Hamas won a decisive parliamentary majority in the 2006 Palestinian elections, thereby ending the Fatah party’s control of the Palestinian Authority. After the international community refused to deal with the victors, a sudden escalation of skirmishes with the Fatah-dominated PA security forces saw Hamas take control of Gaza, leaving Fatah operating in the West Bank. The fifth round of talks held in Cairo between the rival Palestinian factions began in May, 2009.
Hamas and Fatah: reconciliation and ways out of the crisis
As the Cairo talks are set to resume on July 7,2009, what are the prospects for Palestinian-Palestinian dialogue leading to a new national unity initiative? A senior Hamas adviser outlines the options.
by Ahmad Yousef
The clashes which broke out between the Palestinian political factions Hamas and Fatah on 14 June, 2007 concluded with Hamas taking power, including full control of the security apparatus. This battle has been described in various ways, as ‘purifying Gaza from corruption', ‘a pre-emptive strike', ‘the extirpation of sources of insecurity', ‘defeating Dayton's group', ‘fighting those with an ulterior agenda', ‘ending treason in the security departments' and so forth. The President of the Palestinian Authority, together with some Fatah leaders, have, for their part, referred to Hamas control of the Palestinian security apparatus as ‘a bloody coup' or ‘military coup' aimed at taking over authority in the Gaza strip. The prime minister Isma'eel Haneya and his government reject these ‘coup' claims. They immediately announced their readiness to form a fact-finding committee and invited wider Arab, Islamic and international involvement in describing what had really taken place.
Ahmad Yousef is a Gaza-based political chief within the Hamas movement. He is a senior advisor to Ismail Haniyeh.This is our version of events. Unfortunately, Fatah was unable to reconcile themselves to the Hamas election victory in June, 2006 and have worked to impede Hamas efforts at much-needed reform ever since. Perhaps when Fatah refused to participate in the tenth government, they were relying on Hamas power to fail from a lack of experienced and qualified leaders. Whatever the reason, they decided not to enter into a political partnership with Hamas and the Hamas government was instead subjected to many body blows from the mutiny of Fatah leaders within the security apparatus, even during the time of the ostensible national unity government in which Fatah ministers participated in meetings headed by Isma'eel Haneya. It was the undermining of the authority of the Hamas minister of interior that led to the formation of a new ‘executive force' designed to strengthen government authority that led to the bloody confrontations between the two sides.
The eleventh national unity government under the auspices of Hamas made steady progress in pursuing a joint political programme that continued to insist on the right of resistance, while authorizing the President, Abu Mazen, to find a political way out of the occupation, hoping to lay the foundation of a true partnership. However, some foreign interests aligned with Fatah elements within the security apparatus were intent on spoiling theMecca agreement. They contrived a state of chaos which they hoped would ensure the failure of the Hamas government and restore the previous situation of extreme insecurity which prevailed for many years before Hamas came to power.
Even after this deliberate flouting of the authority of the Hamas government through the insurrection of the security apparatus, every attempt was made to reach agreement. But all attempts failed. Certain Fatah groups continued targeting Hamas leaders, and it was this non-stop aggression that compelled Hamas to take decisive action to counter what by now had become a real threat to the Palestinian people.Seizing control of the security apparatus, Hamas found that other points of resistance abruptly surrendered as soon as they realized that our quarrel was not with Fatah, but with those who were trying to involve Fatah in bloody conflict with the Hamas movement. The fighting lasted for a few days and it ended with the escape of the Fatah fighters who had been trying to instigate a civil war in our midst. In terms of its internal security, Gaza has been living in peace ever since the defeat of that group.
Hamas, however, despite all the obstacles and impediments laid in its path, has somehow succeeded in surviving not only these, but the siege of Gaza which has been imposed on us with the consent, it appears, of the whole world. Hamas has moreover, overcome the danger of total political isolation through maintaining direct communication with the Arab and Islamic world. Some Hamas ministers and representatives have even succeeded in taking their case to western countries as well.
On all sides, the same question is asked: what will happen next?We wish nothing more than to return to the project of national unity, and the formation of a true political partnership, led jointly by the two parties, Hamas and Fatah.
The Hamas movement, under its caretaker government led by Isma'eel Haneya, wants dialogue and to this end has been calling on any Arab, Islamic or international intervention that can advance discussions between Hamas and Fatah likely to reach an agreement. We want to end the dispute between the two sides: we seek political partnership. Undoubtedly, the Egyptian intervention has a very important role to play in this process of reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah.
But it is clear. Nobody will be able to make compromises or resolve any political problems, or give political or military leadership to the Palestinians without the existence of a national consensus. If our nation can succeed in these efforts, given our just cause, and with the backing of an international community that is properly alert to that cause, we now have a chance to achieve our freedom in an independent state that includes the West Bank, the Gaza strip, with Jerusalem as its capital.
