The humanitarian aid ship recently attacked by the Israeli Defense Forces flew a white flag and was sailing in international waters. How can anyone say it was a threat to “Israel’s right to exist”?
No one can, and it wasn’t. The real existential threat to Israel is the violence upon which it was founded and that it continues to impose on the Palestinians. If the Palestinians are a threat to Israel’s existence, it is not because tomorrow militarily they can defeat the Israeli army, corner the government and dissolve the state. It is because their cause is just, and that cause is what Israel has been trying to bury since 1948. The more it tries, the more it finds it cannot do it. And the more it cannot do it, the more it tries. So we witness the horror of what happened on the Mavi Marmara. Israel is seemingly unconcerned about committing murder in front of the eyes of the world.

But even it was more than murder. Five of the victims were shot in the back, or in the back of the head. One victim was shot five times from 45 centimetres. This is not murder; it is destruction. There is a level of violence here that is sadistic and vengeful. In reality, this is what Gazans and Palestinians face every day. And it is becoming more and more clear to the world — that is to say, to the world’s people, because governments know very well how brutal and ruthless Israel is, whatever they pretend otherwise.

Norman Finkelstein recently said that Israel is now a lunatic state with 300 nuclear warheads. He is right and it is time, before the unimaginable is what we are obliged to live through, that the world deals with this massive threat that is Israel. Another analogy is Macbeth. Israel has so much blood on its hands that it sees phantoms everywhere, and can only go forward by more killing.

It is not individual Palestinians that haunt Israel. It is Israel’s injustice to the Palestinians.

In a speech last week, Binyamin Netanyahu proclaimed that those aboard this ship were “violent supporters of terrorism”. What is your response to this statement?
Netanyahu is so cynical, and this statement so outlandish, it is a challenge to know how possibly to respond.

First, this flotilla was bringing wheelchairs, spare parts for wheelchairs, paper, medical supplies, basic goods. It seems for Netanyahu a terrorist act to help the disabled. Second, no one aboard was armed, but in the attack it seems Israel expected those onboard to be shot by its soldiers without protest. Third, for Netanyahu, anyone who supports the Palestinians in Gaza in any capacity whatsoever is a “supporter of terrorism”. Given that Israel blocks all attempts to support the Palestinians in Gaza, anyone who insists on supporting them is deemed “violent”. The same was true up until only a few years ago of anyone who supported Fatah in the West Bank. In reality, Israel regards all Palestinians as terrorists or potential terrorists. This is all it sees. Around every corner, at every window, for Israel, is an existential crisis. What it refuses to see, and what it cannot see, is that it is an occupying power, not just of the Arab lands seized in 1967, but the Arab lands seized and expropriated by force in 1948.

Again, Israel simply cannot face up to its own bloody origin. It is a settler state, founded in violence by individuals who came from outside to an Arab country. Given this reality, international law affirms that the Palestinians — and indeed anyone else who wishes to assist them — have the right to use any and all means necessary, including use of armed force, to end this colonial situation and achieve self-determination in Palestine. The law of self-determination is unequivocal on this point. Even if we ignore that Israel’s admission to the United Nations System was conditional and that it has failed to meet the conditions set down, and even if we pretend that its occupation concerns only the land seized after 1967, we still cannot call resistance to Israeli occupation terrorism.

The Palestinians constitute a national liberation movement and this has legal meaning under international law. Moreover, other states are freely permitted to support this movement, and any component of it, if they wish.

Not that anyone is actually arming the Palestinians, as we can see from the homemade rockets they are occasionally able to fire into Israel from Gaza. But if states wanted to, they could arm the Palestinians. And who — having seen the horrid destruction and loss of life Israel inflicted in but its latest wholesale offensive on Gaza in December 2008-January 2009 (the latest in a very long line of offensives) — could say that the Palestinians in Gaza didn’t have the right to defend themselves by use of arms?

In short, Netanyahu is the violent supporter of terrorism, and an instigator of it: the terror of the Israeli state against the Palestinians.

Gaza is the world’s largest open-air prison: in essence, a concentration camp. Why is Israel permitted to perpetuate this genocide against the Palestinian people?
There are a number of factors. In what order they come is difficult to say.

There is Western racism against Arabs. There is the entire Orientalist attitude, which sees the Arabs as little more than Bedouins, camel rangers, or the nouveau riche. In a word, slaves or former slaves. Then there is fear of organised Jewish power, in the form of the political lobby and financial and media-based Jewish interests. Then there are Western strategic interests in the Arab world, based principally around hydrocarbon resources, and which run counter to Arab interests in autonomous development. Then there was the horse-trading that divided up the Arab world in the time Sykes-Picot.

All these factors militate towards Western tolerance of Zionist aggression against the Palestinians, both over the last 60 to 90 years and still today. Gaza is but the highest expression of this. And while the overwhelming majority of state actors know the reality of it, the international arena is so filled with cynicism, self-interest and continual threats from imperial and colonial powers that nothing seemingly can be done about it.

This is where ordinary people come in, and this is where ordinary people are changing the logic. For Israel is no longer able to perpetuate this genocide against the Palestinian people — at least no longer without consequence. Perhaps the greatest expression of this popular power is the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, that every day is gathering more and more momentum. Meanwhile, brave souls like those aboard the Mavi Marmara, at least nine of which died doing so, will continue to attempt to break Israel’s stranglehold over the Palestinians and expose for lies Israeli propaganda.

We in the BRussells Tribunal said it and I am sure of it: this is not the end, but only the beginning. Whereas aid ships used to try to get through alone, now they come in groups. When a thousand ships set sail, what will Israel do?

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan denounced Israel’s murderous deeds with these words: “It is no longer possible to cover up or ignore Israel’s lawlessness.” What are your thoughts?
He is right, but this realisation was a long time coming. And many Palestinians were killed in the meantime. Israel’s crimes are practically numberless. Decade upon decade, we see incident after incident. But it is one thing to recognise crimes and another to do something to end them. Above all, the Palestinians need not words but actions. If they want words, they can turn to Arab leaders. Israel’s victims in the future — whether next week, tomorrow or next year — need action now.

As for Turkey, it is not about starting a war against Israel. We need Turkey to use its influence and to build a coalition first to break the siege on Gaza, if necessary by threat of deploying a multinational naval escort; second, to demand that Israeli leaders responsible of grave crimes (which means all of Israel’s leaders) are brought to justice. Third, the international community must cut all economic ties, all defence coordination and contracts, and all diplomatic, intellectual and cultural links with Israel until Zionism is recognised as racism, the right of Palestinians to self-determination and the right of return of Palestinian refugees are realised, and equal rights are guaranteed for all in historic Palestine. Until this happens, Israel will continue to be the single biggest threat to world peace, and the possibility of a better world will continue to fall into and be suffocated by the black hole of Israel’s insistence on perpetuating injustice against the Palestinians.

Considering the Goldstone Report, the assassination of a Hamas leader in a Dubai hotel, and this latest incident (not to mention dozens of other Israeli crimes against humanity), when will the world reach critical mass in regard to Israel’s reign of terror?
It has already happened. We wait for events to catch up. The overwhelming majority of the world’s population knows the truth about Israel and its leaders. They know that Israel is a lunatic state that insists on racial and religious purity; that it is at war with all of its neighbours, and that it practices brutality morning, noon and night. Who really needs convincing who could be convinced?

In your opinion, why does America continue to blindly follow (and enable) Israel’s pathological bloodlust in light of so much global condemnation?
Israel is a proxy of the United States in the Arab world. Its function is to divide Arab states internally and against one another. Washington’s greater aim is to block all sovereign Arab development and dominate natural energy production and consumption from the region. When America spends $200,000 a minute on oil, you can guess at how important it is to keep the Arabs from realising their geo-economic potential. This also suggests the unbreakable link between resistance in Palestine and resistance in Iraq — indeed resistance anywhere to US geostrategic plans for the region.

Ultimately it comes down to the internal system of power in the United States. It is one built on consumption of oil. Practically nothing in the consumer market doesn’t have an oil derivative in it. It is about far more than gasoline. If that system of consumption collapsed, how would America’s elite keep 300 million people in line? Consumption in the United States is a technology of government, and its currency is oil, of which the Arabs have a lot — enough to keep the US order of things going for a few decades yet.

Why seize that oil instead of buying it? Because America has the military might to do so, or to try to do so. And military technology and equipment has its own sequence of obsolescence. Hence the unnecessary wars in which, also, vast profits are made. Some think that George W Bush was ignorant. On the contrary, he knew what the United States is. And during his time in office, Washington became indistinguishable from Tel Aviv, or vice versa.

Obama is either unwilling, unable or doesn’t want to break from that. I feel genuinely sorry for those who bought into the lie that he would. He won’t and he never intended to. To quote from Borowski, “It is hope that compels man to hold on to one more day of life, because that day may be the day of liberation.” Obama might be able to sell hope to America, but the Palestinians have no hope in Obama. Thus they will continue — for they have nothing to lose — to confront Israeli injustice, and so should we.

Even for eyes burnt witnessing human suffering, there is something shocking, something impossible, about watching Israeli soldiers, armed and in gas masks, fast-roping from helicopters onto an aid ship filled with civilians — journalists, parliamentarians, human rights activists, mothers, doctors — headed to Gaza to break the inhuman siege that keeps 1.5 million people somewhere between life and death.

The Mavi Marmara, carrying 10,000 tons of humanitarian aid, was flying a white flag: a universal symbol of non-violence. It was also flying the Turkish flag, in international waters, giving it status as a sovereign extension of Turkey. Regardless, Israel attacked. For what does Israel fight? Its existence, or the continuance of a regime of collective punishment calculated to destroy the Palestinians? Or are these the same thing? Dead: 19. Injured: 60. Who gave the order? Will NATO react to an attack on one of its members?

Simple public murder

The right to exist cannot be asserted through murder. The very acceptance of Israel into the United Nations System was — in 1948 — conditioned on the former recognising the equal rights of Arabs, in particular the right of return of Palestinians. Not only has Israel prevented the return of refugees, it took over by force and occupied in 1967 the rest of historic Palestine. From founding until now we have witnessed an unending catalogue of Israeli atrocities. By these countless atrocities, Israel has forfeited any claim to legality — it is moreover a state that refuses to join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or consider giving up its nuclear weapons.

Gaza is both the world’s largest open-air prison and the 21st century’s undeclared concentration camp. Everybody knows it. The UN knows it. The US president knows it. Tens of thousands of civil servants in countries across the world know it. The siege is a way of sealing the exits, and of slow killing. It is an atrocity on the same level as genocide. Here every man and woman has a moral duty: inaction is complicity and a betrayal of humanity. All legal rights are with those who attempt to end this situation by whatever means.

The Freedom Flotilla is such an attempt: it is a refusal of inhuman suffering. Its symbolism is more powerful than any navy. As such, it remains what it was as it embarked on its journey: a signal of the collapse of the blockade. Where earlier lone vessels tried to reach Gaza, now they go in groups. More will follow. When a thousand ships set sail, what would Israel do?

Israel on trial

Israel lost the battle for international public opinion a long time ago. None can forget the relentless strafing of a captive civilian population in Israel’s last war on Gaza. Who can Israel hope to persuade now?

• We condemn the illegal, immoral and inhuman blockade on Gaza, and all who uphold it

• We condemn Israel

• We condemn Israel’s brutal attack on peace activists in international waters. We declare that 700 brave souls, from 50 nations, represent something real that Israeli propaganda cannot erase

• We mourn the 19 murdered and express hope and solidarity with the 60 injured. We demand of Israel the release of all activists detained

• We call on all international institutions — including the UN, the EU and human rights agencies and organisations — to declare themselves unequivocally on this latest Israeli atrocity and to work towards ending Israeli impunity

• We demand an international tribunal to judge all Israeli crimes, past and present. We call on the UN General Assembly to request of the International Court of Justice an advisory opinion on the legality of Israel within the United Nations System given its systematic and gross disrespect of international law and moral authority

• We support all efforts by all means to free the people of Gaza from their prison and their suffering, including sanctions and divestment against Israel, a general boycott, and the boycott — by workers federations — of all ships going to and from Israel

• We call upon people everywhere to express their solidarity with the dead and injured, and with Palestinians under occupation, in local expressions of outrage wherever it is deemed useful.

We call on all associations, unions, parliaments, professionals and others to endorse this appeal and its demands. Please distribute and act upon it.

The BRussells Tribunal Committee
http://brusselstribunal.org

After almost two weeks of impotence, during which an estimated 790 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed, including 230 children, a further 1080 children among the 3300 injured, the UN Security Council passed — with US abstention — a weak and indeterminate resolution that has failed to force the State of Israel to halt its criminal onslaught on the occupied people of Gaza, encircled and unable to avoid being massacred.

Today, the security cabinet of the Israeli government, proving again its contempt for its obligations as a member state of the UN, rejected this resolution in no uncertain terms, saying that the State of Israel has never agreed that “any outside body” would determine its military policy, deeming the resolution “not practical” — this a resolution that was even biased towards it, failing to mention Hamas, the elected government in Palestine. In other words, the slaughter will continue whether the Security Council demands that it end or not.

Israeli impunity, UNSC complicity

This outcome is proof that Israel acts with systematic impunity. It is also proof, as recognized by President of the UN General Assembly Miguel d’Escoto-Brockmann, that the Security Council is “dysfunctional”, excusing by omission massive and grave human rights abuses when perpetrated by one of its permanent members or their allies.

In doing so, and in the face of overwhelming evidence — much televised — of Israel war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza, amounting to substantive evidence of the crime of genocide against the Palestinian people, the Security Council has effectively shown that it cannot — or is not willing to — maintain international peace and security and satisfy the Palestinian people’s national right to live peacefully, free on its land.

Uniting for peace resolution

The world need not endure this horror. A mechanism exists that can take the protection of international peace and security, and the Palestinian people, out of the hands of the Security Council and give it to the world community as a whole, represented by the General Assembly.¹ General Assembly President d’Escoto-Brockmann supports this mechanism and Malaysia already fulfilled the procedural obligation that one UN member state proposes it.

Hours before the Security Council voted on a resolution made so weak and bereft of mechanisms of enforcement that Israel could dismiss it, a General Assembly emergency session was due to be held. There is evidence that this prospect alone forced the Security Council to act, largely to block invocation of Resolution 377. Given the result, and given Israel’s rejection of Security Council authority, it is urgent that this session convenes and imposes upon Israel an immediate ceasefire, according to the overwhelming will of the international community and people everywhere, or face international ostracism.

