistance, only the most needy – but even this is questionable, as many agencies report that many of the most needy are not registered because of barriers to do so.

The paltry 40 shekels is essential to buy cooking gas, clothing, school books and uniforms, and food to meet the shortfall in the meagre UNRWA rations – which now have been completely stopped.

For a United Nations agency to withdraw food from the people the UN was responsible for displacing in the first place is nothing short of scandalous – and indicative of a gross lack of respect for human rights, when supposedly the fundamental purpose of the entire UN system being to uphold both individual and collective rights.

I repeat, if individuals break the law, punish the individuals – not the entire population.

Questions should be being asked at the highest level, if this is how UNRWA, the agency with responsibility for the well-being of Palestinian refugees, is choosing to conduct its business – by starving them.

No wonder the refugees are protesting – so should every person with any compassion, or commitment to fundamental human rights.

Palestinian refugees from two of the most impoverished refugee camps in Gaza, Jabaliya and Shatti camps, today launched their own siege – of the UNRWA field office in Gaza City. Hundreds and men, women and children arrived around noon to protest at the cutting of ‘services.’

In reality, such ‘services’ are the bare essentials for survival – cooking oil, sugar, flour, rice, milk, clothing – in fact, just about everything.

As one woman pointed out, there are no jobs and they are trapped in Gaza by the siege so where else can they go to earn a living?

These are the people who were driven from their homes by Israel in 1948, and yet more in 1967. They have been living in some of the most overcrowded and unsanitary conditions on the planet ever since, in an artificially-created dependency on UNRWA handouts which are almost as difficult for them to swallow as the fact of their forced displacement.

Now, even those crumbs are being taken from them.

“We just can not survive on what they are now giving us,” one man told me. “There are 13 people living in our household. What are we to do? Where else can we get food? We can’t get jobs because there are none, we can’t leave, we can’t even grow food because Israel forces Gazans off the agricultural land to create buffer zones, and shoots us if we try to fish. They are just slowly killing us.”

As their frustration grew, some began banging on the doors and shaking the gates, using whatever was at hand – rocks, Palestinian flags – one woman even took to the door with her umbrella.

Suddenly a cheer went up – some men had climbed the gate, pulled the barbed wire away, and hoisted a Palestinian flag on the UNRWA roof, accompanied by loud applause from the crowd.

The Palestinian flag is hoist above UNRWA

Palestinian security then arrived and asked the men to get down, which they did peacefully.

They may have left, but their problems haven’t.

The United Nations cannot just divvy up a country and give it away to someone else, without shouldering the responsibility for the effects on the original indigenous inhabitants – threat to their very survival.

As Maslow identified, warmth, food and shelter are the very basics in the hierarchy of human needs.

The United Nations has the responsibility to ensure these needs are met for every Palestinian refugee and their descendants, and in accordance with its own instruments, to ensure that they live with dignity, and self-determination, until such time as the UN meets its other pressing obligations – the right of return for every single Palestinian refugee that wants to, to their own independent state – without occupation, without a siege.

Then, and only then, can UNRWA cut its services, and this time, permanently.

As Palestinian detainee Maysara Abu Hamdiyeh was being buried in Hebron, the Palestinian Minister of Religious Affairs Ismail Al Radwan was denouncing his murder at the mourning tent set up in his honour in Gaza City by the Ministry for Detainees’ and Ex-Detainees’ Affairs.

Minister of Religious Affairs Ismail Al Radwan and Minister of Detainees’ Affairs Dr Attallah Abu ElSebah at Soraya today

Radwan demanded that the international community form a committee to supervise Palestinian detainees in Israeli jails, to ensure they are given their basic rights.

Several hundred people gathered to add their support to the Minister’s call, amongst them Sabrin Al Baz.
“I have come here today with about 100 others from the Adawa Islamic College to show our support for Maysara Hamdiyeh,” she told me.

“All Muslims must support this issue, it is not just an issue for Palestinians, but for human rights everywhere. They belong to everyone. What do you do when someone takes something that is yours away from you?” she asked.

“You must fight to get it back. We must protect and defend our claim, as Palestinians and as Muslims. But people everywhere must also help to protect them,” she said, reiterating Minister Radwan’s call for international action.

Sabrin El Baz, Adawa Islamic College

The third death of a Palestinian detainee in almost as many months demands international attention, and very close scrutiny of the conditions under which they are being held in Israeli prisons.

That even the International Committee of the Red Cross and local Israeli human rights groups cannot gain access to these prisons to monitor conditions, signals that there are likely gross abuses being hidden from public view. These deaths are compelling proof.

The international community has a moral obligation to expose these atrocities to the cold light of objective assessment, and ensure that the ongoing issue of the torture, abuse and medical negligence of this most vulnerable population is not buried along with Maysara Abu Hamdiyeh.

“The Ministry of Religious Affairs demands the leaders of the Ummah protect the lives of the patient detainees inside Israeli jails”

Maysara Abu Hamdiyeh died today shackled to his hospital bed, the latest victim of Israel’s cruel, degrading and inhuman treatment of Palestinian detainees.