What is the alternative?
The internal Palestinian situation today, overwhelmed with disagreement and division, reminds us of an earlier period - the 1930's and 1940's. Then too, Israel was able to exploit such weakness to renounce its international obligations towards the peace process. The current Palestinian-Palestinian conflict will pave the way to further separation between the West Bank and the Gaza strip, as well as threatening our entire project (the Palestinian cause). This will give the Israeli occupiers the pretext to confiscate more strategic lands - the lands neighbouring Jerusalem as well as territory in the rest of the West Bank. This will be the culmination of a well-organised robbery of all our natural resources. It will destroy any prospects of having a viable and independent Palestinian state.
As Palestinians, whatever parties or factions we belong to, we must put the priority of national survival at the top of our agenda if we are to overcome the dangers that beset our cause and our country today. This means that we must be geographically and politically united. And that we must arrive at this unity through democratic and peaceful means.
Abandoning ourselves to ongoing petty conflicts over very narrow political goals will only ensure the loss of our homeland and can only result in the further fragmentation of our political, social and organizational capacities. It is vitally important that the world should see the power and ability of the Palestinian people for what it is, not fractured by internal disagreement.
Hamas and Fatah together represent the essence of the national consensus, despite the discord which has led to their dispute. Neither party can afford to ignore or bypass the other. The Hamas movement under its government led by Isma'eel Haneya will continue to negotiate in Cairo demanding a true political partnership with the Fatah movement. We want to curtail all the disputes and restore national unity.
What we have in common with the Fatah movement really far exceeds what divides us. Our disagreements are parochial compared to the common agenda that we share in determining a strategy capable of dealing with the Israeli occupation and the international community. Moreover, a fairer international approach towards the Palestinian cause may bring an opportunity to end not only the unjust siege imposed on the Gaza strip, but Israeli occupation, and to establish a free and independent Palestinian state, including the lands occupied in 1967.
Hamas' vision to end the crisis
When Egypt first invited Hamas to participate in this Palestinian-Palestinian dialogue, Hamas responded by submitting a written document that contained the Hamas vision, including its hopes for a reconciliation with Fatah which could be supervised by Egypt. This document was sent to the Egyptian minister "Sulyman", ten days before the meeting, on October 8, 2008. Hamas explained its position in the following terms:
Firstly, the main cause of separation and division between Hamas and Fatah, as every body knows, stems from Fatah's rejection of the PLC election results in January, 2006, followed by an attempt to undermine the legitimate authority of the Hamas government through any available means.This gave Palestinian support to a Zionist-American decision to secure the downfall of Hamas.
Hamas expressed its support for national unity through the Mecca agreement, in which national unity was identified as the supreme goal, over and above any organizational self-interest on the part of the Hamas movement. We continue to call for national unity and to put that at the top of our agenda, regardless of everything that has happened in the interim, and we affirm this position to all those Palestinian and Arab partners that seek reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah.
Second, the main cause of the division among the Palestinian factions does not arise from apparent differences in the political programmes. It is due to the actions of some figures within the Palestinian Authority who seek to keep their hold on Palestinian political decision-making in the conflict with the Israeli occupation, regardless of what the Palestinian people think and of the point of view of their political parties.
Launching a dialogue between Hamas and Fatah is the only basis for a wider reconciliation process among Palestinian factions inside and outside Palestine, whether under the umbrella of PLO or others. It is the precondition for a necessary compromise on a range of disagreements. The dialogue between the Palestinian parties must dedicate itself to the interests of the Palestinian people as a whole, and it must cover the following issues: how the conflict with the Israelis should be conducted; and how the PLO can be rebuilt to act as the effective and real representatives of all Palestinian people and factions wherever they are situated.
Third, in the eyes of the Hamas movement, national reconciliation should be based on the following principles:
- Unity of the West Bank and Gaza strip
- Unity of the political programme, whether in the West Bank or in Gaza, requires a unified authority and government.
- Standing by democratic choices and abiding by election results.
- Full respect for Palestinian legality and all that this implies in terms of applying and abiding by the basic Palestinian law.
- Reforming the security services based on national and professional principles beyond the self-interest of Palestinian factions.
- Abiding by the Cairo agreement in 2005, and the document of understanding that emerged from it, alongside all the issues agreed by the Palestinian parties in 2006, as well as in the Mecca agreement in 2007.
- Maintaining the right of the Palestinian people to resist the Israeli occupation.
- Reactivating and reforming the PLO on the basis of free elections, with the participation of all Palestinian parties and independent figures inside or outside Palestine.