Israel fears Resolution 377

According to UN General Assembly Resolution 377, emergency special sessions of the General Assembly are warranted to act when the Security Council “fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.”² The government of Israel itself has ensured the failure of the Security Council to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.

That Israel’s violations of international humanitarian and human rights law in Gaza are so flagrant, and that Israel rejects the authority of the Security Council prime facie, suggests as the only route possible — a last resort for the Palestinian people in Gaza — the convening of an emergency session of the General Assembly where no veto could be invoked, to impose on Israel an immediate ceasefire backed by credible collective measures.

Urgent call for action

As stated by the Palestinian human rights community in their 30 December call to invoke Resolution 377³: “The civilian population of the occupied Gaza Strip will inevitably continue to suffer heavy losses without the external intervention of the international community.”

In renewing the call to invoke Resolution 377, we support Special Rapporteur Richard Falk’s demand on “all Member States, as well as officials and every relevant organ of the United Nations system, to move on an emergency basis not only to condemn Israel’s serious violations, but to develop new approaches to providing real protection for the Palestinian people.”

Only the General Assembly can impose, where the Security Council fails, an immediate ceasefire on Israel.

We call upon human rights groups, lawyers and legal organizations, trade unions, intellectuals, the anti-war movement and all people of conscience to support President d’Escoto-Brockmann, demand that an emergency session of the General Assembly be convened under authority of Resolution 377, and to participate in the growing international boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel.

We call upon the UN human rights system to authorize an effective investigation of Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity, including its wilful killings, use of internationally prohibited weapons, destruction of civilian infrastructure, targeting of schools, higher education institutions, mosques and civilian shelters, and even international humanitarian aid workers. The UN Human Rights Council has an obligation to investigate these elements of genocide and in doing so contribute to ending it.

As a signal to Israel, we call upon all states to cut diplomatic relations with Israel forthwith and for the High Contracting Parties of the Geneva Conventions to hold an immediate conference to re-establish respect for international humanitarian law. On the basis of its past and present impunity, Israel should be expelled from the United Nations.

All should demand an immediate Israeli ceasefire, the immediate withdrawal of all belligerent Israeli military forces, and the end of the blockade. Upon realization, collective measures should be taken at all levels to end Israel’s occupation of Palestine and to oblige Israeli society to respect the equality of human rights. Until the occupation of Palestine ends, we underline the legal and guaranteed right of the Palestinian people to resist Israeli aggression by all means.

The BRussells Tribunal Committee
http://brusselstribunal.org

I come to his door, it is open. He breaks off from typing, rises, eyes averted, guarded though we have previously met. Mordechai Vanunu has a lot on his mind. He seems, as we speak, in some way behind his own thoughts, somewhere in the back of his own mind, locked in combat. Only once in two hours will his granite-like gaze be broken — laughing that anyone but God can be reached on a cell-phone. A butterfly flutters in the inner courtyard of St George’s Cathedral, his haven. For exposing the State of Israel’s secret nuclear weapons programme, Vanunu endured 18 years’ imprisonment, 11 in solitary confinement. Kidnapped in Italy in 1986, held hostage by Israel in 2005, though out, for Mordechai it’s not over.

What is the current status of your case?
They gave me one more year to stay here. I finished one already. And they’ve kept the restrictions: not to travel freely, not to meet foreigners, not to go to embassies. I’m also charged in court, for the interviews I gave. My lawyer is trying to prove that all these charges and restrictions are contrary to human rights and democracy. What is in court is Israeli democracy and how it relates to freedom of speech. The United States and Europe speak about Israel as the only democracy in the Middle East, but in fact it doesn’t exist. I suffered 18 years in prison because I demanded freedom of speech.

The last time we met you told me that had you accepted these restrictions, hid in your room, Israeli security would see that you were damaged and would find ways to magnify that.
From the beginning I said I have the right to speak to anyone. I am a free human being. They insisted I would not meet anyone, nor speak, so they kept me for 18 years. After 18 years, I decided if they let me go I should live as a normal human being. Not to fear, not to play obeying orders, like I’m a spy. I should go to the street and meet anyone and talk, because I want to exercise my humanity. For these reasons I’m challenging them and speaking all the time. If I were to follow their orders they would come with more orders, and orders for others. I also want to use my case to let the people in Palestine — the Palestinians — see how to challenge Israel and the rules it puts on them. They should exercise their freedom of speech on every subject.

So it’s important that you stay to fight the legal case.

Yes. But I know in Israel you cannot find real justice or real rights. So I took the risk that an Israeli court would punish me. I also believe that by speaking and meeting people I’m bringing my case to the world media. If I kept silent the media would ignore my case. By talking my case will be open and the world media will judge Israel according to what they do to me or to others. For that reason I think it will be very difficult to punish me in the name of these restrictions.

Given that you have nothing new to reveal about Israel’s nuclear programme, these restrictions must be related to a broader purpose.
It is part of the Israeli system. There is a central power that is guiding and controlling people according to certain rules; what it wants people to know, how to behave. By challenging them I’m challenging this system. From the beginning this case was a challenge to the system. They used to remind the Israeli people constantly, “holocaust, holocaust!” but then I came and let them see that the real problem is Israel’s atomic bomb. That is the real holocaust. Or what they did to the Palestinians is the holocaust. We cannot live in the past. I am here saying, “No, we should see what you are, what kind of a society you are building here.” We can see what is happening now, what Israel is doing, how they behave. They are treating people like animals. This is what Nazism did. And this is what Israel is doing now to the Palestinians, or to me.

What is bothering them is that I continue to speak loud and clear. The world knows my case, so it is not a solution to silence me or punish me. They should find real answers. And that is a problem for Israel now: how to continue their brainwashing campaign. They know the world is not swallowing their propaganda — the holocaust, the past, the right to come to this land and expel the Palestinians. If they really want to be a state, respected as a democracy, as a normal society, then they should follow the world standard of equality in human rights, not Jewish special rules.

The blood myth — race, purity — underpins Nazism likewise the “Jewish state”: both seem out of step with history, anomalies or echoes from the 19th century.
From 2000 years ago! This Israeli state poses problems to the whole world. The world was moving towards freedom, democracy, liberty, equal rights, and then the Jewish state came, in 1948, and brought a kind of negative democracy. In the name of state security you can do whatever you want. You can seize rights, invent rules, punish without trial. This system is destroying what the world built from the Greek state until now, and in 50 years. It will not survive long. It has become more and more an apartheid state. They play like a democracy, yet you see there is a super-race state for the Jews. So I believe this will change or be changed in the future; the world cannot swallow it. If the Jewish people had built a state 1000 years ago, maybe we couldn’t have reached the democratic ideals that we have now.

It is a politico-historical problem, or one based in Judaism?
It’s one of the Jewish people following the Jewish religion of 2000 years ago. The Christian faith in Jesus Christ developed and moved, from the old tradition to modern life. One simple change, they moved from the moon calendar year to the sun, accepting developments in science and technology. The Jews, they have their own system of following the moon. They still believe they are the only super-race, the only God-chosen people, while the Christian faith accepts all kinds of people — black, white, slaves, non-slaves. There is no super-race. They are all children of God. So that is the Jewish problem, and I think they have no choice but to accept as equal all the peoples of the world.

To question Judaism these days is quickly labelled anti-Semitism. How do you answer that?

Every race, every human being can believe whatever he wants. But if you want to rule a state, there is only one standard: equal rights and respect of human rights, whoever you are. You cannot put religion above that. So we are not anti-Semitic. You want to keep believing your old faith, very primitive faith, we don’t care. Everyone can go to his synagogue. But to have a parliament, government, that should be for all the people, not biased by religion. In Europe, and everywhere in the world, the Jews have the right to do whatever they like, in their synagogue, in their private life. They should give equal rights to the Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories, and end the occupation. We cannot accept a Jewish state. We demand a secular state.

Given your views about equal rights — or the lack of them — in Israel, presumably you’re not in favour of a two-state solution?
Right. I think the most acceptable solution — and permanent solution — is one state. If you have two states, there’ll still be conflict. You’ll have a Jewish, racist, apartheid state that will not respect the Palestinians (the so-called “Arab Israelis”) and a small state, Palestine, trying to behave like a democracy under effective Israeli power. The Jews may not be ready for a one state solution, but sooner or later they will learn that there is only this solution, if they wish to have a state.

The other thing they have to realise is that you cannot force a people into peace. If you are building the wall and taking land, building settlements, what kind of peace or future exists for the Palestinians? This militaristic attitude should end. It is politicians who need this [military] power. Part of evolution in every state should be to abolish the army. Here, there’s no one to fight, so now they fight civilians. Israel is exporting to the world new kind of activities for military powers — ruling, controlling civilians. Manning checkpoints. Arresting civilians. Checking them. Following them. Questioning them. The model for what America did in Iraq.

On nuclear weapons, given the history of the Jews, isn’t there justification for Israel having a nuclear deterrent?
No, because I think the only way towards safety and peace, towards surviving, is by peace. You cannot survive or save anyone by killing others. The only function of the atomic bomb is if they want to commit suicide: to kill others and to kill themselves. So it is a mistake to say that nuclear weapons are about deterrence and survival. It’s not true.

What did you think of the collapse of nuclear non-proliferation talks at the UN in May?
They came to ask me, “What is your message to this conference?” and I told them I’ve been tired of this treaty for many years because it didn’t do anything. I said, now we want timetables as to when the world will be free from nuclear weapons. Zero nuclear weapons. It’s not enough to say, “We’ll do this; we’ll do that.” We want timetables, years, exact dates. And they should deal with the State of Israel. The time has come to speak out. Israel should abolish its nuclear weapons. The world should no longer accept that a small state cheats. That is what Israel introduced to the world: proliferation and dissimulation — or, lying — not the opposite, which is where the world should go. Now the world knows exactly what’s here and they cannot ignore it. So I’m happy that the meeting collapsed because it made it clear that there’s no real non-proliferation treaty.

In 1986, when you spoke out, the major powers were moving towards weapons reductions. Yet Israel was increasing production.
I came out telling the world that they have the power to produce 10 atomic bombs every year, and that maybe they had 200 already. One of the reasons I sought to publish the Israel nuclear secret was because I felt they were producing too much. Even if you believe in deterrence you can believe they need one, two or four. But I saw they had gone mad, producing 100, 200, and were moving towards producing a hydrogen bomb, which is just for killing millions of people. The United States and Russia abolished their nuclear race. I didn’t accept the idea that the United States is ready to use thousands of atomic bombs to survive, to kill 100 million people in Russia in the name of keeping their capitalism. If socialism or communism is no good it will collapse from the inside. That is what happened.

You don’t need an atomic bomb; you don’t need anything. In fact, nuclear deterrence kept communism alive. It would have collapsed years ago, when Stalin died. It didn’t work. The people were hungry. The same here — Israel became worse, and it’s because of the weapons they have, the atomic bomb. They know no one can tell them what to do. If they didn’t have the atomic bomb they would realise that they have to follow the rules of democracy and human rights, accepting the Palestinians and peace. The message from the Jewish holocaust is that they should respect all human beings, not build atomic weapons. So atomic weapons, in fact, do not ensure survival but the opposite: one day Israel will collapse like communism collapsed.

They should have thanked you for the warning, if not the remedy. How would you describe life in Israel’s prisons?

I understood the game early. I knew that there was a kind of secret warfare engaged by hidden agents. Normally, I am in prison with the guards; there are no state security agents, and no one is fighting me. But underground I concluded there is secret, psychological warfare being conducted by deep-level agents using very sophisticated systems — brainwashing, fighting me. I was very alert. I started to suspect everything, watch everything, accepting nothing as normal. I saw that it was about mind war: their mind against my mind. Their target was to conquer my mind, change it or break it or destroy it. I said to myself that I would use my mind.

My target each day was to find out what exactly they want; what is their mission, what is their purpose. I refused to show I was suffering. Even if I’m in prison, in their hands, I’m still firm and continue to believe in my way. My faith and my mind are very strong. So no matter what they do, how they disappoint me, cause me pain, I refused them the satisfaction of seeing me upset. Even I try to cause them damage — psychological damage. If they try to push me to this side I will go to the other side, the opposite direction. If they try to remind me of the holocaust, I answer them by enjoying German opera. If they try to bring me to the Jewish faith, I answer them by enjoying Christianity or celebrating what is opposite to the Jewish faith.

So it was psychological warfare between us, everyday, for many years, but always underground. My brothers used to come to tell me, “No one is after you, all of them have abandoned you; you are alone.” But it was not true. And that is why they gave me 18 years, because they know if they can change you a little in the beginning — very small, even one millimetre — after 18 years it will become one kilometre change. So from the beginning you fight this one millimetre change, even to go to the other direction, so that after 18 years you will be the same. That is what the world witnessed. When I got out from prison I demonstrated that I want to be the same as I was and to speak and do exactly as I used to 18 years ago, like nothing happened.

Couldn’t your release be not an end but an extension of the game?
Yes, but I think now they realise that after 18 years, if a man still survives such treatment, they’re never going to win. My message is that the human mind, the human spirit, is very free and no one can destroy or change it, not by any system. As long as I am in Israel, they are trying to continue the game. When I get out from here, I’ll feel much more free and continue.

Do you feel a psychological burden from being forced to endure, for 18 years, every moment in a heightened state of alert?
No, it’s not burdening. It’s the opposite. It’s helping me to see much better: to see the reality and understand everything in my own way. And now because I’m free and I can see in the free world — in the street, in shops, on TV — this game, this system, how it is working, how it is controlling.

You had strategies for surviving prison, including music.
I did many things. I started by reading in a loud voice. I cannot speak to anyone so I exercised my speech by reading the New Testament in a loud voice each day, singing, praying in a loud voice. I was fighting those fighting me and strengthening myself. By just hearing myself speaking, reading, singing, it inspired me to know I am strong and alive. If you are quiet, you feel like you not exist. Later I started enjoying music — opera. I enjoyed opera before, but now I asked people to send many more operas. I used to hear them and feel totally free, and happy, like an opera singer. And if something happened to me, disappointed me, if they were punishing me, I could enjoy opera. Every two or three hours, running away from the prison to the opera.