Suffering from cancer since at least August 2012, he was not told of his diagnosis – or given any treatment other than painkillers and flu injections – until March 2013, when he was finally commenced on chemotherapy. This treatment might have had some chance of helping him if it had been administered early enough – but it did not begin until the cancer had already metastasised to his spine…then it was suspended ‘for the Jewish holidays,’ according to his lawyer Rami al-Alami.

Such blatant breaches of both medical ethics and human rights norms are both scandalous, and scandalously common.

The litany of medical neglect by Israeli Prison Services (IPS), which many ex-prisoners describe as a deliberate punitive policy by medical personnel in league with the Israeli prison authorities, is demonstrable in the 200+ prisoners who have died whilst in Israeli custody – 51 of them from medical negligence – and those who have died soon after release.

The latter include Hayel Abu-Zaid, Sitan Al-Wali, Murad Abu-Sakoot, Fayez Ziyadat, Zakariya Eissa Daud, Zuhair Labadah, and Ashraf Abu-Thurai’a who died in January 2013.

Palestinian Minister of Detainees’ and Ex-Detainees’ Affairs Dr Attallah Abu Elsebah has released numerous press statements over recent years advising of the medical negligence being suffered by more than 1000 of the 4500+ Palestinian detainees in Israeli jails. They currently include some 18 prisoners permanently resident in the Israeli Prison Service’s Medical Center (IMC) in Ramleh Prison suffering from life-threatening or malignant diseases such as heart disease, cancer, and kidney failure, and 85 disabled prisoners with mobility, mental, and sensory disabilities.

Israel’s own human rights and medical experts decry the practices of their prison authorities. Physicians for Human Rights–Israel reports that the Ramleh IMC operates with virtually no supervision, medical or otherwise, and is characterized by inadequate medical care, non-medical staff intervening in treatment, problems in transferring patients to outside institutions, neglect in cases of disability and rehabilitation, threats against patients that have filed complaints, and inadequate sanitation and living conditions. [1]

“The IPS, the main entity responsible for the custody of incarcerated persons, goes to great lengths to prevent outside inspections. The IPS does not allow open tours of its facilities, and only permits pre-coordinated visits with attorneys or doctors with individual prisoners, during which the attorney or doctors may not visit a prisoner’s cell in order to assess the conditions of incarceration,” they report on their website.

A Council for European Palestinian Relations description of the conditions for Palestinian detainees stated that health examinations are conducted through a fence, and any necessary surgery or transfer to hospital for additional medical treatment is usually postponed for long periods of time. [2]

“Demands made by Israeli organisations to provide health care to detainees have consistently been refused, in addition to petitions made by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC),” they add.

Right to health care in prisons

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) has been deemed by the Human Rights Committee to protect the rights of prisoners to health care through Article 6 guaranteeing the right to life, the Article 7 prohibition that ‘no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’, and Article 10 guaranteeing the right to humane treatment of prisoners. These articles have led the Committee to hold that ‘adequate’ or ‘appropriate and timely medical care must be available to all detainees.’ [3]

The Committee has also held that ‘free access to doctors’ should be guaranteed in practice, immediately after arrest and during all stages of detention. [4]

In fact the Human Rights Committee found a violation of Article 6, the right to life, in a very similar case to that of Maysara Abu Hamdiyeh. In Lanstova versus Russia, a man died in prison because of the failure of the prison authorities to take appropriate medical measures when his health dangerously deteriorated. [5]

How does Israel get away with it?

Whilst Israel has ratified the main human rights conventions, including the ICCPR, it is not a party to any of the Optional Protocols other than Children in Armed Conflicts, nor has it accepted the jurisdiction of any of the treaty body committees.

Specifically, Israel has not signed the First Optional Protocol of the ICCPR, thus complaints against Israel cannot be received by, or acted on, by the Committee.

Rogue State
How ironic that Israel is able to continue to be a member state of the United Nations, claiming all of the benefits of protection for itself under international law, while accepting none of the accompanying obligations and responsibilities towards others, particularly Palestinian detainees – and while Palestine itself cannot even achieve full recognition as a state.

One might wonder why a state that has breached over 80 UN resolutions, including the United Nations Charter itself at least 22 times, is left to continue ‘business as usual’ against Palestinian detainees –three of whom have already died this year – and is never held to account. Is the UN showing unmistakable signs of its advancing age, and heading for total impotence, and irrelevance?

Noam Chomsky has defined a rogue state as “a state that defies international laws and conventions, does not consider itself bound by the major treaties and conventions, World Court decisions — in fact, anything except the interests of its own leadership, the forces around the leadership that dominate policy.” [6]

Regardless of the impotence of the UN system to enforce international law, particularly in the face of the US power of veto that would inevitably be used should any attempt be made to oust Israel from their hallowed halls, the international community of states has no other moral choice but to act, and to act immediately, to rein in the rogue state of Israel, and force it, as they did apartheid South Africa, to act in accordance with the fundamental rights and principles that define world citizenship – mutual respect, and self-determination.

To do any less is to critically undermine not only the human rights system and its basis in universality, indivisibility, and interdependence, but also the very foundations of civilisation.