Fourth, Palestinian-Palestinian dialogue should focus on the following matters:
- Forming a transitional Palestinian coalition government
- Returning to the position of the Palestinian entity as it was before 14 June,2007, and resolving all the disputes created by the division between Hamas and Fatah
- Holding presidential and legislative elections according to specific mechanisms that guarantee transparency, and that are agreed on by the Palestinian parties.
- Reforming the security apparatuses on the basis of national and professional principles over and above party interests.
- Starting to rebuild the PLO.
We believe the parties preparing to dialogue in Cairo were flexible enough to reach a compromise on many of the issues causing disagreement, and capable of reaching mutual understanding sufficient to end the state of division which the Israeli occupation seeks to extend and to exploit.
A glimmer of light
I would like to draw your attention to some important priorities on which the two sides, Hamas and Fatah, can cooperate, thereby extracting themselves from the division that undermines both:
- The formation of an ad hoc government with specific jurisdiction through national consent. The programme of this government should include the reconstruction of Gaza, preparing for the next elections and working on national reconciliation.
- Reforming the PLO to make it fit to represent Palestinian sectors and parties in general, whether they are based inside or outside the Palestinian homeland. The proportion of any party should not exceed 50% within the PLO in order to guarantee full participation by all parties. No single faction should be allowed to take decisions on its own, or to set itself up as the sole representative, determining national priorities and strategies.
- Rebuilding the security services should be based on professional criteria and the national interest, asking for assistance from the Egyptians in the Gaza strip, and the Jordanians in the West Bank to this end.
- Reactivating the legislative council and respecting the choice of the Palestinian people as reflected in the elections. The holding of presidential and legislative elections simultaneously should be with the consent of all parliamentary parties to the election procedure, including method of proportional representation, as well as determining by consensus the number of nominees for the presidential election.
- Putting pressure on the international community to take a clear position against the expansion of the occupation, the deporting ofPalestinians and the ‘Judaizing' of Jerusalem, as well as existing aggressive practices in the West Bank and Gaza strip.
- The political programme of any future Palestinian government should not disparage or contradict what has been agreed upon thus far.
- Strengthening connection with the Arab and Islamic world, as the Palestinian cause is closely related to that of Arabs and Muslims. Mobilizing such powerful regional and national support for the Palestinian cause.
- Agreeing that all types of resistance are legitimate for the Palestinians while it remains the case that their land is under occupation. Resistance is not in any contradiction with national consent, but is in the national interest.
- Taking care of developmental projects to nurture the economy of the Palestinian people and to reinforce its resilience in enduring Israeli occupation.
In conclusion it is worth observing that time is not on the side of anyone in this struggle, since whatever changes are brought about in securing a new homeland will create new challenges on all sides. Hamas has constantly repeated its commitment to the Cairo talks, the documents of understanding and the Mecca agreement which pave the way to a new political partnership between Hamas and Fatah at the same time as laying the foundation for a national coalition government.
We await the next and final phase of the Cairo talks beginning on 7 July. Meanwhile, the whole world is pinning its hopes on these Cairo talks, wishing it success in achieving a reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah to end the crisis which ha threatened the very future of the Palestinian cause.
We know that the international community has become significantly more aware of our people's cause, especially after the latest Gaza war which caused massive destruction to the infra-structure as well as committing war crimes against human beings in many different locations of the Gaza strip. We should seize on thisinternational support by ensuring that it is not our disunity which gives the government of Netinyahu and Liebermann the slightest opportunity to procrastinate and escape from the obligations of the ‘two-state solution' approved by the Oslo agreement and by the international community.
---------------------
The vision of the Fatah movement
Fatah's General Secretary for Gaza Southern District suggests what it would take to avoid a further polarisation between the PLO and Hamas.
by M.Elwan
On January 1, 1965, the Palestine 'Revolution' commenced and the Fatah movement was born. Due to the absence of any real Palestinian leadership, a group of Palestinian students abroad formed the movement. Arab regimes controlled the Palestinian cause until we came and assumed the leadership. From the first, this movement considered itself to be the ‘centre' of a political arena where we expected to see a mosaic of all kinds of political ideologies that however believe in our national goal.
As Fatah General Secretary for Gaza Southern District, M.Elwan works with the Fatah mobilizations in Gaza, directly experiencing many of the conflicts with the Hamas movement that have arisen over the past three years.Fatah has been leading the Palestinian struggle for decades. Many ups and downs have faced our Palestinian cause during these decades. The movement, which is a grassroots movement, has experienced all manner of shifts in international context that inevitably have affected our struggle. Our strategy has changed many times and our flexibility is what has qualified us to achieve many of our goals without ever making concessions when it comes to our basic rights. It is this strategy that has led to worldwide recognition of the Palestinian cause: around 120 countries do recognise us; we have established diplomatic relations with them.
