Feb. 3, 2002 The *FREE ARAB VOICE* (http://www.freearabvoice.org) (Your Voice in a World where Money, Steel, and Fire Have Turned Justice Mute) In this issue of the Free Arab Voice (FAV) we present: 1) A Paradigm for Understanding the Arab-Zionist Conflict: the transcripts of a lecture by Ibrahim Alloush and the ensuing discussion in Athens, Greece, in mid-December 2001. 2) (In Arabic) Certain Danger: Jordan and Zionist Plans in the Arab Region. Go to: http://www.freearabvoice.org/arabi/alKhatarAlAkeed.htm 3) (In Arabic) Sharon's Trial and the Globalization of Justice: A Tactical Victory and a Strategic Defeat. Go to: http://www.freearabvoice.org/arabi/muhakamatuSharon.htm 4) To Muhammad A., Another Riveting Poem by Nabila Harb Go to: http://www.freearabvoice.org/arabi/toMuhammadA.htm ##################################################### 1) A Paradigm for Understanding the Arab-Zionist Conflict: Introduction, by Themos Stoforopoulos, the former Greek Ambassador in Lebanon during the "Israeli" invasion of 1982: [The tape starts here. Before that, Mr Stoforopoulos said something about Dr Alloush being in Beirut in 1982] [Stoforopoulos]: ...because it so happened that I also was there, in a different capacity, and at a different age than that of 18 years old, and I remember - and I 'm saying this as an introduction, [Mr Alloush] will now tell you... [George Karabelias:] Themos was the only... [Stoforopoulos, laughing:] These are things George says... [Karabelias:] ... the only ambassador from all the "free world", and the rest of the world, who stayed in Beirut when the attacks were taking place... [Stoforopoulos:] ... these are things George says. But let us now see the political essence of the matter, that there was there a heroic resistance from the Palestinians, that in this, you remember, there was a spontaneous, automatic solidarity by the Greek people, you remember the spontaneous demonstrations then in the streets of Athens, for the Palestinians, which was very [correct].On the other hand I have to tell you that, in this phase also became apparent the - how to call it - the choice of the Palestinian leadership to lean on America in order to advance the Palestinian question, a choice which - in my very humble opinion - was incorrect, and I think this is now becoming totally clear, but also a virtual alignment on OUR part, by Andreas Papandreou in particular, from that time, from 1982, with the choices of America and the west, which is also gradually becoming totally clear.So what do we have here? We have a parallel movement, we have a gradual distancing between the Palestinian people and its leadership, with honest intentions, this must be noted - an incorrect choice, this is obvious - and we also have a distancing between the Greek people and its political leadership. I will not talk to you about my analysis of the Palestinian question, I will immediately give the floor to Ibrahim Alloush, who is the editor of a newsletter that is published in the internet, and which is called the "Free Arab Voice", again in my opinion with very correct positions. We thank him for being here, and I give him the floor. Ibrahim Alloush: Thank you for having me in Greece, thank you for having me in this bookstore, and thank you for coming to listen about the question of Palestine. The question of Palestine in fact, represents the locus of contradictions of many problems in the Arab world today. Therefore, understanding the question of Palestine will help us understand many of the problems in the Arab world and much of the conflict that takes place in the Arab world.Essentially, Palestine is one-third desert. It is very poor in mineral resources and it doesn't have any oil. Its agricultural land is very little compared to the agricultural land for example in Egypt, Syria or Iraq or Sudan. Palestine is only 27000 Km2. Most of its population was basically a collection of poor peasants when the state of "Israel" was declared on the 15th of May 1948. So we can safely say that these poor peasants were by no means a threat to Zionist or imperialist designs in the Arab world. And we can safely say that there are no riches in Palestine that would justify all the efforts that are being extended to occupy it and control it. So this raises the logical question, why was Palestine occupied? And why were the Palestinians thrown out of their country, hundreds of thousands of them kicked out by force?Once we have an answer to this question, we will have a model that will help us understand many of the conflicts that take place in the Arab world today.It is important here to go back a little bit to modern history, or maybe the history of the 19th and 18th century. When Napoleon came to occupy Egypt, he called on the Jewish people to meet him in Palestine. It was beginning to become clear that controlling the Arab world requires controlling the strategic location of Palestine. The same thing happened in the first half of the 19th century.After Muhammad Ali Pasha in Egypt went into Syria and what is now Saudi Arabia, the European powers at the time defeated him and brought Egypt back into the control of the Ottoman Empire.