Because ultimately, we are all Maysara Abu Hamdiyeh.

[1] http://www.phr.org.il/default.asp?PageID=114
[2] http://thecepr.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=116%3Apalestinian-prisoners-in-israel&catid=6%3Amemos&Itemid=34
[3] HRC, Concluding Observations, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, ICCPR, A/56/40 vol. 1 (2001) 98 at para. 86(16); HRC, Concluding Observations, Portugal, ICCPR, A/58/40 vol. 1 (2003) 56 at para. 83(11); HRC, Concluding Observations, Kenya, ICCPR, A/60/40 vol. 1 (2005) 44 at para. 86(19)
[4] HRC, Concluding Observations, Ukraine, ICCPR, A/57/40 vol. I (2002) 32 at para. 74(15).
Cf. HRC, Concluding Observations, Benin, ICCPR, A/60/40 vol. I (2004) 30 at para. 83(17).
[5] Lanstova v The Russian Federation Communication No 763/1999, UN Doc CCPR/C/74/D/763/1997 (2002).
[6] http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/200105–.htm

By Khalid Mish’al

Khalid Mish’al

Khalid Mish’al is the head of the Political Bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas)

This article is published in terms of a partnership agreement between AMEC and Beirut-based Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies and Consultations

In August 2010, AMEC published the English translation of an interview with Khalid Mish’al, head of the Political Bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas). The interview laid out the vision and strategies of Hamas at the time. A few months later, uprisings began in North Africa and spread across the Middle East and North Africa, changing the nature of politics and the balance of power in the region. In November 2012, the Beirut-based Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies and Consultations hosted a conference with the theme ‘Islamists in the Arab World and the Palestinian Issue in Light of the Arab uprisings’ at which Mish’al presented a paper outlining the views of his movement regarding the uprisings and how they affect Hamas’ plans for the future. The paper was rewritten by Mish’al, published in Arabic by Al-Zaytouna Centre and translated into English by Middle East Monitor (MEMO). We publish an edited version here, in terms of a partnership agreement with Al-Zaytouna, in order to expose English-speaking audiences to the views and strategies of Hamas, a critical player in the Palestinian-Israeli context. The paper is an important document reflecting the views of an important player in Palestinian and broader Middle Eastern politics and is therefore an important reference document. It explores Hamas’ vision and the practical application of its strategies.

In the name of God, Most Merciful, Most Beneficent

I begin by thanking Al-Zaytouna Centre for holding this important conference at this critical time. God willing, this conference will result in important conclusions that will guide the Arab Spring, evolve its position on the Arab-Zionist conflict and produce two advantages: first, the advantage of an internal structure based on new foundations of freedom, democracy and combating corruption; and second, the advantage of a strong, coherent, and independent foreign policy that maintains its decisions and improves Arab and Islamic performance in relation to Palestine and the general issues of the ummah (nation).
The importance of this conference lies in the following:

Its timing. It is being held in light of the Arab Spring and the progress of the people’s will, their political role and their control over decision-making.

It is the result of the evolution of the role of Islamists and their rise to power in some Arab countries.

It is being held out of consideration for the growing role of the region’s resistance movements, especially following the decline in their official role over the past decades, and in light of their growing national roles, as well as their significant achievements.

It takes into account the decline of the Zionist project, despite its continued military and technological superiority in the region. This entity is undoubtedly declining and its image in the world deteriorating. It has not achieved any victories for a long time, and perhaps what happened during the eight-day Gaza War in which the Palestinian resistance emerged victorious is a significant indicator of this.

The report we are presenting today in this conference on the vision of Hamas and its positions addresses the reality and not just an anticipation of the future. Hamas has been working and striving for the past twenty-five years, and although it may slip up sometimes, it usually gets it right, and we ask God to accept our deeds.

Hamas’ vision for the Palestinian question
This section perhaps represents the fundamentals and declarations that are well known and familiar. However, a reiteration of these basic principles is always important. When we speak in this context, we do not only speak of Hamas as an Islamic movement, but also as a national liberation movement. Some of what we articulate here falls under the category of fundamental principles, and some under policies and positions.

1. Palestine, from its [Jordan] river to its [Mediterranean] sea, from its north to its south, is the land of the Palestinian people; it is their homeland and their legitimate right. We will not relinquish an inch or any part of it – for any reason or under any circumstances or pressures.

2. Palestine, in its entirety, is an Arab and Islamic land. It has Islamic and Arab affiliations and is considered a blessed and sacred land. Moreover, it has a special place in the heart of every Arab and Muslim, and also has a status and respect in all religions.

3. We will not, in any way, recognise the legitimacy of the occupation. This is a principled political and moral position. We do not recognise the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, nor do we acknowledge ‘Israel’ or the legality of its presence on any part of Palestine, no matter how long it remains – and, God willing, this will not be long. All that has occurred in Palestine, including its occupation, settlements, Judaisation, the changing of its landmarks and the falsification of facts in favour [of the occupation] is wrong and must end, God willing.

4. The liberation of Palestine is a national, domestic and legitimate duty. It is the responsibility of the Palestinians, the Arabs and the Islamic ummah. It is also a responsibility for all human beings in accordance with the values of truth and justice.