Now consider from this perspective the nature of the conflict or disagreement between Fatah and Hamas, or between Hamas and all the national and Islamic factions. We find the following:
- Hamas is ideologically and philosophically different from the other factions, including in its various political dimensions.
- Hamas does not believe in political partnership inasmuch as it has other goals and visions. This was very obvious when Hamas first came to power. Hamas wanted to take control of the entire political leadership of the Palestinian territories. Many changes in Ministries and governmental offices happened shortly after Hamas came to power.
- The ‘caliphate' espoused by Hamas completely contradicts the character of the national project. The caliphate means the Islamic system of rule known hundreds of years ago by successive Islamic countries. This system of course may be implemented in a purely Islamic nation. However, our Palestinian cause includes a diversity of political factions and thoughts that vary from the extreme left to the extreme right. The Hamas government nevertheless views its senior political leader, Ismail Haneya, as a new ‘Caliph' for a new Islamic nation.
- The ruling purpose of Hamas was to eliminate the Oslo Accords and to undermine the chances for peace with Israel, since Israel does not put the recognition of the Palestinians' rights undertaken in that agreement into effect. Nevertheless it is the case that Hamas was only able to arrive at its election result thanks to the Oslo agreement. This shows how Hamas cannot accept anything that has been done by others before them, bearing in mind that the Fatah movement secured the Oslo Accords many years ago.
- Hamas presents itself as a substitute for all the national and Islamic factions. This narrow view has brought many troubles in its wake since Hamas came to office. Fighting has erupted between Hamas and Islamic Jihad, an Islamic faction. Other fights have erupted between Hamas and other small new Islamic factions. Those factions' ideology is Islamic, but that doesn't ensure that they agree with Hamas, and that is not very agreeable to Hamas.
Moreover, we cannot help but remember that Hamas was founded as a substitute for the Palestine Liberation Organization, including all its factions, but the Fatah movement in particular. Their dominance would represent the first step in the elimination of the PLO, which has been internationally recognised as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Hamas‘ key leader, Khaled Mishaal, announced this intention very clearly from Syria. He clearly stated that he wants to see Hamas replace the PLO.
Hamas has capitalised on the dire political conditions for peacebuilding, since Israel has made no pretence of fulfilling any of its promises towards the Palestinians. Therefore, Israel has directly caused the failure of the Oslo Accords, and with this the failure of the Fatah movement and the PLO as co-sponsors of an absent peace process.
This in turn has paved the way for other forces to come to the fore, in particular the armed resistance led by Hamas. Israel, as a result, has been able to claim in that in the current balance of power it would not be to its advantage to offer any encouragement to the emergence of a Palestinian state, while there remained no legitimate Palestinian leader with whom to negotiate a peace. Israel does not wish to see peace, so what more logical than to cynically destroy every last chance of peace amongst the Palestinians themselves. Israel has done everything it can to strengthen the conflict between Hamas and Fatah. This has led to the current state of division, and surrounded the Palestinian cause with a conflict-fatigue that must be very reassuring to the Israeli leadership .
I believe that the solution to this deadlock must lie in the following:
- Tactically Hamas and the Islamic Jihad should be forced to integrate into the ranks of the PLO and to recognise the political platform and all the agreements reached by all the national and Islamic factions. All the factions of the PLO should agree upon a shared vision on how to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, either through negotiation or resistance, or both. Moreover, the factions are invited to coordinate at the national level all the roles required to serve the national interest. This agreement represents the minimum level of the stage of liberation for the State.
- Strategically An independent Palestinian state must be established on the territories occupied in 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital. This is a public demand on the part of the Palestinian people, and it represents a vision that is agreed upon by all the national and Islamic factions. In addition, all the main determinants governing the relationship between all factions should be clearly identified from the outset. This would require spelling out in detail and agreement - not the condition of ‘no overall control' urged by many of the parties in the region.
By a combination of the tactical and the strategic, the crisis between Fatah and Hamas can be averted. I think the talks that are currently taking place in Cairo offer only a temporary solution that will not last - one that is susceptible to failure under the slightest circumstance of media abuse, since each party accords its own power greater priority than that of the state itself or the power of law. In reality, this underlying power of each party that is engaged in separate acts of resistance, is dedicated to breaching any existing agreement. In order to ensure the successful outcome of any agreement, there must be only one power and authority that claims control of the path of resistance, a claim which can be abruptly terminated once a Palestinian state exists in the territories occupied in 1967 , with Jerusalem as its capital, and an established right of return.