[...]then the British decided that they should have a Jewish state in Palestine. The purpose of this state was to prevent any state in the Arab world from being able to expand from Egypt into Syria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia, and to prevent any group from expanding from the Eastern part of the Arab world into North Africa. By "expand", we mean both actual political unity as well as geopolitical influence here.There are historical documents that show clearly that the British thought that the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine would prevent the emergence of such a strong state in the Arab world. The importance of Palestine then lies in its strategic location between the Asian and African wings of the Arab world.[...] Immediately after the defeat of Muhammad Ali Pasha, the British decided to take under their sponsorship the Jewish people who lived in Palestine. And this was in 1840. Now why would the British want to do this? There are two reasons: The first reason has to do with the fact that the British had many colonies worldwide. The capitalist class in England wanted to make secure its roads to its colonies, especially in India, and the Arab world happened to be the web of communications or transportation across land. The second reason has to do with the international competition. It was crucial for the British ruling class to make sure that there is no strange control, no hostile control in that strategic location that would threaten the roads to its colonies and that would threaten its world domination. After the Suez Canal was opened in 1869 the location of Palestine increased in importance. Now in addition to transportation across land Palestine was overlooking a crucial artery that would connect Europe to the Far East.In the beginning of the 20th century, oil was discovered in many parts of the Arab world. In the 20s and the 30s American and British companies began digging for oil in many parts of the Arab Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula. At that point, economic development in Western Europe and North America was shifting the source of energy from coal into oil [...] Oil became a strategic asset economically and politically. It was more crucial than ever before to control Palestine in order to control the resources of the Arab world, including its oil.Two things happened in the first half, or the first one quarter of the 20th century, and those two things have to be looked at simultaneously: The first thing was the Balfour declaration which gave Palestine to the Jews on the 2nd of November 1917 - of course Palestine was then under the British mandate - and the other thing that needs to be looked at, is the Sykes-Picot agreement between the British and the French, dividing up the Arab world into little parts, especially in the region surrounding Palestine in the Asian part of the Arab World.These two designs, to divide the Arab world and to occupy Palestine, have been the two legs on which imperialist interests in the Arab world always stand. We have occupation on one hand, and we have the destruction of sovereignty and unity on the other hand. In those little states, elites were put into power that would serve the interests of the imperialist classes in the west. In other words, the Palestinians were not directly targeted in this process, they were just a byproduct; their suffering was a byproduct, of implementing imperialist designs in the Arab world. But what we have from this historical preview is a way of looking at things that take place today in the Arab world and its heart, Palestine. In other words, WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW IS NOT AN ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT, WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW IN FACT IS A STRUGGLE AGAINST ZIONISM AND IMPERIALISM BY THE ARAB PEOPLE.Here it is important to say a word or two about the Zionist project itself. Zionism means having a homeland for the Jews in Palestine. Many of those who hold this project, who work for it, do not necessarily operate from the same imperialist motive. They might even have, or think they have, religious or other motives. But this still made them a tool in the hands of British and American imperialism nonetheless.I do not believe in the so-called "war of civilizations". I believe that imperialism operates on economic and political interests on a strategic global level. However, this does not prevent imperialism from using religion when necessary to achieving those interests. And this is how the Zionist project came to serve the imperialist project. We have other examples of imperialism using religion to serve its ends. For example, using Islam in Afghanistan in the eighties, and using Islam in the Balkans in the 90s; and using Christianity also to serve the same interests when necessary. It is important to say this to make clear that what is taking place in Palestine today is not a war of civilizations.Let us remember that the culture that the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the WTO are trying to impose, is not a protestant Christian culture, but a culture that serves the best interests of the ruling classes in the imperialist countries, in the metropolis. And it is the same kind of culture that will have negative effects on Greece as much as it does in the Arab world. WHAT IS TAKING PLACE TODAY IN THE ARAB WORLD IS AN ATTEMPT TO UPDATE THE SYKES-PICOT AGREEMENT THAT DIVIDED THE ARAB WORLD, UNDER A NEW PROJECT THAT IS CALLED "MIDDLE-EASTERNISM". This new project depends on renewing and updating the two legs of imperialism in the Arab world. On one hand, the existing Arab states should be divided further into smaller states. For example, there is talk now about an attempt to break up Iraq into at least three states, and we have published a document on the Free Arab voice website that was