'Resistance is the only option'
BACK ISSUE , see date, picked this interview up of Ahmed Yassin ....Thought it was interesting. All stick and no carrot.
Al-Ahram Weekly
6 - 12 May 1999
Issue No. 428
By Mohamed El-Masri
Palestinian opposition groups accused Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin of dividing their ranks after agreeing to participate in the PLO's Central Council meeting last week. However, in an interview with Al-Ahram Weekly in Gaza, Sheikh Yassin confirmed that he was still part of the opposition because he rejected peace on Israeli terms. The semi-paralysed Hamas leader added that he took part in the Central Council's meeting to voice his group's views on the Oslo Accord. "Only resistance and not the current peace process" will liberate Palestinian land. Below are extracts from the interview with Sheikh Yassin who spent six years in Israeli jails before his release in late 1997. Sheikh Yassin was exchanged as part of a Jordanian-Israel deal for two Israeli Mossad agents who were caught in Amman after an abortive attempt to assassinate Khaled Mishaal, the head of Hamas' political bureau.
Whom do you expect to win the upcoming Israeli elections, and do you agree that the Labour Party leader, Ehud Barak is the candidate most likely to win?
The injustice inflicted upon us as Palestinians has been carried out by all Israelis so we do not differeniate between right and left. All of them have their hands covered with Palestinian blood; they have continued to deport us, build settlements and confiscate our land. They are all against us which is why we cannot see any difference between Likud and Labour. In fact the general trend among Israeli voters is towards the right and extremism. This was very evident in the last elections in 1996 when the majority of Israelis voted for the Likud and right-wing parties. Remember also that it was also an Israeli who assassinated (former Israeli premier) Yitzhak Rabin when he started the peace process. I personally expect this trend to continue and increase. And even if Barak succeeds he will be unable to move the peace process forward because the many right-wing parties will make it difficult for him to form a government and they will seek to impose limits on his actions. (Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin) Netanyahu has been telling the Israeli public that he was the one who brought them security and prevented suicide attacks, and that he, unlike Labour, would not make any concessions to the Palestinians. He also claims credit for the Palestinians not declaring their State and attributes this to his threat to take strong retaliatory measures should they do so. Unfortunately the Palestinian Authority (PA) has bolstered his claims because they decided against unilateral action at this point. My own opinion is that neither Barak nor Netanyahu will give any concessions to Palestinians.
Your decision to participate in the PLO Central Council meeting despite your group's opposition to Oslo and the PA was very controversial. Can you explain the reasons behind that decision?
We went to the Central Council to explain our point of view on this important issue of the declaration of the state. We could have sent a letter or held a news conference, but I preferred to state our position publicly in front of the whole Palestinian people so that they would know that we were not sparing any effort in our fight for their interests. I stated publicly that the Oslo Accord to which the PA has committed itself, and all other agreements that followed, were unfair and have proved to be a failure because the enemy does not believe in peace. The enemy wants to steal everything. It has the power to do so and we don't have the power to resist. The Palestinian people have lost all their options in fighting the enemy. Resistance movements worldwide do not give up arms until they have gained their rights and maintain their right to manoeuver until they have done so. But we gave up our arms at the beginning of the road and then sat waiting for handouts and rewards from the enemy. This means that we have lost the first round. Therefore, I have asked our brothers in the Authority to get rid of Oslo and all that is related to it because it is the reason for all the suffering we are facing right now.
But what about those Hamas leaders abroad who said that they opposed your decision to take part in the meeting?
I don't know why you are concentrating on this matter. We always make our decisions in Hamas on the basis of discussion. We tried to contact our brothers abroad about our taking part in the meeting but we received the invitation to attend two days before the meeting. It was difficult to get in touch with them. Their opposition to participation in the meeting was known so you cannot speak of "differences" but lack of proper communication channels. As a matter of fact I took part in the meeting as an observer and not as a participant. This means that we did not take part in any decision making as we were there only to declare our stand.
What effects has Oslo had on Palestinians?
First, Oslo has imposed many restrictions on the Palestinian people at a time when we continue to live under Israeli siege. Watch the expansion of settlements and the confiscation of our land. Pressure was put on the Palestinians while the other party remained immune. Second, our sons remain inside Israeli jails despite pledges in the accord to release them. Third, Israel has not implemented more than 5 per cent of the agreement it signed in Oslo. Finally, Oslo led to a deep division among the Palestinians -- between those who supported the agreement and others who opposed it. For all these reason, I repeat my demand to nullify the Oslo agreement and the unjust consequences that it led to.
But the PA will not give up Oslo. So, what is the alternative?
They are free to do what they want. I did not associate myself with Oslo and have not accepted it since the beginning. They (the PA) are the ones who should take this decision. I know that it is a difficult and tough decision to give up Oslo, but this is the only way to reunite Palestinian factions and to attract them to the resistance camp, and not the surrender camp. There is no other alternative. Since peace has failed, resistance is the only solution.
So this means that you insist that resistance is the only option left for the Palestinians?
It is the only and sole alternative we have in order to achieve our rights. I have my reasons for that. During the Intifada, the youth used to confiscate work permits and prevent workers from seeking jobs in Israel. At that time, Israel was the party which was doing its best to attract more workers and help them to find jobs because they knew that poverty would only lead to more action and resistance against them. Now the situation has been reversed. We are the ones begging Israel to accept workers and they are ones who are closing the door and confiscating work permits. The reason is that they are no longer responsible for the consequences of Palestinian violence which will be directed mainly against the PA. All that Israel wants now is the chance to provoke internal dissension among Palestinians, especially as the PA is the body responsible for keeping order in the face of popular resistance.
Don't you see any possibility for Palestinians and Israelis to live side by side in two states with open borders?
This is a false idea. Israel has failed to live side by side with the Palestinians in areas that it occupied in 1948 and has always treated them as second class citizens. Anybody who enters an Israeli town and compares it to a Palestinian town [within pre-June 1967 Israeli borders] will easily find out what I am talking about and the amount of racial segregation that Palestinians are subjected to. If Israel has failed to reach peace with people it has been living with for 50 years, will it succeed with others? I think this will be impossible. Israel wants to use the Palestinians as a bridge to the Arab and Islamic worlds because it wants to dominate our region and its economy.
ahram.org.eg |