5. Jihad and armed resistance is the correct and authentic means for the liberation of Palestine and the restoration of all rights. This battle must, of course, be accompanied by all forms of political, diplomatic, media, national and legal resistance, as well as the investment of the entire nation’s energies and the summoning of all the various strengths we possess.

6. Resistance is a means and not an end. If we had any other way to liberate the land, end the occupation and regain our rights without the shedding of blood and other painful sacrifices, we would have taken it. However, the experiences of nations throughout history have proved that the only option available to expel the occupiers, counter aggression and restore the land and rights of the people is resistance in all its forms, starting with armed resistance.

7. We are not fighting the Jewish people merely because they are Jewish. We are, however, fighting those who are Zionist occupiers and aggressors. We will fight anyone who tries to attack us, seize our rights or occupy our land, regardless of their religion, affiliations, race or nationality.

8. The Zionist project is a racist, hostile and expansionist project based on murder and terrorism. Hence, it is the enemy of the Palestinian people and poses a real threat to them, as well as to their security and other interests. Indeed, it would not be an exaggeration to say that it is a danger to the security of the entire human community, its interests and stability.

9. We hold onto Jerusalem and its Islamic and Christian sacred sites. We will not give them up, nor will we relinquish any part of them. They are our right, our essence, our history, our present and our future. Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine and is cherished in the hearts of Arabs and Muslims as a sign of their status and pride. ‘Israel’ has no legitimacy or right to Jerusalem at all, nor does it have any legitimacy or right to any part of Palestine. All Israeli actions in Jerusalem, such as Judaisation, entrenchment of settlements, falsification of facts and attempts to usurp our history are unacceptable.

10. We stand firm on the Right of Return for Palestinian refugees and displaced individuals, and their right to their homes from which they were expelled or were prevented from returning to, whether in the occupied territories of 1948 or 1967 – that is, to all of Palestine. We refuse to compromise on this right in any way. At the same time, we reject all land resettlement and alternative homeland projects.
Brothers and sisters, this is an opportunity to pause at the ‘symphony’ that plays from time to time; there were once fears of resettlement in Lebanon, Jordan or an alternative homeland, and nowadays it is the Sinai. To the Palestinian, there is no compensation for Palestine but Palestine itself. The actions of our people in the recent Gaza War and wars of the past, as well as in the ongoing intifadas and revolutions is proof of this great nation’s insistence on, and attachment to, its land.

11. The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem), the Gaza Strip, and the occupied lands of 1948 are all one land, one unit with no part separated from the other. It is, as a whole, the homeland of the Palestinian people. The current situation in Gaza is an exceptional case that has been imposed upon us. We cannot accept that Gaza will be separate from the West Bank, for they are one, and together they are a part of the Palestinian homeland.

12. We stand firm on the unity of the Palestinian people, both Muslims and Christians, and all its intellectual, political and ideological elements, as well as its resistance, militants and political forces and factions.

13. The unity of the Palestinian political system and its institutions and the unity of its national authority through the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which needs to be rebuilt on valid grounds to include all Palestinian forces and components. The current division does not reflect our origin, nor does it reflect reality. This division has been imposed upon us after international and regional forces rejected the results of the 2006 Palestinian elections in which Hamas was victorious. However, the unity of the Palestinian political system is imperative and we are sparing no efforts to achieve this, God willing.

14. Liberation first, the state later. A true state is the fruit of liberation, but a state that is the fruit of an agreement is merely a symbolic entity or a self-governing authority. Call it what you will, but a real state is the fruit of liberation first, and there is no alternative to establishing a Palestinian state with true sovereignty over the entire territory.
On the other hand, the Palestinian Authority is a reality we want to manage through a national partnership with others to serve our people, their rights, and their liberation project in a manner that is consistent with their national principles.

15. Independent Palestinian national decision: This is a principle that is based on non-dependency or reliance on any other country or party in the world, whether it is friend, ally, enemy or opponent. However, this does not mean, nor can we accept it in the context of limiting the Palestinian issue to the Palestinians and terminating or weakening the Arab and Islamic roles. The issue of Palestine was, and will remain, not only an Arab and Islamic issue, but also a humanitarian issue.

16. The establishment of national Palestinian institutions and authorities should always be based on democracy, starting with free and fair elections with equal opportunities. Moreover, the principle of partnership and national coalition work should be present in every phase, regardless of the chances of success, with emphasis on the fact that opposition is a legitimate right for everyone, provided that the opposition is constructive. In addition to this, everyone must refer to the results of the ballot boxes and respect the will of the people, as well as accept the peaceful change of authority. We must also be reminded that we are a special and unusual case since we are still living under occupation.

17. We will not intervene in the affairs of other countries, and we will not engage in debates, conflicts or alliances with other nations. We have adopted a policy of opening up to the different countries of the world, especially Arab and Islamic countries. We certainly strive to have balanced relations, the scale and standards of which will be in the interest and service of Palestine and its people and will support their steadfastness and determination. The criteria for these relations are, of course, the nation’s interests and security and the rejection of dependency on any country or party in the world.