translated by an "Israeli" professor called Israel Shahak. It explains the plans, the Zionist plans to break up the Arab world further - five states in Egypt, three states in Iraq, four states in Syria, etc...Thus, the Zionist occupation of Palestine will change its form. Now, the idea is not only to control land in Palestine, the idea is to build a Middle-Eastern empire which "Israel" will be the center of. Instead of direct occupation of the land, there 'll be economic, political and cultural occupation of a Zionified Middle-East. This new situation has created new contradictions in the Arab world. Many of the Arab regimes that used to serve imperialist interests, have discovered in the mid-90s that there is a plan to break them up and limit their regional power. Specifically I am referring here to the three large Arab states controlling the decision-making process on the official Arab level since the second Gulf War, despite the differences between them. These of course are: Syria, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.This is why these three states today are trying to stop the "Israeli" plan to turn Yassir Arafat into another servant of the Mossad. Let me make clear here that I 'm not saying that these states are taking a revolutionary line - I am not saying that - but having found themselves targeted, they are putting counter-pressure on Arafat not to accept American and "Israeli" terms. In return, the U.S. government is putting pressure on all of them in different ways to ease up their conditions in the so-called "peace process", in order to let the Zionist project evolve into the next higher stage.So the battle today is the battle to update the Sykes-Picot agreement. And in this picture of the conflict, one thing remains clear: this conflict will continue. Because Imperialism and Zionism have decided they want to control this part of the world, in order to exploit its resources, hinder its development, and keep its people under oppression, dictatorships and occupation. And I say this regardless of whether the project for Middle-Easternism will succeed or fail.Yet, this project has a cultural side to it. It is important for this project to succeed, that the identity of the region and its people be changed from Arab to Middle-Eastern. Because if we say "Arab", then Zionists will have no place in this region. But if we say "Middle-Eastern", then "Israel" will exist amongst a mosaic of many small states. SO THE BATTLE TODAY IS ALSO A BATTLE IN THE DEFENSE OF IDENTITY. The project of Middle-Easternism is the result of the intersection of two projects: Zionism on one hand, and globalization on the other. But as opposed to this project, there is a counter project, and that is the project of the people to remain free from occupation and oppression. I support the project of the people, and I think it will eventually win regardless of any obstacles - and thank you very much.The Ensuing Discussion: ======================= [A Question about the Role of Islam and Globalization] Well, let's first talk about the state and the national character. There has been a discussion regarding the effect of globalization on the nation state. People claim that the nation state will disappear under globalization. I think this statement is only half true. Under globalization, the state will cease to be nationalistic. But the state will assume increased powers in order to make the project of globalization succeed locally. The project of globalization is a localized police state, which pledges allegiance not to the people of any specific country, but to the interests of transnational corporations in the imperialist metropolis.The same kind of analysis that we use to analyze the nation-state, should be applied to religion.The imperialist ruling classes, just like they will transform the national state to suit their needs, will also try to transform religions to suit their needs. There is a widespread effort to generate a version of Islam that serves the interests of Washington DC. This is why they had people pray in the Congress and the White house recently. They are willing to accept the rituals, and even to tolerate the ideology, as long as they can dictate the political program of the people who claim to be religious. On the other hand, it is true that the attack on the nation state and the national character, will generate groups which resist globalization purely from nationalistic or religious backgrounds. And we should keep our minds open to work with these new allies, especially that many of the leftists spew out leftist rhetoric in words, and accept the imperialist programs in action. After all, what matters in the final analysis is one's alignment in the conflict on the ground. For it is there, not in theoretical textbook models of class war, where the struggle is actually taking place. Thus one cannot possibly be termed more "progressive" if one is standing on the sidelines in a conflict that involves a Third World people against imperialism! [Question about the Peres plan and the turn toward a more traditional occupation policy] Let me say something about the contradictions within the Zionist entity itself. The difference between the left and the right in the Zionist entity, is that the left adopts the new concept for occupying economies, policies and minds, not land directly, whereas the right in the Zionist entity adheres to the old concept of occupying land directly. In fact, as Palestinians, we are very lucky, even though on the surface it seems otherwise, that