Hamas official Osama Hamdan revealed the developments related to reconciliation efforts, stressing the necessity to implement the issues agreed upon during the Palestinian factional secretaries-general’s meeting, above all popular resistance.
In a lengthy interview with al-Resalah newspaper, Hamdan added that efforts were being exerted with Saudi authorities to release former Hamas representative in Riyadh Mohammed al-Khoudri, along with dozens of Palestinian and Jordanian detainees.
He describes his movement’s relationship with Tehran as “excellent”.
The Hamas official also addressed other significant matters, including the internal political approach related to Palestinian elections, Hamas’ foreign relations, issues concerning the public political affairs.
Full transcript of the interview:
What is the nature of updates related to holding the next meeting of the Palestinian factional secretaries-general?
Until now, a date has not been set for the meeting, but there are a lot of things that should be accomplished ahead of this date. We should wait for fixing dates as there is much work to do.
What is the nature of these files?
It has been agreed to form a leadership framework of popular resistance, including representatives from all Palestinian factions. This framework should be created; it hasn’t been formed yet.
There are also talks between Palestinian factions that should be resumed regarding the restructuring of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and reconciliation efforts. All these issues should be handled first and should be put on hold until setting a new date for the meeting of the factional secretaries-general.
Should the framework of popular resistance be approved by the Palestinian factional secretaries-general?
It had been previously agreed to set up a leadership framework of popular resistance, in which all factions can take part. It is supposed to start operating as it has already been agreed upon.
As for restructuring the PLO and internal Palestinian House and ending the intra-Palestinian division, Palestinian factions should reach conclusions based on the outcomes of the factional secretaries-general’s meeting.
How much progress was made about the outcomes of the factional meeting, particularly after Hamas and Fatah met in Istanbul and reached an agreement on elections?
First, we stress that the talks between Hamas and Fatah are not an alternative to the essential dialogue between all factions. These meetings were held to facilitate the general dialogue between these factions, which we hope that it will result in better outcomes. As everybody knows, Saleh al-Arouri is leading this dialogue; it has been agreed on holding elections but a complete agreement between all factions should be struck first to identify the nature of these elections, fix dates, and make agreements for them in general.
Have you agreed on holding a meeting of Palestinian factional secretaries-general?
Fatah is contacting the Alliance of Palestinian Forces (APF) in Damascus, in addition to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP).
Meanwhile, Hamas is holding talks with Islamic Jihad, the PFLP, the DFLP, and the Palestinian National Initiative to discuss this matter. All of these meetings should lead to the factional secretaries-general’s meeting.
In which election will Hamas take part?
A movement such as Hamas should be participating in all elections (presidential, legislative, and National Council) regardless of the nature of its participation and its role, either by putting up or supporting a candidate or entering into an alliance. This a technical issue that should be addressed by the Hamas leadership.
Has Hamas taken a decision on taking part in a joint electoral list?
We are open to all option but the main issue is for all factions to agree on holding election and defining its nature.
As for the joint electoral list, this suggestion is to be presented for discussion. However, this is a technical matter that will be addressed after agreeing on election and its nature and arrangements.
What kind of election is of high priority for you?
We, in Hamas, prefer to prioritise the PLO’s National Council. However, this doesn’t mean that we are not taking part in other elections. We want to hold elections at all levels (National Council legislative, and presidential).
As you know, there is a national atmosphere to prioritise restructuring the PLO. To face off the current challenges posed to the Palestinian cause, we need a national body that represents all Palestinians at home and abroad. We will remain committed to the national consensus that will be reached in the factional meetings.
Why do see the PLO election as priority?
The Israeli occupation is not targeting the Palestinian Authority but the Palestinian cause, people, homeland, and rights. Reviving the negotiation approach is not required at a national level; the national necessity today is to protect Palestinian rights from being abolished through the “deal of the century”, normalisation, Israeli annexation plans, in addition to Judaisation of Jerusalem and the siege imposed on Gaza.