Why opera?
The structure of the music is good. In classical music, the structure is strong. It gets you also to think, to build your thinking in the same pattern.

At 50, towards what aspirations do you intend to direct your energies?
I need to give a course about secret government, or the death of democracy. I would like to find means of teaching a new way of seeing what is happening here; in what kind of society we are now living, what type of life, what type of government we are we having. It is not only here. In every democracy there is a secret power that is governing the government and the state: they use any part of the state, from the media to industry to health, to accomplish their target. So if you have Tony Blair in England or George W Bush in America, it is because these hidden powers decide that these men will serve them. The question is not now. The question is what United States wants to be, 20, 30, 50 years. Take the wall. No other prime minister would have done it. But it was not coming from Sharon. They decided to build the wall in 1990. To succeed, you needed Sharon. And so they brought him and he built it.

What is your view on the Western-Israeli alliance?

Europe and the United States are not ready to accept the Arab world as equal, and the Muslims as equal. And for that reason they ignore what Israel is doing to the Palestinians and Arabs because they treat Israel as a Western state. They believe that Western people are much more advanced; that Arab society is not enough developed to equal them. That’s what the Israelis used to believe about Jews coming from North Africa and the Middle East. But the Arabs can adopt the Western democracy lifestyle and build a modern society, exactly like Europe. For that reason I wrote about the Muslims who modernised their faith. They should let women come to the mosque, pray together, or sit together; not sit on the ground but in chairs; not to wash their feet or face before praying, because they are clean. By doing such things they are keeping themselves behind all the changes in the world.

So sitting here on plastic patio chairs is civilised not assimilated?
I’m not telling them to adopt everything Western, but they should change certain things that are primitive. Why should they kneel on the ground five times daily? You don’t think the church with seats is more civilised than sitting on the ground?

No, I think it’s more human, more humble, to kneel on the ground.
Well, we are working with machines, new games — computers. And we see all these movies of science fiction: that is the direction of the human race.

But we don’t have to establish that direction as truth.
It’s not truth, but we become dependent on watches and mobile phones. Speaking of mobile phones, you can speak to anyone in all this earth, except you cannot speak to God! Why we don’t have his number! At any rate, change is happening. Is it a conspiracy against Islam, or is it development, evolution, new thinking?

You’ve said that you’d be happy to go to the US — that you favour American-style democracy. Has that view changed?
No. I want to be in a very open, free place. I think the United States is a very good place for exercising freedom. Maybe the policy of the government there is not good, but as an individual you can enjoy liberty and freedom. Freedom is having the right to choose what you want, especially to exercise freedom in your political life or beliefs. Freedom of speech is one of the most important freedoms and I fight for it, continue to fight for it, and suffer for it until now. I can accept those who do not accept me, but I don’t want someone to impose on me his direction.

But in America power operates through freedom. You can do what you want, say what you want, no one blinks. Where people are policed in what they say, there is the possibility of real freedom. If the state is absolute there is no need for censorship. Democracy is empty in the West because nothing that is said counts. And an open system is much more stable and difficult to challenge than a closed one, like many we have in the Middle East.

Well, I’m seeing freedom in such a way that no one intervenes in your private life. You can do what you want, as long as you are respecting the laws of the state. No one can dictate to you. This is what you have in Europe and United States. I need to be in a state that offers possibilities. Elsewhere, even if more freedom exists hidden, below the surface, the state is not developed enough for people to exercise that freedom. For that reason I prefer the United States or Europe because they give you more possibility to exercise your freedom. You can travel to anywhere you want, buy anything you want, chose whatever you want to read, because everything is available. Perhaps elsewhere there is freedom, but you don’t have the choice to exercise it, so your freedom is limited.

Sure, the West has choice but the options are predictable. There’s no poetry to life, just “consumer opportunities”.
Yes, the West is boring. Everything is built, standard. You’re not expecting any change, any big event. Everything is in your mind. But I’d still like to experience this other side. That is my aspiration: to be far away from Israel — to be totally free from this Jewish state. I don’t want to be part of this. I’m waiting to get out from here: that is the most important thing — to feel free, totally free. For no one anymore to be interested in what I said or what I do: to enjoy, as a private human being, what I want; to have a normal life, a family; to travel, to see a lot of places around the world, many people, and to find time to read and write. I’m here waiting to end the story. When I leave Israel, it will be the end, a new life. I’m waiting for this new life.

The interviewer is visiting professor in political science at An-Najah National University, Nablus, Palestine.

The BRussells Tribunal condemns the State of Israel for its barbaric killing of 56 Lebanese civilians, including many children, in Qana. 750 Lebanese have been killed since Israel began its military campaign three weeks ago.

Israel’s offensive on the sovereign state of Lebanon is a clear act of aggression under international law and is a supreme crime against peace. The indiscriminate mass killing of civilians also constitutes collective punishment, another imputable crime under international law.

The United States stands accused alongside Israel. It has rushed massive arms deliveries to Israel. Again, it has proven its partiality in the UN Security Council, vetoing all moves towards an immediate ceasefire.

The United States and Israel are acting as one. The illegal pre-emptive war on Iraq was prelude and made possible Israel’s campaign of aggression on Lebanon. No solution to this crisis can be forthcoming unless the United States is isolated and equally condemned by the international community.

Force cannot justify what law denies. Israel’s continued war crimes, which are a staple of its foreign policy and occupation of Palestine, constitute the gravest threat to international peace in decades.

The BRussells Tribunal opposes all rhetoric of a “greater” or “New Middle East” and condemns the use of this phrase to sanction continued killing in Lebanon and Gaza.

Action is possible now

It is time for the international community to fulfil its duty and prevent Israel being the exception to the rule of international norms and peaceful aspirations.

Under UN General Assembly resolution 377 of 1950 — the “Uniting for Peace” resolution — the General Assembly is empowered to act where the UN Security Council has failed. The UN General Assembly can and must, as an urgent measure and as a moral imperative, convene an immediate emergency session, condemn the State of Israel, and its partner in crime and arms supplier, the United States.

Israel must cease all military operations immediately and unconditionally.

The international community must also stand against US-Israeli plans for the post-aggression interjection of an international force in Lebanon. Any “stabilising” force should be stationed on the Israeli side of the Blue Line. Israel is the aggressor state and must be restrained. It is the sovereignty of Lebanon that must be guaranteed.

The Lebanese have the sovereign right to decide how to organise the defence of their territory and they stand in agreement on how to resist. Their right to resist is guaranteed by the UN Charter and customary international law.

The UN General Assembly should act to implement all UN resolutions regarding Palestine, Israel and Lebanon — including resolutions 194, 242 and 425 — and demand the immediate withdrawal of Israel from all occupied territories, along with just compensation for all human and material losses.

The BRussells Tribunal calls upon all organisations, institutions, parliaments, governments and individuals to ACT NOW and call for an extraordinary session of the UN General Assembly to condemn Israel’s aggression on Lebanon and its continuous war crimes. Inaction or silence is complicity.

The BRussells Tribunal Committee
http://brusselstribunal.org

Public demonstrations are essential, but even more is demanded of us. The system has to be disrupted completely if there is to be any chance of minimizing the casualties of Israel’s coming ground invasion and re-occupation of South Lebanon.

We call on all workers, all management, all professions, all unions and syndicates, and all Arabs to begin immediately a general strike.

We appeal especially to dockers, oil workers and airport workers. Anyone who has a position in the supply chain for Israel should act on their conscience.

This action is needed now. We believe the invasion will begin this week.

General strike, now!

Over 250 Lebanese civilians dead within a week, all murdered by the State of Israel. If the elected leaders of the states we, the people, compose do nothing about this, international society is nothing but illusion — camouflage and safety valve for unbridled aggression.

Israel cannot wantonly kill civilians and claim “self-defense”

Collective punishment is illegal under international law

The scale and target of Israeli military strikes is utterly disproportionate to the legal resistance operation Israelclaims provoked them.

This lack of proportionality itself constitutes war crimes and crimes against humanity

Condoleezza Rice suggesting “conducive conditions” must appear before any ceasefire be negotiated is tantamount to aiding and abetting war crimes and is imputable under international criminal law

It is paramount for people everywhere to mobilize now to save Lebanese civilians, understanding that their suffering mirrors the impact of US-Israeli colonial imperialism in Palestine, Iraq and elsewhere

Tel Aviv and Washington: Executioner and apologist

Following the intended destruction of the Iraqi state and society by the United States and its allies, (condemned by the BRussells Tribunal), and the catalogue of atrocities of recent years, no one can maintain that the United States and Israel — international tyrant and regional proxy — have anything but the most contemptuous plans for the Arab world and its people. Not only do we have stomach a barrage of lies and endless attempts by Bush and his oil company paymasters to enact their own version of the domino theory across the Middle East, last week witnessed what could be an audacious bid to begin the endgame: one that likely will lead to a major, multi-state regional war which surely would include, sooner or later, the use of nuclear weapons.

From Iraq to Palestine and across all the crooked pro-Washington Arab regimes, the US alliance with Israel — which now has reached insane proportions of mutual devotion — has brought nothing but torture, violence and mass destruction to the Arab world. The opening years of the second millennium have crystallized all the injustice of the last century. And in this conspiracy, corporate mainstream media plays a willing, opportunist role.

Now we are obliged to sit back, relax and watch Lebanese citizens be exterminated in an orgy of Israeli violence. We refuse. We are cajoled to believe that Israel is the victim and the only fair-playing actor in the Middle East. We do not believe.

The right to resist

The resistance operation that was the alleged trigger for Israel’s latest foray of war crimes was legitimate under international law. Despite Israel’s withdrawal from much of South Lebanon in 2000, it has continued to occupy the Shebaa Farms area, contrary to UN determinations, kept thousands of prisoners, as well as routinely violate Lebanese sovereignty with flyovers by Israeli warplanes.

For over a quarter of a century, customary international law has explicitly sanctioned the use of “all means” necessary to achieving effective self-determination for peoples under colonial rule or occupation. There are hundred of thousands of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon since 1948 whom Israel refuses the right to return to their homes, as stated in resolution 194 of the General Assembly of the UN. The nature of Israel’s colonial designs on Lebanonis well established. So long as Israel occupies Lebanese land, Hizbullah — or any other popular force — has a right under international law to repel and resist that occupation. Nothing in international law prohibits the taking of prisoners of war, which Israel’s captured soldiers are.

Regardless of whether Israel likes it or not that its colonial plans are resisted by those it would subjugate, nothing — certainly not morality — allows it to displace its fury upon a civilian population. This is what it is doing. It is not even targeting Hizbullah.

Colonialism and the fight for justice

In reality, Israel’s bombing of Lebanon has nothing to do with two soldiers. Bush and advisors are saying now that Hizbullah should be addressed militarily: that a ceasefire “won’t solve the problem,” which in their view is resistance to US-Israeli colonial plans.

History has taught repeatedly that no grievance is ever forgotten until justice is attained. Thus, it is impossible to separate Israel’s bombing of Lebanon from its history as a state founded on the dispossession of another national entity — the Palestinians. It is also impossible for Israel to achieve its ends through force, just as the United States has failed in Iraq.

The State of Israel claims, nonetheless, a free hand to do whatever it wishes, wherever it wishes. In this, the US is its most valued apologist. In clear violation of an agreement brokered by Condoleezza Rice herself, Israel is starving Gaza to the point of humanitarian disaster, denying entry for the most rudimentary components of human survival. Supported by Bush’s America, Israel has refused to recognize the internationally declared free and fair election results that brought Hamas to power. In abducting members of the Hamas government, it places the entire Palestinian population at risk.

It is time that the Middle East ceases to be the abyss around which the entire world revolves for the sake of the State of Israel. The attempts to justify Israel’s state of exception — a racist conception of blood purity and regional supremacy — have poisoned not only the Middle East but world politics as a whole. Yet Israel continues to be given carte blanche to cut down all who resist its colonial plans without reference to any of the numerous instruments of international human rights and humanitarian law aimed at codifying the most basic moral principles of human relations.

Justice means addressing the unjustifiable exception to all contemporary norms that is the State of Israel. Justice will begin when the world admits what it knows about Israeli strategic intentions, and when Israel knows it can no longer hoodwink the world.

Action now!

We call for the following immediately:

1) Action in the UN General Assembly

The UN General Assembly has created the State of Israel. It has the political and moral obligation to protect the Lebanese state and people. The UN Security Council is morally bankrupt and practically impotent because Americavetoes anything that negatively affects Israel. Israel’s actions in Lebanon constitute a grave threat to international peace and security and thus challenge the founding principles of the United Nations. Under the “uniting for peace” resolution of 1950, the UN General Assembly is empowered to act when the Security Council neglects its duty to maintain order and peace between states. The General Assembly should immediately evoke this resolution and find or create means to restrain the State of Israel and/or expel it from the United Nations system. (Further reading: A Road to Peace in Lebanon? Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith (27 July 2006)

2) Immediate humanitarian aid for Lebanese civilians

Humanitarian and relief aid agencies have a duty to respond to the needs of all civilians in Lebanon affected byIsrael’s campaign of destruction, regardless of nationality. Many already warn of a severe humanitarian crisis but days away as thousands are internally displaced. Citizen-based initiatives are as important, if not more so. While the community of state leaders seems happy to watch the carnage, world civil society should demonstrate in action that this silence is not in our name.

3) Divestment drives and boycotts of the State of Israel

We call for an immediate and complete economic boycott of the State of Israel. Divestment campaigns — successful on many college campuses in the West — should be extended and publicized. The manufacturers of hundreds of US products give money directly to Israel (lists are available on the Internet). All should be boycotted immediately and until Israel has established again its credentials as a peaceful, democratic, and open state and society.

4) Immediate and sustained protest until the killing stops and real change occurs

It is time for wider humanity to address the core reasons for the litany of atrocities — from Iraq to Afghanistan,Lebanon to Palestine — to which we are all subjected as witnesses. These core reasons concern the State of Israel, and blind US support for the racist policies thereof.

Conclusion

The BRussells Tribunal, in solidarity with the people of Lebanon, accuses the State of Israel of war crimes and theUnited States of complicity. We demand the unconditional end of Israeli aggression against the sovereign state and sovereign people of Lebanon.

We call upon people of conscience and moral fortitude everywhere to vigorously oppose Israel’s campaign of mass murder and America’s grotesque alliance with Israeli state terrorism.