18. The unity of the nation, including all its ethnic, religious and denominational elements. It is one nation in its interests and history – present, past and future – and we deal with it accordingly. As we acknowledge the diversity and variety in our ummah, we realise the need for everyone in our nation to distance themselves from incitement and conflict, as well as to avoid taking sides on this basis. Instead, we must coexist as we have in past centuries. Moreover, everyone in this nation must know their limits and claim their rights without violating the rights of others. The greater good of the nation must outweigh any sectarian or factional interests.

19. Any progressive tactical or detailed political programme must be in line with national Palestinian principles and may not contradict them. Moreover, every partial or full judgement must be subject to this principle, and, therefore, we reject any projects, agreements or peace settlements that diminish these fundamentals and principles and affect Palestinian national rights.

As you can see, this last point on the matter of fundamentals, policies, attitudes, and principles is an important summation of what has been mentioned thus far.

Practical application of principles and positions
Some may wonder what the reality of this strong rhetoric is. Where is its application on the ground?

We say that the movement’s performance on the ground is similar to the performance of all humans: it may be right or wrong. However, as a movement, our performance has mostly been right, thanks to God. Our performance is largely in line with our announced principles and values. Occasionally, there are gaps, mistakes, or sometimes ambiguous images that suggest there are contradictions or conflict with what is announced. However, we clearly say, even if we have a lapse in judgement, or if some images are misleading, that our standards are identical to the principles, fundamentals, policies, and attitudes
we have mentioned.

I will give four examples to illustrate this:

1. Resistance: This is a primary principle and our strategic choice. Some have had doubts that talk of a truce means giving up on the resistance; this, of course, is arbitrary. In short, the path of resistance, in terms of its preparation, organisation and performance for the liberation of Palestine is a path that cannot be interrupted. In addition to this, the management of the decision of escalation and truce, as well as diversifying our methods and manners, all fall under the process of managing the decision, and not the principle of the decision, as the principle cannot be changed.

Moreover, while the enemy and the settlers are out of Gaza, Gaza cannot be taken out of the circle of the conflict, even though necessity calls for a change in its role in the battle by virtue of its circumstances. Thankfully, Gaza is still a source of hope, not only for Palestine but for the entire region. We have just emerged from an aggressive war on the Gaza Strip, which ended with a victory for the Palestinian resistance, and succeeded in ending the war on its terms.

In the case of the West Bank, the absence of the resistance for several years does not change the authenticity or principle of resistance. The absence of resistance in the West Bank has been the necessary course for our people because of the massive security pressures from every direction, both close and distant. We consider the decline of the resistance role in the West Bank as inevitable and a forced reality that we strive to overcome by maintaining our intention and preparing for a new start. God willing, the resistance will return to the West Bank, reassuming its effective and essential role in every phase of the Palestinian struggle, as the enemy will not withdraw from our land without the pressure of resistance.

2. Participation in the Palestinian Authority: Doesn’t this contradict the movement’s position on the Oslo Accords? This is a legitimate question, and there is no doubt that the matter is vague on the surface, but we believe the answer is clear. Our positions on Oslo and all the agreements of surrender are decisive. However, there are obligations that compelled us to enter the authority to change its role and combine the service of the people and the management of day-to-day affairs on the one hand, with the right to resist the occupation on the other. Today we are an authority in the Gaza Strip, while we resist and develop and strengthen this resistance, with the realisation that it is difficult to practically combine all these considerations. However, our support of the principles and our commitment to them allows us to mould the reality to our principles and not the other way around.

3. Agreeing to a state on the 1967 borders: Some people worry that this is following in the footsteps of those before us and that, eventually, the bigger dream will shrink. To this we say ‘No’. We are not necessarily convinced that the liberation of the occupied territory of 1967 is a practical goal. Personally, I believe, in terms of the prevailing reality, that anyone who can liberate the territories occupied in 1967 is able to liberate the rest of Palestine. Furthermore, there is a need to unify the Palestinian as well as the Arab stance on a common position and vision, regardless of how the programme to achieve that vision may vary from one party to another. This is what drives us, the Hamas movement and other resistance movements, to take this political stance – as long as it is not at the expense of the rest of the Palestinian land and does not contain any abandonment of our rights on any part of our land, nor includes any recognition of ‘Israel’.

4. The matter of the division: This is also a reality that has been forced upon us; we did not choose it. As everyone knows, it was imposed on us in 2007 when several international and regional parties rejected the results of the 2006 elections. I attest, at this historical moment, that the division occurred on 13, 14 and 15 June 2007. On 15 June I called the Egyptian authorities and informed them we were ready to settle the matter and reconcile, because the division was not our choice and had been forced upon us. Since then, we have been continuously working on putting an end to that outcome, and striving to achieve reconciliation on national foundations that ensure the rearrangement of the Palestinian internal situation within the framework of the Palestinian Authority and PLO, and the adoption of a national political programme that aligns with Palestinian fundamentals, rights and national interests.