Thus, we are interested in a political entity that represents all Palestinian. This is why restructuring the PLO is a national necessity.
Some believe that legislative elections will lead to a reproduction of the outcomes of the Oslo Accords and a revival of the PA that some has called for dissolving it to face off the current challenges.
We have talked about the necessity to agree on a national project to face off the annexation plan, normalisation, and attempts to liquidate the Palestinian cause and this is still under discussion in a national framework.
So, how can we face off these plots and preserve the Palestinian cause? How can we restore the unified national position?
In this context, many proposals are being presented. But we don’t want this discussion to take place through the media; we are not underestimating the role and importance of the press but this is a serious process to consider our national options to face off the plans aimed at liquidating the Palestinian cause and set up a national strategy to achieve this goal. Many ideas are being presented in this regard but suggesting a proposal doesn’t mean that it is agreed upon by all sides.
Hamas, as a national Palestinian movement, believes that everything is subject to discussion if no understanding was reached at a national scale.
I don’t think that holding the legislative council will inevitably lead to a reproduction of the outcomes of the Oslo deal; agreeing on a national program will identify the nature and objectives of any election.
It is time to clearly state that the negotiation approach has failed with the announcement of the “deal of the century”; it is time to reorganise all of our internal cards on the basis of a unanimously-accepted national vision.
Meanwhile, some believe that the joint electoral list undermines political competition?
We are interested in national partnership; this is not a new position by Hamas. We’ve all stated that the national liberation stage requires national partnership; this is our constant stance.
In 2006, we called for forming a national unity government and didn’t reject the participation of any faction. But pressures were exerted to boycott such efforts.
We are talking about a national partnership in the face of the Israeli occupation. Today, we’re obliged to achieve a national partnership and this needs an understanding.
In light of this, contesting an election doesn’t mean a power struggle. Rather, it’s a contest in a framework of partnership in which we can part through factional or joint lists or complete or partial alliances. These are just technical details, as I’ve said earlier.
How can a partnership be formed with the PA’s punitive measures against Gaza still in place?
Simply, we’re are discussing how to end the intra-Palestinian division, achieving a national partnership, and restructuring the Palestinian House and the PLO to face off the “deal of the century” and Israeli annexation plans.
In light of this, agreeing on a national project and accomplishing national partnership are among the most important expected outcomes. So agreeing on this program should not result in ending the PA’s punitive measures against Gaza but also creating a national environment, in which completely different measures should be taken on the ground.
There’s been talk of Egyptian reprimand for the Hamas-Fatah meetings in Ankara. Have you received any message from Egypt in this regard?
We haven’t received any Egyptian rebuke for holding meetings with Fatah in Tukey nor have we receive any signal from Egypt indicating that there was a reprimand. The talks held in Istanbul and Beirut focused on ending the intra-Palestinian division and achieving reconciliation. But let me say that there’s a large course than ending the Palestinian rift: restoring the genuine Palestinian national project based on an approach towards the liberation of Palestine and the Palestinian right of return and on facing off the plots intended to liquidate the Palestinian cause.
I don’t guess any side concerned about Palestine and its people has a right to be outraged over when, where, or how we meet. However, this doesn’t mean that we are ungrateful for Egypt’s role or that any faction doesn’t want the Egyptian role. Everyone has been addressing the same course that we started in Egypt. We’re interested in keeping the Egyptian role in place along with all roles supportive of restoring Palestinian reconciliation and restructuring the Palestinian House, especially the Qatari, Turkish, and Russian roles.
Does this mean that there is no crisis over the latest meetings?
There is no reason to create a crisis or fuel speculation that these understandings have angered Egypt. It’s natural that we unite as Palestinians and the Egyptian efforts are being exerted to achieve this and they are highly appreciated.
As for prosecuting former Hamas representative Mohammed al-Khoudri in Saudi Arabia, how you following this case?