We stand with the Lebanese against imperialism and racism, and in defense of human values, democracy and international law.

The BRussells Tribunal Committee
http://brusselstribunal.org

The BRussells Tribunal calls on people who endorse the sentiment of this statement to diffuse it widely. Email contact for the BRussells Tribunal: info@brusselstribunal.org

Is it true that Islamic Jihad members were arrested recently on their way to a double martyrdom operation in Jerusalem?
This was in the news for a reason. We consider it an extension of the targeted Israeli attack on the Islamic Jihad movement from the first day of the truce. Up to this moment it didn’t stop for a minute. Jihad is officially committed to the truce. If it is to be broken, we will announce it to the world.

So you’re denying it?
Yes. The movement denied it in an official statement and emphasised its commitment to the truce, no matter what the Israelis say.

But they were reportedly carrying explosive belts.
This is a lie. This is an Israeli pretence, manufactured as justification to continue hitting Islamic Jihad. This campaign runs from the north of the West Bank to the south, starting with chasing the sons of Jihad in Tulkarem and killing them. The Palestinian Authority is also chasing Jihad. Shin Bet can pretend whatever they want. These mujahadeen were wanted from the very beginning, before the truce.

Do you believe Israel is a partner in peace?
From the very beginning, and amid all this talk about peace, Islamic Jihad hasn’t thought of Israel as a partner in peace. Along with dialogue went the confiscation of lands, the killing of Palestinians and the tightening of the space of freedom in their lives. Delaying the execution of agreements, peddling biased interpretations for its own sake, Israel also manipulated international law for its own benefit. It had the will and the ability to present itself as a country with a peace vision; after all, there is logic to it talking about peace, and presenting itself as being earnest about peace. In reality, this is all decoration: marketing to make peace a hot issue. Meanwhile, the violation of agreements, the killing, is ignored.

Jihad doesn’t see anything called peace with Israel because Israel is an intruder in this region, occupying Palestinian lands using violence and power. It forced people off their lands”a whole nation”and replaced them with other intruders. Thus, we don’t think it is fair to talk about peace with a state that uprooted a whole nation from its land and soil and took its place. That is not right. That’s why the movement believes that talking about peace with something called Israel doesn’t have any place in the lexicon of justice. The reality is that Israel occupied this area and the only right is the right for the Palestinians to demand Israel to leave. If we talk to the Israelis about peace, it means that they have a claim in the region.

In the absence of pan-Arab coordination, how will this situation be resolved?
Talking about a solution between the two sides is a difficult thing because there is an occupier and an occupied. The international equation is balanced in favour of Israel, because America controls everything in the region. The strategic rationale has nothing to do with solutions but is simply about protecting Israel, keeping the peace, maintaining security. The world over is revolving around American foreign policy concepts. It is not for Islamic Jihad to propose peace. Peace is not the alternative.

Our vision of a solution is that the international community pressures Israel to leave the region. Any alternate ‘solution’ is a question, or problem, for Israelis, not the Palestinians. Islamic Jihad believes that the problem will burn as long as Israel remains in an Arab-Islamic region. It is not a matter of generations. Maybe some Palestinians or Arabs and Jews can make peace with each other. The issue has to do with dogma, religion, history and the geography of the land. Peace negotiations will only ever lead to temporary agreements, so long as the State of Israel remains. Things may be cooled down for a while, but there won’t be a solution. There won’t be peaceful relations between two countries, Arab Palestine and Israel. Why? Because we cannot delete from our memory that this land is Palestinian, that the Israelis occupied and forced our people out of it.

So the problem is with the State of Israel, not Jews as such?
The issue is always presented to the world by the Israelis as being one of Muslims holding enmity towards Jews. In fact, it is not about animosity towards Jews. Our problem is not with the Jews. Our problem is with invaders who occupied lands belonging to others, regardless of religion or nationality. There were always Jews living in Islamic states, in Arab countries. The problem is not with the Jews and not with their dogma. Likewise, there have been always Christians. We have no problem with other religions so long as they don’t wage wars on Muslims and attack Muslim and Arab lands. Israel tries to propagate an opposite picture in order to stir up the issue and gain the sympathy of others.

Even if established by force, the State of Israel is nearly 60 years old. It is almost unimaginable that it will simply roll over, pack up shop and go away. In this context, aren’t your demands unrealistic?
Since it was established until now, Israel created a reality for its existence and imposed it on the Arab and Islamic world. It recruited international opinion for its right of existence and was successful, in part, because the Palestinians recognised it, or a big part of the Palestinian nation did. Islamic Jihad’s point of view is that the Palestinian right is a right that shouldn’t be given up, and it won’t change its opinion that Israel is an occupier in Arab and Islamic lands, no matter how hard Israel tries to recruit public opinion and accrue more power. Power shouldn’t dictate right. We wish that the whole world supports our cause because, in our opinion, it is a fair cause, and our demands are the least asked by a nation oppressed and dispossessed of its land. We take courage from the example of previously occupied countries, from international law that gives occupied peoples the right to fight back, to defend themselves against power. Strength may dictate, but it cannot impose right. If now we agreed on the right of Israel to exist on our land, the occupation would last forever.

So the current ceasefire is trivial?
Temporary compromises are possible, but they won’t solve the problem. The problem will remain so long as there is occupation. Right now, the world is concerned to maintain calm. But this situation is apt to explode at any moment. The world is trying to fix a culture: one of the impossibility of the death of Israel. This and other concepts are being fixed in the minds of Arabs and Muslims. This is what we call the psychological war. It is a propaganda war carried out by the West and Israel. We, in Islamic Jihad, are trying to build another culture against that idea: the ability and possibility of removing Israel and winning the conflict against it. It’s becoming like nobody is allowed to say that we can win. Islamic Jihad is trying to convince people that we can win. The other side is holding on to the opposite.

What is your assessment of the role Egypt is playing in Gaza?
We welcome the role of Egypt as a mediator. All the Arabs should have a role to play in the Palestinian issue. The Palestinian issue is an Arab-Islamic issue. To focus only on the Palestinians as though they were separate from the broader Arab nation is dividing it and making it weaker. For some time, Israel was trying to establish individual dialogues and refused all international conferences and meetings with Arabs in general. We need to oppose that logic.

We think that Israel will not withdraw from Gaza in line with the right of the Palestinians but just for the sake of getting rid of a burden. They were forced to do it by the resistance. If people think that Islamic Jihad doesn’t approve of Israeli withdrawals from here or there, they are wrong. We are with them getting out from every inch.

But this, too, is temporary? Presumably, if the State of Israel was disbanded and a single Palestine reestablished, Jewish settlements could stay?
The Jews present in Palestine are living in houses, or on lands, that belonged to Palestinians. How can the problem of a person or a nation be solved at the expense of another? The problem of X cannot be solved at the expense of Y, W or Z.

From the very beginning, they came and kicked the Palestinians out. Israel tries to give a bad image about the Palestinians, that they will kill and kick the Jews out. I repeat; our problem is not with the Jews at all. Coexistence with them as Palestinian citizens is possible. But it shouldn’t be at the expense of our nation. The Europeans made this Jewish problem here. ‘What shall we do with those Jews living here? They don’t have a land or a home.’ It became our fixation. This is the culture that the Europeans fixed over the last 50 years. It became the Palestinians’ problem to solve the problem of the Jews.

How much is the Palestinian Islamic Jihad driven by politics and how much by religion?
Jihad doesn’t separate between politics and religion. We think that dealing with political issues should be borne of a religious stance. Politics should follow religious regulations: the Holy Qur’an, the Hadith and the history of Islam, political fiqh [Islamic thought] and ishtihad [Islamic wisdom and practice]. For example, some people asked: Is entering the PLO halal [permitted] or haram [taboo]? This form”the PLO”is not found in Islamic regulations, so the movement resorts to ishtihad, which is followed and depended upon in Islam.

There’s no contradiction in saying that politics and religion are inseparable while holding that the problem is not with Jews but with the State of Israel?
As I said earlier, we do not discriminate on the basis of religion. Rather, we take wisdom for political action on the basis of our faith.

Traditionally, Islamic Jihad has been closely supported by Iran. What is your view of the pressures bearing down now on that country?
The pressures on Iran from the West are the same as the ones on the resistance movements Palestine and Lebanon. America imposes pressure on Iran because of its stance with the Palestinians. It is the same with Syria. And it imposes pressure on the Palestinian movements because of their stance against Israel. The Palestinian issue is a central issue. American favour depends on a given country’s relation with Israel. If Egypt holds an affable stance towards Israel, America is good to Egypt. If Egypt takes Israel as an enemy, America takes Egypt as an enemy. If Iran were to cooperate with the Zionist project, America would clear all the obstacles from Iran’s path, casting aside all of its claims about nuclear programs, and so on. Pakistan and India already have nuclear weapons, but America ignores them because they are working with the American and Israeli project.

So the war on terror is not cover for a war on Islam?
America supported religious movements against Russia. If Iran applied the religious as America wants, agreed on what America and Israel do, stayed away from international politics, America would keep silent. Islam in the mosque, that which doesn’t exceed the mosque, America accepts. But Islam that demands a political role, America is against. For us politics and religion cannot, should not, be separate.

Recently, Islamic Jihad organised a march in Gaza calling for Palestinian national unity. What do you perceive as the current threats to national unity?
Israel has always been betting on the unity of the Palestinians parties”that it won’t last long. Always, it has done all things possible to penetrate the small gaps and start fights between the movements. But the Palestinians are awake to this, and it hasn’t gotten to that stage. From Oslo or Madrid until now, the Authority put much pressure on the movements, even resorting to arresting the leaders and members of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. But even still, we didn’t reach the stage of open clashes. Hamas and Jihad were flexible in dealing with the Authority. Also, the Authority was flexible, to tell the truth. Dialogue was still there. During this Intifada, the dialogue became deeper and stronger. This made Israel lose its balance and self-restraint: to see that all of the movements, despite local conflicts and differences in ideology, agree upon one aim, which is the necessity of getting Israel out of Palestine.

The policy of Islamic Jihad was to stress Palestinian unity; it wanted to awaken the consciousness of the Palestinians. Jihad succeeded, to some extent, in opening dialogue between Fatah and Hamas, for example, to solve problems surrounding local elections. The demonstration in Gaza was a way of ringing the warning bell to the other movements, reminding them of the greater unifying issues. The refugees are still there, the land is still taken, and the Israelis still exist there. The killings and the invasions are still happening. So you, Hamas and Fatah, should talk, should solve issues in dialogue, and remember the bond of your blood, and that of all the martyrs who sacrificed themselves for the sake of the situation and this unity. It was a way of saying, ‘Do not waste that!’

Western media always talks about the Palestinian ‘factions’, as though there were a problem in Palestinian society, as though Palestinians have no real idea about democracy. On the contrary, of all the Arab countries, Palestine has one of the more vibrant democracies, with a healthy dynamic of opinion. To me, the movements are not factions but political parties, do you agree?
We don’t see anything wrong in the variation of points of view. Variety is a healthy phenomenon. It is a mistake to picture difference as a source of conflict. It can be an entry point towards agreement. It is all relative to the psychological build up of the individual and society. People can disagree in point of views but not the overall aim.

Can you tell me something about the Popular Resistance Committee, which seems a way of ensuring this unity?
Arranging and organising the parties is a must. Islamic Jihad thinks that individual efforts are scattered and useless. There should be an agreement between parties and a general policy set by the nation and the Palestinian Authority. The Authority working in isolation from the public doesn’t serve the Palestinians cause and vice versa. Intra-Palestinian dialogue is critical, as is that between Palestinians and the broader Arab nation. I want to point out that Islamic Jihad even attended one of the Arab summits, to give voice to the Palestinians, and try to gain the support of Arabs and Muslims for the Palestinian cause. Others sometimes try to make Jihad look closed, always refusing dialogue. The truth is the opposite. I disagree with the PLO and Fatah in many things, but I encourage dialogue with them so we can be in the same stream of resisting the Israeli occupation. We believe that Jihad alone won’t be able to liberate Palestine; it cannot work in isolation from the other movements.

Isn’t the Popular Resistance Committee principally a means of coordinating the armed resistance? Political coordination is one thing, but joint action on the ground is another.
There is an arrangement there. But, honestly, I don’t separate the military part of a movement from the political. If dialogue is closed from one side, it will be closed from the other. It all goes back to the prevalent culture and way of thinking. The military and the political in Palestine complete each other.

I’d like to ask some questions that specifically concern Islamic Jihad. On 6 June there was a pretrial hearing in Florida for several men”including University of South Florida professor, Sami Al-Arian, accused of running a funding cell for Islamic Jihad in the 1990s. Do you have a comment?
Anybody who tries to offer any sort of humanitarian help [to Palestinians] is accused. I think it is clear when you look at the campaign orchestrated against some charity funds. In the Gaza Strip, America put pressure upon the Palestinian Authority to close the accounts of charities handling donations for orphans. Those donations are not even sufficient for orphans to buy food and essential needs. America can arrest and charge anybody who offers help to a martyr’s family, or the family of someone injured, as a terrorist. Human rights organisations should pay attention to this because it gives the state license to arrest whoever it wants. It is so clear now, and I read many articles of complaint by those who call for the defence of freedoms in America. It does not only touch Islamic Jihad members, not even Palestinians; they can be Europeans one day. It is not a fleeting issue; it has to do with the future, and the future of freedoms in America.

In the US State Department’s Country Reports on Terrorism 2004, published last month, Damascus is named as the principal headquarters of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Is there any operational basis to this claim?
The Palestinians departed from their land for other countries like Lebanon and Syria. Israel and America want to get them out from Syria now. They are there because they were forced there, not by choice or free will. If anyone is to choose where the Palestinians should go, it is the Palestinians. Or should we be thankful that the United States regards Palestinians as a more urgent case, more important to find a solution for, rather than looking for one for the Jews? How many times can one be made a refugee in a lifetime?