Changes in the Arab World and their effects on the Palestinian question and Hamas’ role
We now move on to the second part of the topic: an understanding of the changes in the Arab world and their impact on Palestinian question and on the role of Hamas, as well as the challenges and opportunities resulting from them.

1. In addition to its significance to the nation in the context of its historical regeneration, the Arab Spring was also a major strategic development in the path to liberating Palestine and confronting the Zionist project. This is because Palestine’s battle and liberation needs a strong and robust nation on its internal front, and a foreign policy that is based on the people’s will and has their approval.

2. There is no doubt that the Arab Spring has increased Israeli concerns and muddled their calculations because the rules of the game to which the enemy is accustomed have begun to change. We will be satisfied with addressing just the main points on this topic due to the limited time.

3. We have no doubt that the Arab Spring and the changes it brought about in the Arab world give Hamas and the Palestinian resistance movements an opportunity to work in a better Arab environment that is more in line with the resistance and consistent to national Palestinian principles and rights.

4. Obviously, the revolutions and the major events succeeding them change the map of Hamas’ political relations, and have added to and impacted on them. Hamas’ political relations with Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco have certainly seen a qualitative improvement in comparison to the former situation. Keeping in mind that Hamas has had varied relations with most Arab countries over the past two decades, the Arab Spring enhanced some of these relations, as well as continued others. We are, of course, concerned about all of them.

As for the impact of the Arab Spring on the movement’s international relations, one issue that is well-known is that our unique relationship with Syria has suffered. We did not wish for events to happen as they did and, from the very first moment, as history will attest, we were keen for matters to evolve differently. We want Syria to remain strong in terms of its security, stability and foreign policies which, over the last few years, have been aligned to the resistance. This is a historical truth, and with the Arab Spring and its natural shift to the Syrian arena, the Syrian people are no less concerned with democracy, freedom and their involvement in decision making than any other Arab nation. We also hope that an internal policy is adopted that responds to the people’s will. We have given many pointers in this direction, not as interference in Syria’s internal affairs, but as honest advice in our attempt to be protective of Arab, including Syrian, interests. Syria will remain the resistance’s fortress, through its foreign policies based on an internal policy that satisfies its people and responds to its demands. However, unfortunately, things moved in the tragic direction we are witnessing today. Resistance is not an official choice made strictly by countries, but has always been the choice of the people first. When a leader feels his people support the resistance, he will be stronger. The people have always supported the resistance, but among the regimes, some support it, some are negative towards it, and some are enemies of the resistance.

This is undoubtedly an example of how our relations have been impacted, and there are other well-known examples as well. However, Hamas – and this is an important point that must be emphasised – has not moved from one axis to another; Palestine and the Palestinian resistance are the essence of the resistance axis. Resistance, and the axis of resistance, is not just a hotel where we merely reside in or leave at whim, and resistance is not linked to geography. When the Hamas leadership was in Jordan, along with its presence inside Palestine, Hamas was supporting the resistance and exercising resistance. Later, even after we moved to Qatar, then Syria, then other countries such as Egypt, Hamas remained a resistance movement. Hamas has and always will be a supporter of the resistance and will be a resistance movement – regardless of its geographical location – because this is its essence and its strategic choice until, God willing, we liberate Palestine.

5. The Arab Spring and its major events temporarily distracted the world from the Palestinian issue. This is certainly a loss, but it is a short and a temporary loss. Arab nations have a right to pursue their interests and concerns, and we are sure that even when Arab nations are busy with their internal affairs, Palestine is present in their minds, hearts, and in their slogans. The last war on Gaza provided us with renewed and concrete evidence that Palestine’s status never changes in the eyes of the nation, even when different parts of it are busy with their internal affairs and developments.

Challenges, problems facing Arab Spring countries
It is clear that there are challenges and problems facing the Arab Spring and its countries that call for a series of observations and alerts. It is also essential for there to be a high degree of directness, honesty and transparency when dealing with this subject, for a leader does not lie to his people. Based on this, I will make a series of recommendations and blunt observations on this subject, only for the objective of contributing to the greater good of our great nation.

1. There is a need to strike a balance between internal priorities – meaning national concerns and national priorities – with foreign priorities. This can be done without creating a conflict between them as success internally strengthens a country’s foreign position, and vice versa. It is wrong to adopt a policy of isolation. What we are saying is that being concerned with the bigger issues does not only enhance a country’s regional and international role, but also serves the country’s internal policies in facing pressures and attempts at external intervention. It is wrong to protect oneself by hiding away; instead, protect yourself with openness, by taking initiative, and by getting involved in broader issues.

2. It is necessary not to manage the substantial current phase in the nation’s history from a small individual location, but to do so from the broader context of the Arab and Islamic nation through cooperation and integration. I assure you that this serves the concerns, interests and the individual internal issues of a country. Economic, security and political integration between Arab countries, particularly during this difficult transitional phase that some Arab Spring countries are going through, serves these countries and their people and eases this transitional phase. The people and their leaders are in their own countries and are busy with their individual concerns, and this is their natural right. But while they are rebuilding their countries, they must think of the nation’s concerns and interests! Where does it stand? What is its role? Where is its place under the sun? The nation has been a field for others to play in and wrestle over, while it has been absent from this field. The time has come for the nation to become a key player and contribute to rebuilding the regional map. This is the responsibility of everyone; we must build our countries and, at the same time, the greater Arab nation. The Arabs have been absent for many decades, and today is the day they return to the stage, not to wrestle with anyone – except for the Zionist enemy and anyone who invades their land – but to build a map of balance, integration and cooperation along with other regional and neighbouring countries, without forgetting the Arab position or their role.