Saudi Arabia is putting the man who served as a representative for Hamas in the kingdom for over a decade in complete coordination with the Saudi leadership. In other words, his existence in Saudi Arabia has never been unknown or undesired.
We’ve spared no effort to end this matter in a proper way by which I mean releasing Dr. Mohammed al-Khoudri and his son Dr. Hani along with all Palestinians and Jordanians held over charges of supporting or belonging to the Palestinian resistance; these is not charges but medals of honour.
This topic is still on the table until all Palestinian and Jordanians detained in Saudi jails are released. We hope that Saudi authorities will respond to these efforts.
Are there still any channels of communication with Saudi Arabia to release them?
There’re efforts being exerted through indirect channels. Things are not as they were before when contacts were made at high levels. But there are still lines of communication through which we’re handling this topic. Hamas has a constant policy of not cutting lines of communication with any sides regardless of how tense their relationship with the movement is.
What does Saudi Arabic benefit from its hostility towards Hamas? Is the Hamas-Iran relationship a reason for that?
This question should be answered by Saudi authorities. We are not acting as a proxy for any side. Any side would be deluded it mistakenly thought that Hamas can act as their proxy.
Our relationship with Iran is obvious. Hamas should not be blamed for developing such ties. Instead, any side that abstains from supporting Palestine and its people and their option of resistance should be blamed and slammed for taking such a position.
Thousands of Palestinian martyrs have fallen and tens of thousands were injured in the Palestinian struggle against the Israeli occupation; it’s shameful that some sides think that it can make the Palestinian people or any Palestinian faction act as their proxy.
We welcome any side that wants to provide support for the Palestinian cause; we will, in return, thank them openly and without hesitation. We aren’t asking much from those who can provide support for Palestine.
As for those who don’t want to support us and continues to be hostile to us, we will ask them the same question: “Do you want us to submit to the Israeli occupation?”
What is the message to the countries that normalise ties with the Israeli occupation?
Those who want to normalise with the Israeli occupation and believe this a normal matter can give the Israeli occupation part of their homeland. However, no side can force us to accept the Israeli occupation of our homeland.
Those who think that normalisation with the Israeli occupation serves their interests are deluded. The Israeli occupation cares only about its interests. Moreover, the Israeli occupation is doomed to end, just as all sides will do.
How do you evaluate your relationship with Tehran and Hezbollah?
The relationship between Hamas and Iran is excellent and is advancing in the context of supporting the Palestinian people and their rights and option of resistance. Also, our relationship with Hezbollah and other resistance movements in the region is very good.
Some don’t approve such ties, but that is their concern. We don’t have to convince those who recognise the Israeli occupation and normalise relations with it to accept our relationship with Iran and resistance movements in the Arab world.
Why did Hamas’ latest visit to Lebanon upset some sides?
Our visit to Lebanon was fruitful; we met Lebanese officials and leaders of Lebanese parties. Another important stop of our visit was meeting officials from Hezbollah. There’s nothing to hide about this visit; no one should be upset or worried about it.
The visit came as part of Hamas’ natural relationship with Lebanon and its political parties and its efforts being exerted concerning the internal Palestinian affairs.
The Hamas leadership, headed by chief of Hamas Political Bureau Ismail Haniyeh, met with Palestinian factions and the representatives for Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon.
As for Haniyeh’s visit to Ain al-Hilweh refugee camp, it was a reflection of the leadership’s connection to its people and send a clear message to whom it may concern that Palestinian refugees are still committed to their right of return that can only be restored through the option of resistance after over than 70 years of forced displacement while continuing to make sacrifices in their fight for their rights.
The head of Hamas Political Bureau, in addition, debunked misinformation spread about this visit during a meeting with Arab reporters. Haniyeh also stressed that this visit was a very significant step of his political trip, in which he visited several capitals at the Arab, Muslim, and international levels.
No comments:
Post a Comment