At the beginning of May, Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the killing of Rami Al-Malakh in his village near Tulkarem. Allegedly, he confessed to collaborating with Israeli security forces, giving information that led to the killing of Islamic Jihad activist Shafik Abdul Ghani. Isn’t there another way of dealing with the problem of collaboration aside from mirroring Israeli tactics of extra-judicial killings?‘
Islamic Jihad calls for the application of the force of law on anybody who attacks the Palestinians, either by revealing where resistance members are, in order that Israel kills them, or by themselves killing them. Throughout the second Intifada, Islamic Jihad has been asking the Palestinian Authority to take such individuals to court, as they are doing with those resisting Israel now jailed in Jericho. Do you know any country that doesn’t charge spies? Collaboration, or spying, is the biggest factor preventing the Palestinians from winning the war with the Israelis, or exercising the pressure necessary on them. If Jihad took the law into its own hands and killed somebody, then it has to do with the resistance members on the ground where it took place. This is something the movement itself can’t always control in detail.

This instance highlights an endemic problem in Palestinian society, the absence of trust.
There is trust between Palestinians, and instances of collaboration are but small in number. They are dangerous, though, and something should be done to prevent them. Israel doesn’t only kill, but by illegal means makes people fall into immoral ways that are dehumanising, like exerting financial pressure, using psychological games, taking certain photos of a wife or sister, spreading drugs and alcohol. Israel does all of this in front of the whole world, but when the Palestinians kill a spy it becomes a morality question. Protecting the Palestinian nation is not separated from resisting the occupation. Killing won’t solve the problem”we know that. But there are big cases and in such instances something must be done. The guy you mentioned admitted to collaborating with Israel, not only in providing information that led to movement members, but in agitating in the Palestinian street. His killing will protect many others.

But the two are crimes: he “allegedly” was an accessory to murder and those who killed him are murderers. Not only that, but such actions undermine the moral standing upon which the Palestinian struggle is founded.
Perhaps.

What is your view on the disarming of militants?
Israel is striving towards that and America is helping it. To go along with disarmament would kill the resistance. If we were disarmed how should we resist? Resistance wouldn’t mean anything. We think that if the Authority did what it was asked to do, it would be a success for the Israelis, principally in dividing the Palestinians. Jihad will refuse to give over its weapons. It is taboo and the Authority knows it.

But one of the conditions of negotiations is to do this.
There are many things that the Israelis should do to allow for negotiations. We are always the ones who give. The arms that we have are negligible compared to those that they have. But we don’t have to think of ourselves as weak. Though we don’t have weapons, we think we are strong: we are strong morally, because we are owners of right. In this, we are stronger than Israel. They always speak about”are obsessed with”security, because they are always afraid, while we talk about our rights with ease.

Indeed, the Palestinians cannot be disarmed of their principal weapon, which is moral right.
It is this weapon that frightens Israel, not the guns we keep.

So you’d say that when Israel talks about peace they really mean getting the Palestinians to forget their rights?
As I said earlier, peace lessens the importance of Palestinian rights. But it’s bigger than this. Sometimes Israel enacts massacres, and then some Arabs, even Palestinians, come and say: ‘Let us forget about what they did this time.’ The Israelis are doing all that they can to kill the national sentiment; that is, whatever the Jews do, or whatever the Israelis do with the Palestinians, we have to ignore, both this and the occupation. Yesterday, there was reaction for the killing of two, but today the killing of 200 or 2000 or 200,000 doesn’t elicit reaction. This didn’t come all at once; it came following humiliation after humiliation for the Arabs and Muslims, to force them to this point. They got to a point where even if a whole nation and land was occupied, the Arab summit and the Arabs wouldn’t do anything. The will to defend the nation was killed. For example, Iraq was occupied and massacres enacted, with atrocities committed in Abu Ghraib, with the Holy Qur’an desecrated and dishonoured in Guantanamo Bay. How did Arab leaders react? All this has to do with the future and something bigger than limited killing.

What is Islamic Jihad’s strategy for moving forward?
Our strategy revolves around recruiting the Muslim Arab nations on the side of the resistance, which we see as the only solution for stopping the Israelis and pushing them to give the Palestinians their rights. Four years ago, there was nothing called the apartheid wall. With this they are trying to create a new reality. The Islamic Jihad, with the other movements and the ‘alive’ powers in the Muslim Arab world, think that peace with this entity is a fake solution. Palestinians will never be able to build their country so long as there is Israeli occupation because the Israelis won’t let that happen. This is proven historically and has to do with logic and dogma: if there is Israel, there are no Palestinians. If anything like a limited Palestinian state were to be permitted by Israel it would be temporary; to give them some time to reorganise themselves, and for the Palestinians to relax a bit, tired after such a long period of continuous pressure on them from the world and Israel. In my opinion”not only me, or the Islamic Jihad, but all Palestinians”there is no way to coexist in peace and security as they claim because on their terms there won’t be justice and it wouldn’t be fair. If justice is absent the reasons to fight will remain. In the absence of justice, the solution is the resistance, which is a legal right for every occupied nation.

Two weeks ago he turned his head and said, quite matter-of-fact, “My car was set on fire last night, perhaps you would be interested to know.” Abdel-Sattar Kassem is a picture of respectability. Born in 1948, white haired but burly, a professor of political science at An-Najah National University in Nablus and early runner in the recent Palestinian presidential elections, a virulent critic of the Palestinian Authority, Kassem is no stranger to the risks of the written word. He is author of over a thousand articles and a dozen books, the most controversial of which, The Road to Defeat , traced the deleterious effects, as he sees it, of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation on the Palestinian people, especially under the leadership of late President Yasser Arafat. Imprisoned by both the Israelis and his own government (the latter three times), he describes himself, while laughing, as a “continuous, relentless fighter”. We spoke at his home, beginning with why threats to his life have resumed.

Your car was set on fire, your life threatened. Why?
This is just part of a phenomenon in the West Bank and Gaza, one of the genius acts of Yasser Arafat. For 10 years, things have been solved in this way, and people have been frightened and terrorised by armed men who belong to the Palestinian Authority. It was the same in Beirut. I know because I visited several times. What I used to see was horrible. He used to terrorise people, gathering around him those ethically of a very low standard. All the time I thought this kind of behavior does not befit a revolution. On the contrary, it is suitable for surrender. He repeated the same experience here. I wrote several times about that. It deteriorated. I’m sure that Yasser Arafat was planning this, to make sure Palestinian society would not recover after he died–to ensure that his character remained here. You might not believe me because you do not know the exact details about this man. I followed him for more than 30 years. I always thought these kinds of people would never liberate Palestine.

When he came here I started writing, telling the people he’s a great liar. Don’t listen to him, he’s not going to make a state, he’s going to fragment society, pit brother against brother, and against his sister, his father. He was a very insincere man, very deceptive. Of course he always had a lot of money. He could bribe people–so many. They just receive salaries from the Palestinian Authority for doing nothing. In 1995 I wrote an article entitled “Democracy and Our President”. I made a comparison between Yasser Arafat and Hell; that he is putting democracy under his backside. So he sent somebody to shoot me, and they did.

What exactly happened on that day?
I wrote that article and it was published in a newspaper in Gaza that belongs to Hamas. At that time the editor was Imad Al- Qaluji, who became a minister afterwards. They came after him and beat him. He called me after and told me, “Now look, these people are going to shoot you.” I said, “Okay,” so I had bodyguards. I used to go the university with bodyguards, had bodyguards in my office, in the classroom, when I went to the market, and so on. I discovered that being with bodyguards turned your life into a terrible thing, so I sent them away.

On 28 August 1995 I was returning home from the university. As you know, it’s a five-minute walk to my home. Always I pay attention when I walk, but on that day I was absentminded. Suddenly I saw somebody in the street, near Al-Qasr Hotel. He asked me, “Are you Dr Abdul-Sattar Kassem?” I said, “No”. I looked around to see an open door. Nothing. The houses on my left were closed, and I discovered later that the owner collaborated by closing all the doors and windows. He grabbed my hand. I pulled my hand away and raised it to beat him. Somebody else came out and started firing. I was hit by four bullets, but remained standing. I got into a taxi and went to the hospital. I remained there for six days.

Believe me, that was a horrible day in Nablus. All of Nablus was there in the hospital. It was a public issue. It was there I found out that the one who shot me was named Maher Danden, living in Balata refugee camp. The one who guided him to me was an An- Najah University student named Muslama Thabit. The one who sent Dandem to shoot me was named Jamal Atirawi, an officer in the Palestinian intelligence, while the one who asked Jamal Atirawi to recruit a criminal was Tawfik Atirawi, then head of Palestinian intelligence in the West Bank. It was Yasser Arafat who ordered Tawfik Atirawi to recruit somebody. I learned all this immediately, because in Arafat’s office there was never any secret. I also learned that on that day one of Arafat’s aides asked him to call me. Arafat told him that if he called I would never answer the phone. He was damn right.

I presume you spoke to him at some point during his life?
Never. And I never felt that I needed to or that I should. I always thought of him as an Israeli collaborator or Israeli agent. If you are a true leader and you want to build a country you will be an ethically integral person and you will work hard on productive projects, on the creation of friendships between your people, in strengthening social and political and economic ties, and so on. This man was doing completely the contrary. He succeeded where even the Israelis failed. He was very, very successful. During so many years of the Israeli occupation they were never able to divide society in the way Arafat did, or to create such an insecure atmosphere as Arafat did. Occupation itself means insecurity. But the insecurity made by Yasser Arafat was just more intense than that made by the occupation. I’m not exaggerating that.

So they tried to silence me, but I refused to stay silent. I continued writing. I wrote The Road to Defeat in 1998 and distributed around 1500 copies under the table. People were scared to buy the book. I’m not scared to publish the book; the people are scared to buy the book. And some are scared to read the book. You see, because of the dictatorship, people are cowards. They have learned this over centuries. This part of the world has been ruled in a very harsh and violent way. So people don’t have the courage. People are scared to read because they think the intelligence apparatus is everywhere, behind every curtain, and will say, “Why did you read that book? You’re going to prison for six months because you read that book.” This has been true in some Arab countries, like Iraq, Syria and Saudi Arabia. It’s a sad part of the Arab tradition. But I was not scared. I wrote that book and published it.

In many parts of the world the word remains a danger to established powers. You seem to accept the dangers the word poses to the writer.
Some people write, but for me, I think I have the courage to say it as it is. I don’t go around it. When I used to write about Yasser Arafat I used to mention his name–Arafat. Some others would say “the Palestinian leadership”. Probably they mean the prime minister or a minister or the head of a security service, something like that. I used to just mention the name. Because of my frankness the Palestinian Authority gets angry. Sometimes outraged. And they sometimes tell me, “Well, don’t mention this, just say something around it.” I refuse. I should be direct and honest and state the right thing. And I refuse to be bought. I speak as an independent. I don’t want to be imprisoned by any organisation or to be the agent of any state. When I am free I can write what I think is right. That’s why they have been making so much trouble for me. And I have been making so much trouble for them too.

You believe in combining the activist and author, correct?
Yes. In 1999, I was the first signatory on the “Petition of the 20″. By then there was so much corruption. A few people decided we have to make a statement to the Palestinians. I wrote that statement. People were always scared to talk about Yasser Arafat as the source of corruption. I insisted that in that petition his name be stated. Twenty signed. And I told them–the people who met in the first instance–”Look, if we put Yasser Arafat in the petition, in the statement, we will be imprisoned, and that will make the statement very valuable. If we don’t mention Yasser Arafat they are not going to put us in jail, so that will make the statement worthless and meaningless. So we have to put Yasser Arafat there, and we will go to jail.”

It was distributed in the morning of 28 November 1999. During the night, the intelligence just roamed around picking us up. They came here around 10.30pm. I didn’t open the door. So they stayed down in the street. At 3am they came back, I opened the door and went with them. They arrested, I believe, nine people. Some of us were members in the Legislative Council. Arafat ordered that they should be arrested, but his aides advised him not to do so. So those who were not members were put in jail. Since we were put in jail all the mass media became very much interested in the situation and my prophecy was fulfilled. If they had not put us in jail nobody would care. Arafat was stupid, was very much stupid. So everyone started to talk about it. But the problem was, those who were not arrested did nothing to make the people move. You need a public movement. Nobody cared. According to the public polls, 70 per cent of the people said that we were right in our statement. But nobody went out in the street, demonstrating for our release. Only our wives did. That’s one of the problems that we face in Arab countries; they will tell you, “Yes, what you are doing is good,” but they will never support you. They only give you verbal support.

Our people still do not have the courage to face their leaders, although they are convinced that these leaders are cowards, and they are not the right people to lead. We have been facing the Israelis for years–not all of us, some of us–and we haven’t been able to face 100 corrupt people in the Palestinian Authority. This is probably true for Iraq too. If you look at Iraq, for so many years Saddam Hussein was a very absolute dictator; they didn’t resist him. But they have been resisting the Americans. Probably we need external occupation to make us move. Internally we have been a failure. I think many peoples in the world ask, why are the Arabs not rebelling against their leaders? They see that these leaders are very corrupt, they are US-Israeli agents and puppets, they have been wasting all the money, and so on.

Lately the Palestinian Authority has been arresting people from Islamic Jihad and other organisations. You are lucky, by the way, if you are arrested by the Israelis. The Israelis, within 18 days, will tell you why they are arresting you. And if they don’t have any reason they will release you. And if they interrogate somebody and if there is a confession, they will bring him to court, and he will be sentenced. But if you are arrested by the Palestinian Authority you might never know why they arrested you. And you never know for how long you will stay there. I was arrested in 2000. Nobody ever told me why I was arrested and I never knew why I was released. I stayed six months there. So I talked about these people–who are 11 now–in Jericho prison. I talked about them, and I published written statements they sent to me, about how they were treated by the Authority. The Authority didn’t like it, so they burned by car.

This 11 are related to the February bombing in Tel Aviv?
After the explosion in Tel Aviv on 25 February 2005 the Israelis arrested some Palestinians from Tulkarem area and a few hours later the Palestinian Authority arrested some others. My brother was imprisoned by the Israelis. They got him into court and they sentenced him for five months. He’s the imam of the local mosque. The Authority has arrested some others, until now they don’t know why exactly. They sent me statements about their treatment by the Authority, what they have seen in the Tulkarem jail and in Jericho. Even when we were in Israeli jails we used to smuggle things out. Always you are creative in the circumstances you live in. So they sent me these papers, I published them.