3. The relationship with the West and major countries outside the West must be managed, and this is normal in today’s world for political and economic purposes. However, this must not be at the expense of the Palestinian issue and the Arab role and responsibilities related to it. I say this while I am confident that the nation, God willing, is aware of this. This is just a reminder. We believe that it is necessary not to give free concessions to the West while managing our relations with it. The legitimacy of the Arab Spring countries stems from their people’s will, not foreign support, and addressing major issues strengthens these countries, not weakens them.

4. There is a need to raise the bar of the Arab stance, the Arab League, and for every country in the region, particularly in terms of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Moreover, it is necessary to reconsider and review the current Arab strategy. To begin with, this requires changing the political language. It is true that the people need time, but it is not right, after this Arab Spring, to keep the same language, initiatives, projects and attitudes. I know that full transformation and development requires time, but we must take the first step towards this now; the political language and terms of the Arab political dialogue must change. We must initiate and research reorientation of the Arab strategy on the Arab-Israeli conflict, and from there we must move towards changing the attitude towards the resistance and resistance movements. What in the past were strange, rejected or taboo topics in terms of Arab official norms – such as not supplying arms to the resistance – must become possible today. A strategy must be drawn for the nation on how to support the resistance movements with funds and arms, and how to back it politically. Parts of such a strategy will be announced publicly while others will remain covert. This will be a strong message from the nation that times have changed, and the world must respect the nation’s will, rights and interests. We cannot remain biased to ‘Israel’ and stand by helplessly while it disregards the nation and violates its rights, interests, and sanctities.

If there are no official wars between armies, the nation should at least support the golden option that has proved its worth, with the help of God, especially during the past years. Since 1967, ‘Israel’ has not won a true war, unless we consider 1982 when it expelled the Palestinian revolutionaries from Beirut and Lebanon. Thereafter, ‘Israel’ has not been victorious, neither in Lebanon nor in any part of Palestine, especially Gaza, and this is credited, after God, to the resistance, the heroes of the resistance, the weapons of the resistance and the support of the nation.

Furthermore, there is a need to turn the page on old projects and initiatives, and to search for new visions, projects and strategies, beginning with obtaining assets of real strength, and keeping the nation’s options open.

5. The peace agreements with ‘Israel’ and the positions of the Arab countries that are party to them is certainly a heavy legacy that needs to be reconsidered. However, the question is how, in what way, and when. What is extremely important is that it must be done. Political settlements and agreements with ‘Israel’ are unfair to the nation and to Palestine; they are neither an advantage, nor do they represent a normal situation. ‘Israel’ is not and will not be a friend or a neighbour, but is an enemy to the Palestinians and to the nation as a whole. If we characterise the agreements as such, we must make it a priority to address the relations, contact and normalisation with the Israeli occupier. This is unacceptable, especially in light of the Arab Spring, because the nation’s leaders must realise that the anger of their people is not only a result of internal policies but also a result of the nation’s shame and weak position, weak policies and weak strategies in terms of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

6. With regards to the rise of Islamists to power and the significance and impact this has on the issue, it must be clear that this does not imply that Palestine needs only Islamists, or that Hamas and the Islamic Jihad – as national Islamic Palestinian powers – are only in need of Islamists due to their importance, distinction and firm position on the issue. On the contrary, we need all the nation’s trends and elements: Islamists, nationalists, liberals and leftists. This is our nation, we need everyone in it, and Palestine was and will remain an issue for the whole nation. It is also necessary to dissociate ourselves from any divisions or sectarian, racial or religious alignments. May God rid us of the hateful sectarianism that has spread over the region. May God rid us of racial, religious and denominational divisions. Our nation has always been characterised by this beautiful diversity; this is a history that we have inherited, which has formed the nation’s civilisation and course throughout history. Today, it is wrong for us to explore these gaps into which our enemies pour oil and light fires to destroy us. This not only requires us to instil correct ideas and concepts, but also requires that our behaviour – as countries, movements, academics, or intellectuals – must be in line with these positions and concepts, and does not promote sectarian or ethnic feelings.

In this Arab Spring, we want our nation to be unified for Palestine, and we want it to build its internal front based on the interests of its people. These people are today thirsty for freedom, democracy, development, making a dignified living, progress, advancement and technology. At the same time, they look forward to having an advanced nation comparable to other nations, and a firm grip on managing their relations, foreign policies and their battle with the Zionist enemy.

These are our humble experiences that we wished to convey, and perhaps they will be beneficial. We hope that Hamas continues, as it has always done, to meet your expectations and gain your confidence.

