Hamas refuses to relate itself to any of the products of Oslo or the consequences of political settlement with the Zionist enemy, as that would be considered a concession, which stands against Hamas’ strategic principles and objectives.
Islamic Movements in Palestine: Hamas - IV
- Publish date:10/03/2011
Khalid Mish‘al once again said,
We, in the Hamas movement, are still studying the issue of elections in its different forms, for it is still considered problematic, whether because it is established on a political base, which is a continuation of Oslo and the settlement approach that we did and still do reject, or because it is seen now within the context of the American view, demands and dictates.”
Both backgrounds are unacceptable to us; however, we are in the process of study. The criterion for us is not to obtain personal or partisan gains, or the nostalgia for authority as is the case with others. The criterion, in our sight, is what serves our Palestinian people, and what draws it near to freedom and liberation, and to be rid of the occupation. We hope that Allah The Almighty would guide us to the truthful position to achieve that goal. We, in all cases, practice politics and adopt our different political positions in a way that corresponds to the resistance program and the fixed national rights of our people.
In return, Hamas has no political program by which it could propose its political vision, for it believes that resistance and the removal of the occupation are its strategic goals; and this, from its perspective, does not require a negotiable political program or any compromise of some principles, seeing that resistance alone ensures the achievement of its goals.
Is the political program an end in its own right? Is it a requisite that there should be a political program regardless of its content? If realism requires that any party should have a political program, even if it is against the benefit of the people, or even if it steps over the rights of the people, then how evil is the political program that they talk about!
The fatal loss in the Palestinian arena along decades goes back to the fact that such logic started to infiltrate our Palestinian scene, and some began to talk about a political program. Practically, the political program meant, in each stage, more concession and abandonment of Palestinian objectives and constants until we declined to Madrid, then Oslo and to what is more inferior and worse than both. Of course we support a political vision and program, provided that it should be established on the basis of the rights of the Palestinian people, and adherence to the Palestinian territory.
We believe that the political program to be established on that basis is the resistance-based political program. Resistance alone could provide the necessary atmosphere to drive away the occupation and liberate the land. Each political program has a goal. If the programs of others aim to achieve compromises and co-existence with the enemy, that does not count for us in Hamas.
Let us tell you openly that the general aim of our political program is to drive away the occupation. The political program is not to play with words, or to present compromises, and reduce the aims and rights of the Palestinian people. Unfortunately, the connotation of the political program of those means that we should concede, while the other party never concedes. It plays with sentences, words and accords but never changes its position.
In short, we, in the Hamas movement, have a clear vision and a clear political program which is to seek to drive away the occupation, liberate the land, and restore our rights, seeing that the way to do all of this is only the Intifada and resistance in its different forms. No doubt, political action is a part of this process; but political action without resistance, without military operation, and without real pressure on the occupation is without value.
The Hamas movement has emphasized repeatedly that it is not against the principle of peace: on the contrary, it is with peace, which it calls for, and seeks to achieve, and agrees with the global view that peace should prevail in all parts of the world. However, it is in favor of the just peace that restores to the Palestinian people their rights, and enables them to practice their right of freedom, independence and self-determination. The movement is of the view that the accords concluded until now fall short of meeting the ambitions, and even the minimum limit of the aspirations of the Palestinian people. They are unfair accords that inflict injustice and harm on the Palestinian people, and reward the aggressor for its hostility, and acknowledge for it the right to take what it usurped from others. They are also an attempt to dictate and impose the conditions of the victor, and require the victim to give up her/her rights. An unjust peace of such a nature cannot succeed or last long.
Therefore, the principle of political settlement, regardless of its origin and content, entails the recognition of the Zionist enemy’s right to exist in the greater part of the land of Palestinian, and, consequently, to deprive millions of Palestinians of the right of return (to their homeland), self-determination, building their independent state on all Palestinian territories, and establishing national institutions.
This contradicts, not only international and human values, charters and traditions, but it is also forbidden under Islamic jurisprudence. It should not be accepted, for the land of Palestine is a blessed Islamic territory, which the Zionists usurped by force, and Jihad has become due on all the Muslims to restore it and drive the occupiers away from it.
Based on the above, the movement rejected the project of Shultz and Baker, Mubarak’s ten points, Shamir’s plan, and the Madrid-Washington’s process. Hamas believes that the most dangerous settlement projects are "Gaza-Jericho First" that was signed in Washington on September 13, 1993 C.E., between the Zionist entity and the PLO leadership; the mutual recognition document and the consequent agreements of Taba, Cairo and others. What is even more disastrous than these agreements is that they not only recognize Zionist sovereignty over all of Palestine, normalize Arab-Zionist relations and give the Zionists a free hand over the whole region, but are also endorsed by a Palestinian faction even though this side does not represent the Palestinians in actual terms. All of this means closing the Palestinian file and depriving the Palestinian people of their right to claim their rights or of using legitimate means to restore them. It also consolidates the basis for depriving the majority of Palestinians to live on their land, to say nothing about the consequences that all of this may reflect, not only on the Palestinian people, but also on the Arab and Islamic people.
In view of the dangers posed by the settlement currently in process, the movement adopted a position based on the following points:
1- To promote awareness of the Palestinian people concerning the risks of the settlement and its resulting accords.
2- To group in one bloc all Palestinian forces opposed to the settlement and its accords and to present their principles to the Palestinian, Arab and international arenas.
3- To demand that the PLO leadership withdraw from the negotiations with the Zionist entity and retract from the Gaza-Jericho deal which threatens the existence of our people in Palestine and the Diaspora now and in the future.
4- To establish contacts with respective Arab and Islamic countries to ask them to withdraw from the negotiations, not to respond to the conspiracy of normalizing relations with the Zionist entity, and to give the Palestinian people their support in confronting the Zionist enemy and its plans.