Apparently the Palestinian Authority did not like that. So an officer called me and told me they are not happy about it, and said in Arabic that you don’t know there are kata’eb–brigades. What he meant, I think, are the brigades of Shuhada Al-Aqsa. So I said, okay, but I told him, if you don’t like what I published, and you see that I made mistakes, send me what you think is right and I am going to treat you in the same way; I would just say, I received so and so from so and so, and that’s it. Or if you don’t like we can just go to court. So what he did, he just sent people to burn my car.

The officer who talked to me is the leader of Preventive Security in Tulkarem. So I suspect–strongly suspect–that he is behind burning my car. So it’s the Palestinian Authority that has done this. And it’s not strange or weird because the Authority has always spread confusion and insecurity in the Palestinian street.

Interesting that he mentioned kata’eb. Recently I interviewed Nasser Juma, leader of the Kata’eb Shuhada Al-Aqsa. He expressed similar views to your own about corruption and graft within the Palestinian Authority. Rather than a problem, I think you’d find allies there.
I am in touch with him, with Nasser Juma. And I am in touch with some others. But the problem is that Kata’eb Al-Aqsa does not have a unified leadership, so everyone can describe himself as Kata’eb Al-Aqsa. You never know who is truly a freedom fighter and who is not. When he talked to me about kata’eb I know he is talking about zo’ran –just street boys. So he probably just sent somebody from the institution, from Preventive Security, or one of his relatives. I don’t think that the true Kata’eb Al-Aqsa is involved. Actually some of them visited me in the afternoon, here, and they said they were ready to get their guns and open a front against these people. I said, “No.” The gun should have a code of ethics. It is there to defend the Palestinians, not terrorise them. I’m sure many in the Kata’eb Al-Aqsa are ready to resist that.

I’m unclear about how far this is all characteristic of the Palestinian Authority at a structural level, or it’s the legacy of one man, Arafat.
All the mass media supported Yasser Arafat; even Al-Manar, which belongs to Hizbollah, never talked against Arafat. But now, after the people started to the see impact of his policies, they start now to realise that these policies were made by him. Most the time people used to say, “Well, the bad people are his aides, but he’s a good man. If he knew that his aides are bad he wouldn’t keep them.” But of course that was a kind of ignorance–naiveté. A leader might make a mistake in a couple of his aides, or three, but not all of them! And even when he discovers that one of his aides is corrupt he will bring him to court or just fire him, or do something. But the tradition of Yasser Arafat was that whenever he saw that someone was reaching a level of excellence in corruption he would upgrade him. That was his behavior. If someone proved that he was a son of a bitch, he was promoted! But, his legacy, I think, will stay not more than a couple of years.

What is your view on the Oslo Accords?
In 1967, 1968, Israel told the Arabs, “Well, look, you want a solution to the Palestinian question? Okay, we want a solution. But the solution comes only through bilateral, direct talks with Israel.” That is, every Arab state should sit down at the table with Israel and talk directly about the problem. The outcome of the negotiations will be the solution. And the Israelis told us that they are interested in an Arab authority in the West Bank and Gaza, because they are not interested in ruling other people. They are interested in their own security. So they needed a Palestinian authority, or an Arab authority, to run the daily life of the Palestinians.

Arafat and his people always said that those who accept the Israeli solution are traitors and they should be shot, they should be hanged. We accepted all of that in 1993 with the Oslo Accords. And Arafat considered that an achievement. That was very stupid on the side of our people. The Oslo solution was offered in 1967. And Golda Meir talked about it in 1973. In 1977, Menachem Begin, then prime minister of Israel, offered us autonomy. In 1981, Sharon, when we was minister of defence, proposed autonomy. We could have saved our lives, our homes, our trees, and avoided so many atrocities. What Arafat achieved over the years was but to lead the people from one defeat to another, from one frustration to another, until the people were ready to accept the Israeli solution of 1967-8.

Arafat portrayed himself as a hero and as a liberator by signing the Oslo Accords. But he just led the people to gradually accept the Israeli solution. Nobody in 1967 was ready to recognise Israel or shake hands with Israelis. We needed so many defeats to realise that the Israelis are the supermen of the Middle East, and so Arafat led us there. In 1993, psychologically, the people became ready for the defeat, to recognise the defeat, and we did.

But this was on the back of the first Intifada. How can we say that people were ready to accept defeat when they were out throwing rocks?
In 1988 the people were fed up. That Intifada was not an Intifada of public awareness. It was an Intifada of the inability to see any future, to see anything. The people were so frustrated that they went out into the streets. Why? The PLO was doing nothing for the people. The Arabs were disregarding the Palestinian question and were engaged in the Lebanese question. The Americans and the Soviets did not pay attention to Palestinians. We felt that nobody was left to support us. I was very active during that Intifada. Four times I was imprisoned by the Israelis, under administrative detention. I spent a couple of years in Israeli jails, through 1988, 1989 and 1990.

You would seem to be in a no man’s land: critical of the occupation yet critical of the Palestinian Authority. But you’re saying that there is a link between the Palestinian Authority and the State of Israel, therefore to be critical of the Authority is not what the Israelis want to hear.
Exactly. They need to have the people supporting the Palestinian Authority because this is their chance to have peace. And if you look, during the Al-Aqsa Intifada, they did not dismantle the Authority. In the mass media everyone was saying they are against the Authority. That was a big lie. What the Israelis did was to hit the chairs and the offices, and they did not hit the people, the persons–the individuals. Nobody from the Palestinian Authority was killed.

What they did–in hitting the chairs, the offices–was to make the Palestinian Authority popular. Attacking the offices of the Authority was part of the mechanism of deepening the Authority’s grip on the Palestinians. For example, one day Ahmed Qurei was at an Israeli checkpoint and a soldier started shooting in the air. So in the mass media they started shouting about Qurei–the Israelis shot at his car, they tried to kill him! That was not true. We are sure that was something planned just to give Qurei a push. They elevated his popularity. Even Arafat, when he was put under siege: I personally said many times–so many times, openly–in my articles, that Arafat could never be shot by the Israelis. He will die an ordinary death. Nobody is going to shoot him because he is protected by the Americans and the Israelis. And the Israelis elevated his popularity by putting him under siege. Afterwards they came to think that Arafat was worthless. And we know that if the Israelis extract all they need from somebody, they just put him in the trash. Arafat was just put in the trash basket.

There’s no credence to the idea that Arafat was poisoned?
No. Why should they poison him then? They could have poisoned him when he was a revolutionary in Beirut. Once they ordered a Syrian plane to land in Israel while it was making a trip from Cairo to Damascus. Why? Because they thought George Habash was in that plane. Arafat was always there in the sky, before the Oslo Accords, and they never harmed him. And when his plane crashed in Libya, the Americans became hysterical. They mobilised all of their technological might to find Yasser Arafat, and they did. They told Qaddafi about the location of Arafat and Qaddafi rescued him. But at a certain point for the Israelis, Arafat became useless, worthless. He was unable to offer any more services. They needed somebody else.

If the logic holds that Israel destroyed the infrastructure but left the individuals alone in order to bolster the popularity of the Palestinian Authority among Palestinians, why did Sharon publicly back Abbas before the presidential elections?
Ah, but Sharon realised that he made a mistake. That’s why afterwards he ordered his cabinet members not to praise Abu Mazen at all. He made such a statement and it was published by the Israeli mass media.

Now look, about Yasser Arafat, when there were elections in 1996 between Netanyahu and Peres, an Israeli officer called me. He used to work in Tulkarem and he always used to interrogate me. He called me and said, “Do you think if Netanyahu wins he will shake hands with Yasser Arafat?” I told him “Yes, he will.” Not only shake hands, he is going to sit down, at the same table, and talk with Yasser Arafat. He said, “Are you sure?” I said “Yeah.” He told me that Netanyahu is saying on his platform that he is not going to sit down with Yasser Arafat. I told him that Netanyahu does not have the black briefcase in his hand. The black briefcase is still in the hands of the prime minister. There, there are secrets. And Netanyahu will, afterwards, sit down with Yasser Arafat. He said, “Okay, after the elections we’ll see.”

So, after the elections–two weeks after the elections–Netanyahu called Yasser Arafat, over the phone, and they talked. He called me, that officer. He said, “Yeah, you are right!” I told him, “No, I am not right. I told you that he’s going to sit with him at the same table.” So a few weeks later Netanyahu was sitting with Yasser Arafat on the same table. So the officer called me. I told him, “Well look, you are an army officer; you don’t know anything! You are a dumb person! I have been following Yasser Arafat and your leaders for three decades. I’m good at this now!”

Actually, I made so many prophecies, and all of them came true. For instance, I predicted the recognition of Israel. I wrote that in 1979. In 1982, I told an assembly at An-Najah University that the PLO was going to recognise the Security Council resolutions 242 and 338. There was uproar in the assembly, but it came true. And I told them that Arafat is going to come to the West Bank and Gaza, and he came. That he’s going to bring corruption, and he did!

You said something to me recently that was quite startling; that the occupation is humanitarian compared to the Palestinian Authority. You’re serious?
What we have been getting is worthless. Under occupation we had it better. For instance, under occupation I used to travel in Palestine, to go to Hebron, to go to Gaza, even to go to Haifa–in my car! After Oslo I couldn’t. I lost that privilege. Before Oslo the Israelis never used tanks or airplanes or helicopters against us. After Oslo they started doing so. Before Oslo I didn’t have 1000 governmental employees who are doing nothing. We had few employees, with the Israelis paying their salaries, and they were more efficient than the Palestinian Authority. And the social fabric, the ethical fabric, was much stronger than it is now. People think that we have gained something? No. We are not in a better situation; we are in a worse situation. So those who are weak and not interested in surrendering to the enemy must wait. Of course we should not wait doing nothing. We have to prepare, inside and outside. Now things are getting tight. The Americans have a tight grip on the area. The Israelis are very strong militarily. But there is the other side of the coin: the underground Arab and Islamist organisations are improving their methods, and their style, against the enemy. So I think in the near future, yes, we are suffering, but they are going to suffer too.

You’re sympathetic with the Islamist movement?
I sympathise with the Islamist movement, but differ on certain cultural and social attitudes, particularly on the limits imposed on the freedom of women. Why? This is an Arabian tradition, not an Islamic one. Personally I think that societies that will advance and will achieve tremendous progress should be free societies. They [the Islamists] have that dogmatic, stupid thing, that if you are not part of us then you are not a true Muslim. They are not ready to cooperate with non-Muslims, like Christians. So what I see is a kind of narrow-mindedness. There are so many things that belong to the past, to backwardness. I think should read Islam in a deeper way, although we agree on political issues.

What is your vision of the future prospects of the peace process?
Internally, I am very much interested in having free Palestinians who can express their thoughts, who can work and participate in decision-making. If we are not free we will never be able to free our land. Unfree people cannot free anybody. Corruption should be eliminated. We might not be able to eliminate it 100 per cent. But we can make progress. We can advance. We have to be honest in using public money, and also in providing information to our people. Our people are misled. They don’t receive the right information, or at least they don’t receive all the information that they should. So we have to make tremendous changes, not only reforms. Reform is not enough. We need tremendous change in the social, economic, political, cultural and social spheres, and I have my platform and I have a clear idea what should be done.

On the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there is one point, and if it is fulfilled the whole question will be resolved: the right of return. The Palestinians should return to their homes and property in Palestine of 1948. Otherwise I’m not ready to talk about anything else. I don’t want a state–I don’t need it. We have 22 Arab states. That’s good enough. I want the right of return, that’s it.

So, expanded Arab representation under a single system?
Exactly. We are talking about democracy. We are not talking about sectarianism. We are talking about democracy and human rights. There are international resolutions supporting the return of the Palestinians. There are international conventions. And there are universal principles at stake. So there is no logic, whatsoever, to talk about issues which are of very minor value. The most important issue is the refugee problem. They are five million people who have been suffering for a very long time. For 57 years and they have been living in these filthy refugee camps. First, solve this problem. Before any negotiations between warring states they solve the human issues first. They release the prisoners, they settle the question of the refugees and then they start the negotiations–in all cases, except for the Palestinian case. Once they are back they can talk with the Jews and the Jews can talk to them, and they can find a solution. I’m not ready to talk about a state, or the recognition of the State of Israel, or the recognition of UN resolutions and so on. Talk about human rights. That’s it. That’s the solution for me.

I’m sympathetic, but the Israelis will never agree to it, so the conflict remains unresolved.

Then the international community should not be tailored according to the wishes of the Israelis.
I agree, but practical solutions have to be possible also.

If we want to talk about practicalities, why was it practical in 1917 to start bringing the Jews into Palestine who afterwards kicked the Palestinians out? Why was that practical and it’s not practical to have the Palestinians back, although housing in Israel occupies only 13 per cent of the total land area? There is enough space. So what we are talking about is not practicality. We are talking about international bias against the Palestinians. And that bias, I’m sure, is controlled by the balance of power. If we get stronger, I’m sure the international community will start to talk logic. But now, as long as we are weak, yes, everyone will be talking about the right of Israel to remain a pure Jewish state. So it has nothing to do with practicality, it has to do with the balance of power.

So how will the Palestinians shift the balance of power?
If you look at military developments in the area you will find that the Palestinians, lately, have been very effective against the Israelis. In 1967 we were unable to throw a stone at the Israelis. In 1987, 20 years on, we made an Intifada, and the stones were flying everywhere. Afterwards we used new methods, for instance kidnapping and killing soldiers. Then we started having guns, started to shoot at the checkpoints, killing Israelis here and there. Then we started to see martyrdom operations against the Israelis, and that was effective, security-wise. Militarily speaking, we are still very weak. But we can inflict much damage against the security of Israel. Our methods and means developed over the years. Egypt, for instance, the biggest Arab state, couldn’t manufacture a rocket. The Palestinians in Gaza could. It doesn’t hit the right target, that’s true, but once you create such an instrument you will be able to make improvements in the future. So we will develop, I am sure. And I am sure that our Palestinian people are going to develop chemical instruments–to make a chemical weapon doesn’t require sophisticated technologies. We will do it. One day we will do it and we will make real threats to the Israelis.

Your response surprises me. I expected you to underline the importance of education, of inner strengthening.
No, this is a struggle. It’s a twist of arms. You have to equip yourself with the necessary power. If the power of the other is overriding, as in the last year when Israeli measures have been very effective, leaving the Palestinians crippled, you need time to think; we need time to think what kind of instruments we should to develop to face Israeli measures. It’s expected that so many Palestinians will be killed, homes will be demolished, trees will be uprooted and lands will be confiscated. All of that is expected. That’s because we are weak, not because we are not educated. Education is good. It is a very necessary element, but it’s not decisive. Only might is decisive. Education can improve your might but it cannot impose a solution.