the people who want to control land directly, that is the Zionist right, have been able to impede the progress of the Zionist left. The Zionist right is fanatic and irrational. They think that controlling a little building in the heart of the town of Hebron, because there is allegedly something about it in the Torah, is more important than the Peres plan for a new Middle East. And because of that, they will impede those plans out of irrationality. This is also a source of friction between the Zionist right and the American administration. So what is going on now, is also an attempt by the American administration and the Israeli left to work with the Israeli right to find a middle ground. Yes, that points to war and genocide, and yes, luckily for us again, the regimes that were supposed to be servants of imperialism have been put in a situation where they are targeted by imperialism, and yes, those are applying counter-pressure on Arafat to hold fast, even if they seem helpless otherwise. [To understand] the possibilities here of the future, we have to look at the international scene: what will the European position be, what will the Russian position be, and what will the Chinese position be. Because as long as these are strong, the three Arab states mentioned will be able to hold fast longer. On the other hand, if the same thing happened that happened in Kosovo - the Europeans supported the Americans, the Russians abandoned Yugoslavia, and the Chinese stood on the side - then the results will not be very good. So far, it seems that all of these groups have been opposing a renewed strike against Iraq, and this strengthens the positions of Syria, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. In this formula, it is crucial to see how small Arab states, like Mauritania or Qatar or Jordan, are being used as political footholds to besiege the large Arab states. That's because under the present Arab division, any weakening of the regional influence of the large Arab states across the smaller Arab states necessarily implies a strengthening of Zionist and American influence there. Political nature, just like all nature, knows no vacuum. Thus it's either Syria or "Israel" in Lebanon; either Saudi Arabia or the U.S. government in Qatar; either Morocco or the West and "Israel" in Mauritania; either Egypt or Sharon in the Palestinian Authority; etc. On the other hand, the political structure of the region is such that the smaller Arab artificial entities can only "break away" from the influence of the larger artificial Arab entities by striking an alliance with a larger countervailing force such as the U.S. government, France, or "Israel".[Note: Mind you, this formula is a realist one in the sense that it says nothing about whether the relationship between the larger and the smaller Arab states would be democratic or not, and it certainly says nothing about whether the relationship between the Arab regimes and the Arab people is democratic or not. In fact these relationships are NOT democratic on both levels. But that is a totally different subject. The point is that the strategic interests of the Arab people cannot possibly be served by having the U.S. government and "Israel" undermine the Arab state system in favor of a Middle Eastern zone of Zio-American influence, even if they tried to establish such a zone under the garb of spreading democracy, or human and minority rights. The Arab state system is very bad indeed, but as Ghandi said: "why do you think the people will prefer a good foreign government over a bad local government?!" Hence, a truly democratic program will oppose ACTUAL plans to consolidate Zio-American influence in the Arab World, not just Zionism and imperialism on the abstract level, while working for democracy on the internal Arab level, which can only be truly realized within the framework of an Arab unity precisely because division was purposely imposed by the West to arrest the democratic development of the Arab World.][Question about the Sept 11 attacks]You are posing many open questions. Let me just say that I lived in the United States for a very long time. One of the biggest problems that Americans face, and I am talking about the average American here, they cannot seem to make the connection between what their government does abroad and the reaction of the people of the world to the policies of their government. Most Americans think of these attacks, or any attacks, against any American target - they sincerely think they are unjustified and unwarranted - and I am not just talking about the WTC. They cannot for example understand anti-American demonstrations in Greece, they have no idea why this happens. There is a problem of ignorance here, on the part of the average American, and this is something that was done deliberately by the American media. There are hundreds and thousands of American media - newspapers, radio stations, TV stations etc - but most of those are controlled by four or five transnational media giants. And these form the American mind and American public opinion to serve the interests of the corporations that these media belong to.I do not think that the attacks on the WTC were self-inflicted by the American government, neither do I think that the "Israelis" did them - I do not think that the Americans did them themselves or that the "Israelis" did them. Regardless of what anyone may think of these attacks, at some point Americans have to begin to understand that for any action there is an opposite and equal reaction. The