ENDS

Originally Published by:
Afro-Middle East Centre (AMEC)
PO Box 411494
Craighall
2024
South Africa

Tel: +27 11 880-0525
Fax: +27 86 544 9913

eMail: info@amec.org.za

Web: http://www.amec.org.za

AMEC insights is a series of publicly-accessible publications, providing trenchant analyses of topical issues related to the Middle East and the MuslimWorld. If you want to be added to the mailing list, please email info@amec.org.za

Palestinians are running out of patience. 65 years since they were ousted from their homes and lands following Israel’s unilateral declaration of itself as a state and the end of the British ‘mandate’, and 37 years since Land Day was established, they are saying, “Enough!”

And they are saying it loud and clear, men and women, old and young. “ENOUGH!!!”

Loudest of all are the cries from Gaza, where hundreds of thousands of refugees and their descendants still languish in cramped camps lacking the barest necessities, nary a tree for kids to climb, or a space to kick a ball in – the result of replacing one occupying power, Britain, with another, Israel, and all with the tacit endorsement of the United Nations (UN) and its never-implemented partition plan, and its scores of never-enforced resolutions.

Hamas today hosted an event in Gaza City, where people from all levels of society, the Palestinian Legislative Council to camp-dwellers, vented their frustration, and their legitimate demands to return to the homes brazenly stolen from them.

Abu Hussan Dugheeesh, a Palestinian refugee, was unequivocal in his condemnation of the British role in these shameful events.

“Our memory still maintains the history of our land, and how Britain participated in giving the land of Palestinians to the Jews in the biggest armed robbery in history,” he told the crowd to loud applause.

Abu Akram Bahar, of the Palestinian Legislative Council, insisted that the right of return cannot – and will not – diminish with time.

UN Resolution 194 guarantees Palestinian refugees the right of return. But as Palestinian poet Ghazi Kalakh pointed out, “The international community wants us to disappear, to make the refugee problem disappear. As a refugee, the only way I will disappear is when I return to my land. That is the how the refugee problem will disappear – with the return of the refugees.”

Issam Audwan, from the Hamas Division of Refugee Affairs, made it very clear that doing nothing is not an option. With only around 22% of their lands left, and settlements expanding daily, time is running out.

“We must be united,” he said. “We should not wait for another Arab Spring, we have to move.”

This view was vehemently endorsed by Ameena Abdullah Abusalmiya, an 83 year-old woman driven out of her home in Ashkelon in 1948.

“We need action, not talk,” she insisted. “Muslims and Arabs all have an obligation. We don’t need food, we don’t need aid – Allah will give us those. We need our land. Enough! Enough!”

Uploaded on 6 Jun 2009

Hugo Chavez Kicks Out Israeli Ambassador to Venezuela

Venezuela yesterday expelled the Israeli Ambassador, saying it was an act of solidarity with the people of Gaza.

From an official statement:

The Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela expresses, yet again, together with people across the world, horror at the death of innocent women and children—a product of the Gaza Strips invasion by Israeli troops and the continual aereal and ground bombardment systematically unloaded by the State of Israel on the Palestinian Territory

At this tragic and indignant hour, the People of Venezuela manifests its unrestricted solidarity with the heroic Palestinian people; share the pain that has overcome the thousands of families for the loss of their loved ones; and standing with them, the Venezuelan government affirms that it will not rest until those responsible for these criminal atrocities are severely punished.

The Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela sharply condemns the flagrant violations of the international law which the State of Israel has incurred, and denounces its planned use of State terrorism, with which this State has positioned itself at the margins of National order.

For the reasons outlined above, the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has decided to expel the Israeli Ambassador and part of its personnel at the Israeli Embassy in Venezuela, reaffirming its vocation of peace and its existence that international law be respected.

The Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has prepared its mission in accordance to the UN so that, together with the majority of governments who require it, pressure is put on the Security Council to apply urgent and necessary measures to stop the current invasion of the State of Israel against the Palestinian Territory.

President Hugo Chávez, who has supported encounters with high representatives from the World Jewish Congress and has always opposed all anti-Semitism as he has all types of discrimination and racism, makes a brotherly plea to the Jewish community throughout the world to oppose the State of Israels criminal policies that serve as a reminder of the worst pages in the history of the twentieth century. With the genocide of the Palestinian people, the State of Israel will never be able to offer its own people a prospect toward a necessary and long lasting peace

Palestinian “holocaust” and said the presidents of Israel and the United States should be tried in international court.

“The Holocaust, that is what is happening right now in Gaza,” Chavez said in televised comments. “The president of Israel at this moment should be taken to the International Criminal Court together with the President of the United States.”

The socialist Chavez, a harsh critic of Israel and the United States, on Monday had accused Washington of poisoning the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to destabilize the Middle East and justify U.S.-backed Israeli incursions.

Israel is under international pressure to reach a cease-fire with Hamas militants and halt an offensive that has killed nearly 600 Palestinians, including more than 40 in a U.N. school sheltering civilians.

The United States, which Chavez describes as a decadent empire, firmly backs Israel — its principal ally in the region

i appreciate you Mr.CHAVEZ you are better than most of our arab leaders,,, THANK U VERY MUCH