So what we are saying about education, well, that’s good enough, but it’s not enough to liberate our land. I am sure that the Israelis are not going to accept the refugees back. So they must be defeated, to have the refugees back. In the foreseeable future I am sure we are not going to defeat the Israelis. But in the far future, Israel has no chance to stay in the area. Strategically speaking, Israel is small in area, small in population, and no matter how it is developed economically it remains small. The best and the most effective instrument that Israel has to stay in the area is the weakness of the Arabs. We are weak. This weakness is due to internal problems, not to external powers, because we have so many filthy, stupid Arab regimes; they are dictators, they are very corrupt people. One day there will be change in Arabia–in Saudi Arabia, in Egypt, in Syria and so on. I am not talking about in 10 years or 15 years, but it is coming. It may seem that we are taking steps towards this moment, but this moment is rather taking steps towards us. It is inevitable.

What will happen to Israel?
Israel will remain alien in this Arab region. It will always be an aberration. That is why it and the United States are so interested in normalising relations with Arab countries. They understand that this is the only way for Israel to stay in the area. They themselves realise that military might is not a solution. The stronger is not the strongest. And if you are the strongest now, it is not assured in the future. Strength or might is something relative. Empires fall. Others arise. History is in a state of flux. The Arab states are around 14 million square kilometres. The Arabs are around 300 million people. The international community is advancing. We are not an exception. We might be slower than other nations, but someday we will push forward. And once there is a new future for the Arabs there will be a deteriorating future for Israel.

If I were Israeli I would accept the return of the refugees, for the safety of Israel 50 years from now. But they think only with their muscles, not with their brains. That’s their problem. They are buying the animosity of the Arabs and the Muslims. The current situation is also the solution of rotten regimes. It’s the solution of Yasser Arafat, of Hosni Mubarak, of King Hussein, and so on. It’s not the solution of the peoples of the area. If you want to remain here in the area you have to build friendships in the area. The behaviour of the Israelis and the Americans does not facilitate friendship. The kind of normalisation that they are talking about is not going to happen. They want us to accept Israel as a part–an organic part–of this area. It’s a joke. Under these circumstances it will never happen.

They have nuclear arms, they have tanks, they have rockets, and that is the only thing that keeps them here now, along the weakness of the Arabs. If the Arabs are not weak they are not even going to be able to use the nuclear bombs that they have. They are going to hit Damascus, Amman, Cairo? In other words, they are going to commit suicide. So, I’m not in a hurry. I know there are so many atrocities that the Palestinians have been suffering for 57 years, but that’s no justification for us to accept Israeli conditions. If we make a solution now, while we are weak, the solution is not going to be in our favor. I strongly think that it is unwise to negotiate from a position of weakness. If you are weak, wait. As long as you are weak there are no negotiations, actually. That’s why I believe the Palestinians are not negotiating with the Israelis. The Palestinians are asking the Israelis to give them certain things. That’s the difference.

The old city is a sea of colours and eyes. My contact picks me up and we wait in a café for the interview that took seven weeks and much risk to arrange. “Did you notice the guy on the bridge?” No chance. “He just left.”

We pause for a moment, next heading off through a hundred small alleys, up and down steps and stairways, seemingly in circles, to an assigned location but Jumaa is not there. None other is either. “Don’t be surprised if he doesn’t show,” I’d been told earlier.

Nasser Jumaa is reputedly No. 1 wanted by the State of Israel. Between the first and second Intifadas he has existed one night here, one night there, for 17 years. Rarely can he spend more than a couple of hours in one place. As one of three who founded the Kataaeb Shuhadaa Al-Aqsa (Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades), and the only one remaining, Jumaa can be sure that no suspension of Israel’s assassination policy applies to him. But when we do hear a voice and he appears from around a corner his greeting is warm and his welcome genuine.

He is not what I expected, at least not what I feared. His soft-spoken voice is in harmony with his words, which are as much about feeling as reasoning. A journalist does not take sides, but it’s simply a fact that along with his eloquence his eyes betray sensitivity, intelligence and decency. This is a man who has been imprisoned by both sides, Palestinian and Israeli. He was tortured by the Palestinian Authority and has borne witness to, and been active within, over a quarter of a century of Palestinian struggle.

What are your reflections on the current situation as you experience it?
Right now we’re busy with internal issues; despite the continued existence of the occupation, internal issues take so much of our times, energy and attention. As you know, the entire Palestinian scene lacks harmony, or in other words a clear vision. I am speaking from several backgrounds; as one of the leaders of Kataaeb Shuhadaa Al-Aqsa, as a member of Fatah’s district committee — the supreme leadership body in Nablus — and of course as a Palestinian citizen, but let us talk about the current situation for the resistance. Perhaps we can say that the resistance has realised it made a number of mistakes leading to the result we have now. It should, from the very beginning, have found and followed a clear strategy, one that defined aims and a logic towards achieving those aims.

Unfortunately, wings of the Palestinian resistance with different political viewpoints and different religious beliefs, and in a way that was uncalculated, vied off with one another, without a clear vision, specifically in regard to the strategy of suicide operations, which in the end classified the Palestinians and the Palestinian resistance as terrorists, preventing us from defending the legitimacy of the resistance before public opinion, even in front ourselves as Palestinians, and with those whom we considered allies and friends. Our position is very weak regarding the legitimate right as Palestinians to resist, which at least in theory is guaranteed by international covenants, being an occupied country. This way we lost a right that should have been invoked in a mature manner.

Above all, we gave permission to Israel to use all their forces to hit the resistance, and to hit the Palestinians in general. We also gave to Sharon, to Sharon’s government — indeed to the Israeli logic of the conflict — permission to impose a lot of Israel’s goals, a lot of Sharon’s dreams, of controlling and grabbing the greatest possible extent of Palestinian lands. The resistance and the official political leadership were on two different sides, which prevented the Palestinian voice from reaching world public opinion. Because of the absence of a unified voice we ended up in a situation that is wracked with problems, a lot of corruption and chaos. We are searching now for a strategy to get out of this miserable abyss.

How will you do that?
I believe it will be hard. We’re talking now about the Palestinian elections as a strategy and point of entry to starting the process of reform and change in Palestinian political society. Palestinians at a ground level no longer trust the peace process, they don’t feel that we’re going in the right direction, that any real progress will be achieved, simply because of the existence of Sharon’s government. So we decided to start by getting our house in order. And we will be serious about that.

In the process of internal change, we crashed into a very important issue, one that represents something so important on the Palestinian stage, which is Fatah and the crisis within the movement; logically that the corruption in the Palestinian Authority (PA) is by default an extension of that existing in Fatah, or that it is reflected from Fatah to the PA. So it was necessary to reform Fatah — being the biggest power on the ground in Palestine — to achieve reform and change the PA. Now there is a battle inside Fatah between the old Fatah leaders, trying to control Fatah via the old guard, and the young leadership and the different organisational levels of Fatah bodies. It’s not always a dispute between right and wrong or angels and devils; it’s sometimes between two evils, within the corrupt core itself. Until now those with a new vision — that of amending and reforming — lack the presence necessary to make essential changes inside Fatah’s leadership institutions.

If we can make that change in Fatah then eventually we can make a big change inside the PA. This matter is not easy. It’s very complicated. For around 40 years Fatah has been dependent on a format that Arafat injected into it. It’s not easy to get rid of this right now.

Is Fatah still the biggest power on the ground?
Practically yes, but organisationally, as a result of the internal crisis, Fatah lost to Hamas — the second power on the ground — on more than one occasion. We see clearly that the internal disputes are reflected in the performance of Fatah, which offers space to smaller factions — much smaller even — to defeat it in more than one field.

Abu Mazen has charged officials with the task of “disarming wanted militants within two weeks”. Will he be able to?
This is also murky, or let us say ambiguous. If Abu Mazen talks about the arms of the resistance he knows that factions outside his influence, that refuse to disarm, own the majority of these weapons. But if he talks about the weapons that are used to create disorder — fawda al-silah, weapons outside the resistance–we previously agreed and we asked more than once for the PA to collect these arms. Maybe the whole issue is about Israeli pressure exercised on the PA and on Abu Mazen specifically, as if they are testing him, or pushing Palestinian society towards civil war as a result of these demands. It is very clear that this is a local Palestinian issue and when Israelis withdraw we will solve it internally.

A week ago the PA appointed General Nadal Asoli, security commander in Nablus, to the position of West Bank security chief. Is this a signal to the city of Nablus?
Asoli is one of the closest people to Haj Ismail Jabr, former head of the PA Preventive Security Services. He belongs to him and works under his supervision. Practically, when they fire Ismail and hire Asoli we don’t feel any real change. If they aimed to reform the security institutions by this change, sorry to say it, this is nonsense. It’s a joke. Changes are taking place within the same corrupt cycle. Asoli sees Ismail as his model.

On the expulsion of Al-Aqsa’s wanted from the presidential compound in Ramallah, what happened and do you feel betrayed by Abu Mazen?
In the end, it’s bad handling. From the very beginning, when the PA worked on the file of “the wanted” they didn’t deal with it appropriately, especially regarding Kataaeb Shuhadaa Al-Aqsa. At the time that the Palestinian political core was meeting and talking with the other Palestinian factions, and with the other military wings, the brothers of Kataaeb Al- Aqsa and their leaders were ignored. There was no communication apart from occasional messages passed from one or two security officials but never a Palestinian politician. No one bothered to inform us about new developments on the political level. This treatment is behind events in Ramallah.

When Abu Mazen ordered the removal of the wanted people from the muqataa, claiming that there were American guarantees for their safety, they didn’t feel secure, didn’t trust these guarantees as many incidents were preceded by such guarantees and agreements with the Israelis. The wanted brothers needed someone to hear their concerns and understand their point of view; that the Israelis were still in the streets of Ramallah and every other Palestinian city; that it’s our natural right to carry arms to defend ourselves — not to attack, but simply to defend if Israelis attack us. I think it’s a natural right for them to keep their weapons in defense of themselves. But political elites on the Palestinian side always deal with things in an upside down manner.

The real problem is that Israeli soldiers remain in the Palestinian territories, that the occupation remains, invasions continue. The Palestinian side should stay focused on this; push them to get out, for Israelis to withdraw. We are living in tension, worried about invasions, arrests, chasings, assassinations, and you are telling me to disarm? This is nonsense.

Do you think Abu Mazen will succeed in getting the Israelis out?
As Palestinians we’re used to tragic endings, whether to struggles on the political level or sacrifices in the field. What Abu Mazen is doing is a result of American and Israeli pressure. What we are asking of Abu Mazen, begging of him, is not to submit to their demands. We did not reach the point of open internal confrontation yet, which is, by the way, what the Israelis have been pushing for and laying bets on. Now they are trying to achieve this through the Palestinian leadership, with brother Abu Mazen — unilaterally and ahead of Israeli reciprocity — carrying out Palestinian commitments to the peace process. Abu Mazen and the leadership should pay very good attention to this issue. I repeat, we must not submit to this pressure.

What do you think the conditional amnesty reportedly offered by Israel to the list of wanted Palestinians?
During the negotiations about us — the wanted — I was maybe closer than anyone to those who were talking with the Israelis on this issue, and I was always sensitive to using the expression, “pardon”. I refused more than once the use of the expression “Israeli pardon of the wanted”. From the very beginning I also refused, and still refuse, a security-based solution to the wanted. I said there must be a political agreement because we are part of the general conflict, so we must have place in the political solution and not simply be contained according to security logic. We have long experience with the Israelis and we know how they like to arrange things.

Let us be clear, the resistance is not only Kataaeb Shuhadaa Al-Aqsa. There is also Hamas. Hamas has its own wanted, its own fighters, its own armed forces, but we can’t see, we don’t see coming up to the surface, any problem between Hamas and the PA. This problem only comes up with Shuhadaa Al-Aqsa and one of the main reasons is that there is a huge crisis inside Fatah. This crisis tried to express itself, and reflect itself, in Shuhadaa Al-Aqsa. Because the Shuhadaa is a Fatah wing for sure it lives this crisis of Fatah.

That’s why we always said we have to solve the Shuhadaa Al-Aqsa issue in an organisational manner as well as in the context of Fatah. On more than one occasion when the issue of the Kataaeb was transferred to the security level we objected and boycotted it. The proposed solutions always led us to a dead end, forestalling progress on other issues. The most important issue to Israel now is the truce. If the most important step is cooling down the situation, if everything follows from this, the Palestinian leadership should to give more attention to the issue of the wanted.

The Kataaeb from the beginning, when they spoke about a cooling down of the situation, made a huge effort to maintain calm in order to give Abu Mazen and the political leadership the chance to make all political efforts towards reaching solutions we think would benefit the Palestinian people. The leadership didn’t care or give real attention to this issue, the truce, with the Kataaeb, although through us something could happen that perhaps would put an end to this truce and put the Palestinian leadership in an embarrassing situation. The leadership should have redoubled their efforts with the Kataaeb, especially that they know that the Kataaeb doesn’t have a central or political leadership that they can deal with or reach an agreement with. They know that the Kataaeb consists of tens of groups and cells in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, so they would have needed to have made, in order to achieve an agreement and to ensure that the Kataaeb honoured the proposed truce, a much bigger effort.

The only thing we felt was their negligence and we remained for a while, we in Kataaeb Al-Aqsa, feeling we don’t know where we are going, because the Palestinian political elite doesn’t communicate with us.

Why did they ignore you when they know you’re armed?
I have long experience in this with the PA. First, the current state of corruption in the PA and the Palestinian leadership reflects itself on everything. I remember two years or more ago European parties moved to maintain a truce between the Palestinian military wings, including Kataaeb Al-Aqsa, and the Israelis. It was promoted by the European Commission — I don’t remember names but they used to come here a lot. They asked one of the leaders of the security forces to arrange a meeting with the Kataaeb commanders. He pointed to specific people who had no relation with the Kataaeb. He just wanted to seem like the one who controlled things on the ground. Of course the Commission considered that he was a leader of a security force and his information would be worth something.