behavior of the American government in Yugoslavia and in Afghanistan creates the discontent which generates attacks like those of Sept 11. Thus, the Americans have entered the same increasing, ascending spiral that the Zionists have entered. I predict therefore, that the oppressed people of the world, in the absence of an organized, well thought-out alternative, will find ways to take vengeance on the American government for the crimes that it keeps on committing around the world. So what is needed is to create a movement that is able to confront American imperialism worldwide at the grassroots level, and in the absence of such a movement then it is normal to see reactions like Sept 11. But I do not think it is my duty to condemn these attacks, and I deplore the hypocrisy of those politicians who cannot stop shedding tears about the civilians of Sept 11, but suddenly the tears dry up when the murderer is the American government.[Question about a movement of solidarity between the Greek and Arab peoples]First, I would like to say that we also need a movement in the Palestinian field to exert pressure on Arafat not to make concessions to the Zionists. The problem that we are facing here, in Greece, in the Arab world and elsewhere, is the split between the people and the leadership. There is no question regarding the historical links between the civilizations that existed in Mesopotamia and the civilization that emerged in ancient Greek cities. [Both] of these civilizations gave something to human civilization and contributed to its growth and development. And there is also no question that the Greek people as a whole sympathize greatly with the plight of the Palestinian people. And there is also no question that we have common interests as well in the fight against imperialist domination that is taking place today in the campaign called globalization. Yes, let's build more connections between each other, political and cultural connections. But let's not also forget that local battles are fought locally - at the same time we should think globally. Each level of the struggle will contribute to the other level. And to the friendship of the Greek and Arab people we should work and struggle in the common fight for the liberation of peoples from domination from the outside and the inside.[Question about terrorism and provocations][during the entire course of] History the people in power have used the concept of provocation in order to justify measures that would have otherwise seemed too oppressive. Also the weapon of political assassinations is used by the strong against the weak more than vice-versa. Therefore I agree and understand completely, regarding the statement made by your friend - but on the other hand, let's keep an open mind and judge on a case-by-case basis. When the oppressed lack a venue for organized effective action, it is conceivable that certain groups will act spontaneously, which does not change the fact that provocations will exist and will be perpetrated by the intelligence services to justify dictatorial behavior. The Zionists do this, and even Arafat does this sometimes. But we have to be able to judge politically, to distinguish between the two types of action.[intervention by Th. Stoforopoulos:]I want to say two things, it is not a question. One is, because I had the luck to live with the Palestinian people and to serve in Arab countries, [I 'm not afraid, and don't believe that in the last few years there has been such a dramatic change in] the Palestinians and the Arabs I knew, I 'm not afraid of old ideas, such as that of a united Palestine - not of the two states, but of united, democratic Palestine. The second thing I want to say is how much I agree with our friend that we have common anti-imperialist interests, more precisely as concerns the Turkish plans in Cyprus and the Aegean Sea. Why? Because it is well known that imperialism, western and Turkish, uses [occupied northern] Cyprus both against the Arab nation, with military bases, etc ...- Allow me to interrupt you for a second. May I?[Stoforopoulos:] Of course you may.-Well, you are forgetting a very important thing here: The "Israeli"-Turkish military and security alliance.[Stoforopoulos:] Absolutely right. [smiling:] I am not forgetting, but you are right to remind me of it.- In fact now the strategy of encircling the large Arab states includes the help of the Turkish regime. And there is another issue that we shouldn't forget: I am an Arab, but I sympathize with the suffering of my Kurdish brothers who have been suffering just as much as the Palestinians have, and who also deserve to obtain their national rights. And in this area, the Turkish regime has been very active in oppressing several groups: The Kurds, the Arabs and the Cypriots[Stoforopoulos:] We are in complete agreement.[Question about the current situation about whether today in Palestine there is a development leading the majority of Fatah to positions against Arafat and in reality to a unification (a convergence) between Islamic groups, like Hamas, and organisations like Fatah, or Marxist ones, like the Popular front and the Democratic front.]Answer: The Palestinian situation, the internal Palestinian situation, is quite complicated. Initially groups like Hamas and the Jihad were viewed as counter-weights to national and leftist groups. But there have been some developments in the last ten years. The Islamic movement has come to contain many elements which are fighting actively against the Zionist project. And this has brought them closer to many militants in the national and leftist movement. In fact because they have been willing to make sacrifices and because their political stances have been stronger, they have won over thousands of cadres from the leftist and nationalist camp. They have also undergone a transformation: Whereas in the past they were emphasizing religious issues, namely ritualistic religious issues, they are now emphasizing political issues, and they are now actively engaged in armed struggle against the Zionists. And this is making them win the support of the Palestinian people, including the support of many people who do not agree with their ideological project. This is not strange in the history of people worldwide. I read American articles which said that the Vietnamese people or the Chinese people did not necessarily support communism, but granted their support to a communist leadership which was able to undertake effectively the national tasks of uniting and liberating their country. This is the role that the Islamic movement is playing now in Palestine and to the extent they have been able to fill the void that was left by the retreat of national and leftist groups, they have been gaining more and more popular support. On the other hand, the Tanzim of Fatah, the organisation of Fatah during the second Intifadah, is actively targeted by the Zionist occupation. So they find themselves in the same trenches with Hamas. The same thing of course applies to the PFLP. Now the structure of popular support in Palestine today is as follows: Generally speaking, support for the left has decreased tremendously, support for the Islamic movement has increased tremendously, and within Fatah two branches have grown, the organisation of Fatah, which is fighting against the Zionists, and a small group, like Preventive Security, which is coordinating with the Zionists - so this is the landscape of the Palestinian internal situation today.[Q: Up to which point can the PA allow the attacks by Hamas, Jihad, or Fatah itself against the Zionists][Let's not] forget that Arafat's authority is legally based on the Oslo agreement. The Oslo agreement states that the Palestinian police force will be delegated the task of defending "Israel's" security. In the history of colonialism in the world, it was a tradition for the British and the French to create a local power to oppress the locals. The Zionists have been refusing to do that until 1993. And Arafat has accepted to do that task, until it became clear that even those concessions that the "Israelis" promised under the Oslo agreements were not going to be fulfilled. So he went back to playing the same game he used to play before Oslo, which is to give the "Israelis" some of what they want, and try to pressure them on the other hand to make a few concessions. Of course that is not acceptable to the "Israelis" because they brought him in 1993 to be their policeman, and he is willing to play that role, as long as they give him something, like the semblance of a state. But there are certain things he cannot do, even if he wanted to. For example
Once again I say that we are very lucky to have arrogant Zionist politicians
to force people who were willing to work with the Zionists - to force them
against their will into the same trenches with the Palestinian people.
[Q: conflict between Americans and Sharon]
We have to understand something. There are many Arabs who think that
American policies are dictated by the Jewish lobby in the US. And in fact
there is a very powerful Jewish lobby in the US. But I do NOT think this is
the locomotive behind American policies in the Arab World. I think that on
the contrary, just because the state of "Israel" was established to serve
imperialist interests, the success of the Jewish lobby in the US arises from
the fact that the interests of this lobby interact positively with the
interests of American imperialism. The Jewish Lobby is not forcing America
to do something against its interests, in spite of the fact that there might
be discrepancies sometimes - and this is normal within any alliance, within
any political organisation, even within the same family. So those
discrepancies remain discrepancies, they do not turn into fundamental
contradictions, like the contradiction between the US and Zionism in one
hand, and the Arab people and the people of the third world on the other
hand - those are not just discrepancies, but fundamental contradictions that
can only be resolved by force. As for the contradictions between Sharon and
America, yes they may dislike his style, and yes, he may belong to a group
that is a little behind the times - and if they had any brains, for the best
interests of the Zionist movement as a whole, it would be better if they got
rid of him, to bring in his place Zionists who can think on a more strategic
level. And even if they were to work toward that end, that would not mean at
all that there is a problem between Zionists and the US government. It will
be more like the parent punishing his child a little for its own good.
[Q]
[what is happening] now, regarding Arafat, the Zionists and the US
government is a game of brinksmanship - making things reach a certain level,
right before the explosion. They make Arafat feel threatened, and possibly -
you know - threatening him with assassination - but they stop just short of
doing it. It is like a way of making him fall into their hands. So they
always seem like they are about to attack and kill him, but they back off.