The representatives of the Commission went to certain addresses, sat and talked with whoever was there, as if they were Kataaeb leaders, and they achieved a stack of easy agreements. They felt it was simple. And when they went to the Israelis to report the good news, the Israeli side asked, “With whom did you get these agreements — clowns sitting in their houses? If we wanted them we’d go get them.”

I emphasise again, the corruption exercised by Palestinian officials is reflected in everything, in every aspect of Palestinian life. Therefore we asked Abu Mazen from the beginning to start with political reform, embracing every Palestinian institution. The Palestinian Legislative Council, a parliament institution, is part of this political corruption. We need immediate and total reform, not only changing the faces but also procedures and strategies.

Isn’t there more than negligence and corruption at work here? You, yourself were imprisoned and tortured by the PA.
It is the scale of the corruption, which means there is no judicial institution that acts independently. This played a big role in keeping me jailed for 15 months; there is no logic to keeping me there without accusation, without charge, even if this charge were a lie at least would have I understood why I was there. Once a prosecutor came to me and said, “I don’t know why you’re here.” This was a sign I was imprisoned by a gang, not by an authority; only a gang would act in this manner.

Two days ago I was with the new minister of justice and I asked him about the men who tortured us. In few simple hours my friend, Mahmoud Jumail, was killed in front of my eyes. They were convicted by a Palestinian court and sentenced to 15-year terms. They didn’t spend 4 months in prison before being set free. One of these guys was sent to Algeria, for a training course in something related to the army, I don’t remember. So I asked the minister, “do I have the right to wonder why those men were released though the murder they committed was 100 per cent premeditated?” “You have a full right to complain,” he replied, “but I don’t know that anything will come of it.” Up until now he doesn’t talk about instituting real change in the legal institutions. He knows that this is related to the present Palestinian political situation, as much as the political situation is sound, as much as the legal apparatus is genuine, but he didn’t give a real answer.

These guys are now in Gaza. I have the ability to communicate with those who work with me there, with the Kataaeb in Gaza, and say, “Go and carry out the execution order… kill them,” but I’m criticising a situation of corruption so I don’t like to practice it. I don’t allow myself to do it. I remain bound by law.

The ceasefire you declared in November excluded soldiers and settlers. Do they remain legitimate targets despite the present ceasefire?
Indeed, it is this way. We can’t under any circumstances accept, as Palestinians, the existence of the settlers and the existence of the soldiers in the Palestinian territories. But from the point of view of not giving the Israelis excuses to break the ceasefire we suspended militant wing activities. That does not mean that we lend legitimacy to the presence of soldiers and settlers.

Would Palestinian resistance operations be possible without Israeli complicity? Isn’t there advantage in exposing the fissures within the Israeli society itself?
I can’t tell exactly if there’s any help in such operations. I can speak about how Sharon’s government prays to god to have such operations taking place, which gives reason and excuse to attack the Palestinians and to disavow Israeli obligations. It was good justification to build the separation wall, stealing a huge amount of land.

I’m referring to individuals, Israelis, who use the Intifada for personal profit.
I know one guy who had a friend, his girlfriend, who helped him. As I remember she was jailed for 13 years. I’m sure that no intelligence agencies, nor even settlers, help in committing such operations in the spirit of serving their own interests. It’s not even willful negligence. It’s obvious that were any facilitation offered, even merely that of neglecting security restrictions, this would lead to a government collapse.

We are living with them [the Israelis] for years. We understand them clearly; we know their red lines.

Didn’t Arafat once say the Palestinians didn’t need Hizbullah for weapons as the Israelis provided them?
For sure a segment of Israeli society makes it easier for us to get weapons, for money of course. The Palestinian side used this aberration within Israeli society; in other words, we used every means and method to get arms. Most of the weapons in the West Bank, or a great proportion of weapons, have come from Israel. But in general the lines of dependence are reversed: I can see that they depend on our failures. I already mentioned the stupid mistakes we have made. We didn’t have a clear strategy for the Palestinian resistance. We should have specified the place for its work as the occupied territories, and made its target the settlers and the soldiers that exist to protect them. It would have been possible this way to win a voice within Israeli society. It would also have prevented outsiders from denying our rights to defend our land and expel those who stole and occupied our land.

Members of Al-Aqsa in the West Bank reportedly said a couple of days ago they received money from Hizbullah to fund operations. Is this true?
I’m not aware of anyone saying so, but a relation with Hizbullah started in the early moments of this Intifada. Hizbullah fights the same enemy on the same land, and there is a natural and legitimate affinity between liberation movements and resistance movements worldwide. We are not ashamed to say there is a relation on this level. Hizbullah recognised that the Palestinian resistance movement needed help and it offered help, but without interfering in internal Palestinian affairs or seeking to shape the goals of the resistance. As for Iran, however, Hizbullah’s main sponsor, perhaps they wish that the Palestinians continue fighting Israel, and have an interest in the continuance of the conflict, so that attention is drawn away from them.

Mustafa Barghouti once said the Israelis want Palestinians to feel they lurk behind every house, every window. Does Israel have a hand in the destruction of trust within Palestinian society?
We’ve already mentioned that Israel is eager to see internal clashes within Palestinian society and its political institutions. This is not new. Certain tactics are used that keep Palestinians busy and then Israelis interfere in different ways. No one speaks optimistically about the near future. Everyone fears an explosion in the situation at any moment. The reason behind this is the Israeli insistence on never giving the Palestinians their legitimate rights in their lands. The continuous expansion of settlements, the continued construction of the wall, the permanent creation of problems in the daily life of Palestinians, the huge number of roadblocks and military checkpoints; all these things will push the ceasefire to end. No nation could continue this way, under this pressure.

History will record that they, the Israelis, invented one thing: the world’s biggest prisons. They build prisons on people — literally over them. The life that Israel has imposed upon Palestinians is impossible to live, and there will come a day, it isn’t far away, when the prisons will be destroyed. God alone gifted us with the mental power, the fortitude and stamina, to endure under enormous pressure and in impossible circumstances.

And the future?
We, the brothers and leaders of the Kataaeb Al-Aqsa, played a leading role in the ceasefire and don’t want to be in the lead of it collapsing. We know very well that Israel has no interest in ceasefires, as illustrated by the assassinations of Raaed Al- Karmi and Salah Shehadeh in January and August 2002, both in the context of ceasefires on the Palestinian side.

So we expect that Israel is striving to find ways of ending the current ceasefire, principally because Sharon’s government’s existence is predicated on war not peace. Given that it has to create reasons for its existence, it has to create conditions of war.

The Kataaeb remains alert to all scenarios, to all possibilities, and along with all the military wings, we will learn well, you can be assured, from past mistakes.

What is your view of Sharon’s disengagement plan?
It’s unilateral for the sake of the Israelis. Sharon cannot bear the consequences of the resistance in Gaza and he’s trying to look good internationally. Meanwhile, Israel will continue confiscating land and enlarging the settlements in the West Bank.

Is settlement expansion reason enough for Hamas to break the ceasefire?
Yes, and not only that; all kinds of aggression are reason enough to break the ceasefire. We have not seen a single positive gesture from the Israeli side. We’re being patient to prove to the world that the problem is Israel, not the Palestinians. We are not optimistic that the ceasefire will continue because Israeli aggression is intensifying and broadening, not decreasing. There cannot be a ceasefire from one side.

Is it realistic to hope that all West Bank settlements will be dismantled?
The West Bank and Gaza and East Jerusalem are occupied territories and everybody in the world knows it. If the Israelis want a ceasefire with the Palestinians they should withdraw from all occupied areas.

And the written understandings Bush passed to Sharon in 2004?
The US and the world should decide whether a solution is to be based on justice or the current situation. If the decision falls against justice there will be no truce, no ceasefire, and no solution. I think this would create a big problem for the West, especially the US and the Europeans, because they will look like hypocrites. They speak about democracy but they don’t believe it. They speak about freedom — freedom of expression, freedom of people, human rights — and do the opposite. They themselves sow the seeds of all kinds of hatred against them, the fruits of which spread throughout the world.

If integrated into the Palestinian political system, will Hamas move away from armed struggle?
Yes, under one condition: the Israeli occupation ends. Once the Israeli occupation ends we will not continue fighting as we will have no one to fight. Now there is occupation. We cannot be just a political party because ending occupation cannot come through political work alone: we tried all political avenues. We couldn’t do anything, and I think you are aware of that. When we resorted to armed struggle we were forced to do that. From 1948 until 1965 we did not shoot one bullet. We were waiting for the United Nations and other countries to help us. Nobody helped. When we give up hope of being helped we began fighting to achieve our goals. So it’s not that we like fighting, but we were forced to fight. If you know anyone in the world able to bring us our rights, please tell us and we’ll stop fighting, go to them, and ask for that.

What is your assessment of the current Palestinian leadership?
We don’t see a lot of changes. Many promises were given, still they are just promises, they are not tangible in real life. We don’t feel many changes and I think ordinary people feel no changes at all.

And Jericho and Tulkarem?
It’s a joke. It may be funny for those who are outside Palestine, listening to the news, “Oh good, it’s going well,” but if you live in these areas, the Israelis pulled out from the city centres and blockaded from outside. Nobody can enter or leave without permission. So what kind of pullout? They can sell these things to the world, but they cannot sell them to our people.

Would you respect a peace deal negotiated by Abu Mazen, even if it didn’t align with your own stance?
If it did not align with the Palestinian stance, nobody would respect it.

But there are differences among Palestinians.
We have a common strategy: that all the West Bank and Gaza, all the lands occupied in 1967, should be freed, with dismantling of the settlements and solving the problem of the refugees. This is agreed upon by everybody. Less than that, no one would agree — not Hamas nor the Palestinian people.

And the Geneva Initiative?
It was rejected by most Palestinians.

It was not rejected by the Palestinian Authority…
Well, they did not even agree upon it. They did not dare to agree upon it. And they would not have been able to agree upon it.

They didn’t scotch it either.
If they were afraid to announce publicly that they agreed with it they would not have been able to pass it. When Yasser Arafat was asked to sign at Camp David he said one thing to Clinton: “I can sign it but then you will be invited to my funeral.” No Palestinian can agree to what Yasser Arafat refused or agree to less than that, or maybe he will be having the same funeral Arafat was speaking about.

But Israel will never agree to UNGA 194.
Israel will not agree to many things. Israel is not thinking of returning the West Bank to Palestinians. Israel is not thinking of returning East Jerusalem to Palestinians. Israel is not thinking of stopping the killings. Israel has its own agenda. Our people will continue putting pressure on Israel until Israel will be forced to agree. We know in the end that Israel will be begging us to agree on things they don’t agree upon now.

Why did Hamas refuse to field a candidate for the presidency while it will run in the Legislative Council elections?
That was a political decision. We’re not looking for that position. But our people are demanding we run for the Legislative Council. We have many things that we can do through the council that we cannot do through the presidency. We’d like to have complete saturation, and complete saturation begins from the bottom up.

Is the Islamist trend in Palestine merely a reaction to Israeli abuses in the context of the current Intifada, or is it a deeper current?
It’s a deeper move not only in Palestine; it’s all over the world. People have tasted communism, secularism, nationalism, they tasted American democracy — especially that of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. They began to return to Islam. More now believe in Islam than any time before, at least in the last century. Take a poll of the Palestinians: 80 per cent would like to have an Islamic state in Palestine.

Apart from military means, what other means of pressure can be put on Israel?
We are not limited to military pressure. That’s why we talk to people; we’d like to make a coalition with people all over the world who refuse unjust acts. We are open to everyone in the world who believes in human values. Europeans consider Israel and the United States as the main violators of human rights in the world; the majority of people do not like the policy of Israel, the policy of the United States and I don’t think that they respect Sharon or Bush. We’re working on all levels and in the future we will achieve more.

The propaganda machine you’re confronting is very intense.
It’s not so much that they are working well. The problem is that we are not working well enough. What I mean by “we” is the Arab governments. Every debate we have with the Israelis we win. So it’s not difficult to convince people all over the world that Israel is the source of the problem.

But can you convince even Arab governments of this?
Arab governments have a different strategy. They will be convinced. They will be convinced or changed. In 1989, I was asked by US Congressmen why people in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe could demonstrate against their rulers and change them while Arabs could not change theirs. I told them it’s because the Americans were supporting the people in Eastern Europe against their rulers. In our case, America supports our rulers against our people.

But increasingly US pressure is bearing on Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria.
Sooner or later our rulers will understand that they are no more than puppets in the hands of the Americans. Once their role ends, the US will kick them out without any tears. Maybe they will understand that.

The US is supposedly working towards democratisation in the Middle East, yet democratisation, if it meant anything, would be a problem for Israel.
That’s right. That’s why Israel and the United States are against democracy in the Middle East and the Islamic world.

But they sure talk about it a lot.
Well, Israel is talking more than anyone else about human rights. This is a dilemma that the United States must solve, because they cannot support dictatorship and speak about democracy. The result is that people do not trust American foreign policy.

How do you view the separation wall?
The separation wall is designed to eliminate any possibility of a contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank. It’s like knowing the final score at the beginning of the game. It’s not a security wall. It’s a wall that decides borders that should not be decided now. At the same time, its effect on our people is criminal. Continuing with the wall, or leaving it like this, I don’t think there can be any peace with the Israelis. We cannot agree on having a state of zones. This is what the Israelis are proposing to give us. And they would agree that we call it an empire, the great empire of Palestine. But it is zones. And they cannot sell us this kind of joke.

It is ominous that it is Sharon who is doing this. Is he ready to give the Palestinians a state because the last thing he wants is a bi-national solution?
The Palestinian state is a need for the Israelis. But it’s not a state that we think of; it’s a state that they think of. It’s a state of zones. An area here and an area there that is surrounded by the Israelis: a state that controls less than 40 per cent of the West Bank. And that’s not the state we are looking for.

My fear is that a state will be established only to be destroyed by another war…
That’s good for us. It is not a state that we will shed tears over. That will increase the armed struggle and it will increase the problem with the Israelis. There was a great Soviet Union, where is it now? History does not stop. Neither Israel nor the United States will continue for long to be great powers in the world and to do what they want. So we are not in a hurry. Once I told the Israelis they waited 2,000 years to return back to their homeland, as they say. Well, we have struggled less than 70 years. We can wait another 10 or 20 years. But every Palestinian knows that the Israeli problem will be at an end soon — sooner than anybody thinks.