Even the game where the US is holding back Sharon is part of that charade.
Arafat would be willing in fact, to get himself out of this dilemma, to do
some of what they want. When they submitted a list of 30 activists to
arrest, he arrested 12 of them - but they said that was not enough, and he
did not do it by the specified time. So they attacked him again. In other
words, he has to stop playing games, and has to completely become their
pawn. What I am saying is he is willing to do much of what they want, but
he's trying to retain a measure of independent decision-making. [and they
are] saying: "You cannot do that, you have to be our policeman, to take
orders from us". To emphasize this point, when Camp David II took place in
the summer of 2000, Arafat was prevented from contacting anyone outside.
Especially they were angry if he tried to contact Egypt, so they cut off his
communications, he was secluded like a hostage - of course Syria was already
calling on him to leave Camp David II - but now what is going on, they are
telling him, "you 'll be secluded WITHIN the so-called self-autonomy area".
If you read the Oslo agreement carefully, you 'll see that section 4 of that
agreement, which is allegedly between the Palestinians and the "Israelis"
only, talks about opening Arab markets to "Israeli" trade. So the idea from
the Palestinian state itself is to become a foothold for Zionist power in
the rest of the Middle East. The Palestinian state in and of itself is not
necessarily something that the Zionists would disagree with. In fact it may
be a very useful bridge between Zionist economic and political power and the
rest of the Arab world - and this is also part of the attraction of Hamas to
the Palestinian people: they do not talk about a Palestinian state, they
talk about liberation, and the correct slogan politically is liberation, not
a Palestinian state on less than 20% of historical Palestine, under the
conditions dictated by the US government and the Zionists. In short to
answer your question, Yassir Arafat is put in a field of threat where his
existence is subject to assassination, both physically and politically, and
the stakes of this game: will he become a follower of the US government and
the Zionists, completely, no games - or will he remain susceptible to
counter-pressure from large Arab states as he is now? I said earlier that
Palestine is the locus of the contradictions in the Arab region. So the
resolution of Arafat's dilemma extends beyond the area where he is besieged.
It pertains to the larger questions: will the larger Arab states succumb to
pressure? Will the Europeans the Russians and the Chinese make a deal with
the Americans? Once we answer these questions, we will know the answer to
Arafat's dilemma.
#####################################################
2) (In Arabic) Certain Danger: Jordan and Zionist Plans in the Arab Region.
Go to: http://www.freearabvoice.org/arabi/alKhatarAlAkeed.htm
#####################################################
3) (In Arabic) Sharon's Trial and the Globalization of Justice: A Tactical
Victory and a Strategic Defeat. Go to:
http://www.freearabvoice.org/arabi/muhakamatuSharon.htm
#####################################################
4) A Poem by Nabila Harb:
To Muhammad A. Go to:
http://www.freearabvoice.org/arabi/toMuhammadA.htm
#####################################################
##################################################### The Free Arab Voice is an alternative newsletter that comes out only in cyberspace. For other FAV issues, please visit: http://www.freearabvoice.org/favPrevIssues.htm Sign a real right of return petition at: http://www.freearabvoice.org/A-RealRightOfReturnPetition.htm Check out a special slide show on Palestine at: http://www.freearabvoice.org/RememberPalestine.htm Read the In Response to Defeatist Thought series at: http://www.freearabvoice.org/InResponseToDefeatistThought0.htm To read on Arab contributions to civilization, click on: http://www.freearabvoice.org/arabCivilMain.htm For Palestinian Poems in English, go to: http://www.freearabvoice.org/rhythmsOfTheStorm.htm The Free Arab Voice welcomes your comments, suggestions, and submissions. If you do not wish to be on FAV's mailing list, please indicate as much by writing to us. |
FAV Editor: | Ibrahim Alloush | Editor@freearabvoice.org |
Co-editors: | Nabila Harb | Harb@freearabvoice.org |
Muhammad Abu Nasr | Nasr@freearabvoice.org | |
FAV Webmasters: | Administrator |
FAV Home Page - > Please click on the logo above, and we'll FAV you there :)