Interview with Dr. Rabah Mohanna
Member of the Political Bureau, PFLP
Question: What is your opinion on the government of national unity in Palestine?
Dr. Mohana: Although PFLP was the third force in the elections, although with a big difference in votes to Fatah, we did not take part in the 11th Palestinian government because we saw the prisoners’ document (1) which has been agreed upon by all political and social groups in Palestine as a minimum political compromise on the agenda. We thought what happened in Mecca has exceeded the limit which we had agreed upon in the prisoners’ document. For example, in the prisoners’ document we did not accept Oslo and subsequent agreements as the basis for the continuation of the political process. In Mecca they agreed on it, Hamas also agreed on it.
Second, we do not agree with the Beirut Arab summit initiative because it does not deal with the right to return in a proper way, but it deals with normalisation of relations with Israel. Also, we saw in Mecca that both Fatah and Hamas they did not want real partnership between the different parties.
We think that there are three possibilities for the future development of the government of national unity: First, Abu Mazen wants to bring Hamas to his political agenda. And actually it seems like if Hamas is coming closer to Fatah, first of all concerning concrete issues like the budget, the ministers etc. We are afraid that Hamas could follow this way and end up being close to Abu Mazen’s political agenda. And this governement including Hamas will continue to deal with the Quartet for the Middle East. We think that this is very dangerous for the Palestinian issue. This is the first possibility.
Second possibilty: there may be some difficulties, especially from inside Hamas. So Hamas does not get join closely enough Abu Mazen’s agenda. Consequently, there will be problems in the government and Abu Mazen will go to early elections, presidential and parliamentary elections. And the support for Abu Mazen will be very strong. He will say: We tried Fatah government and did not succeed, we tried Hamas government and did not succeed, and we tried the government of national unity and did not succeed, so then let’s go back to elections. Abu Mazen would come out very strong of such elections.
Third possibility: there will be more political difficulties between Hamas and Fatah, more directly related to the issues of government, division of powers, main positions ministers, internal relations, communication. And Hamas will not accept to go to elections and finally we will go back to clashes between Hamas and Fatah through blood and shooting.
There is a fourth scenario that we as PFLP are trying to put forward. We see this in a reform of PLO on democratic bases, with the aim to respect the PLO charta. This has to constitute the leadership for the Palestinians inside and outside Palestine. Only on this basis, we can discuss the issue of government, whatever government. We even have to discuss the question whether we do at all need the Palestinian authority because it hinders the Palestinian freedom fight.
Question: So the PLO Charta should be the basis of any Palestinian future government, of national unity or whatsoever?
Of course. .. the original PLO charta.
Question: Do you think there is the concrete danger of civil war in Palestine, beyond the clashes?
I don’t think that we are going to civil war. There might be the continuation of clashes between some factions of Fatah and Hamas. I don’t see we have the conditions for civil war. The mentality and the constitution of the Palestinian society will make it difficult for the clashes to expand into a real civil war. The constitution of the Palestinian society holds a kind of control over this situation. You might imagine this as if for instance in my house, I am with Fatah, my wife is with Hamas, my son with PFLP. People have strong relations with each other and they are all interconnected.
Question: Which is PFLP’s message to the Palestinians outside Palestine, especially to ensure that the second generation of Palestinians outside Palestine can understand what is PFLP? What are your connections to organisations outside Palestine?
PFLP has organisations in Europe and in South and North America. But I agree, our relations are not active enough. And I think that we have to work to activate our institutions and organisations, because after all we are the main party that is not inside the government. We must activate our potential to the maximum and we have to strengthen our contacts to Palestinians all over the world. Furthermore, I think PFLP’s position is clear: we have to connect Palestinians inside and outside Palestine. We have a clear programme: we do agree on having an independent Palestinian state and at the same time we insist on the right of return. And we think that this strategy is the bridge that connects political reality at the moment: the revendication of an independent state in the borders of 1967 and our historical aim in building a democratic Palestinian state in all Palestine where Arab, Muslims, Christians and Jews will live together without any discrimination on the basis of religion, nationality, sex or whatsoever.
Question: Why do PFLP’s positions expressed inside Palestine sometimes lack political clarity?
What I have told you can all be found in official documents. However, we can say that maybe we do not have proper connections with the people. We are planning to strengthen our connection to the people, for instance through means of communcation. But a problem is also our lack of ressources.
Question: Which are the main financial sources of PFLP? Do you receive ressources from inside or outside Palestine or from PLO?
The main sources are our friends. We have some projects which we get ressources from, and of course historically from PLO. However, since 1991 when we were against Madrid and Oslo, funds were shortened. I am proud to say that we do not receive any support of any Arab regime. Our situation is really difficult. Hamas and Fatah both receive support from the Arab regimes, we do not. And this is a one of our problems.
We are trying to strengthen our relations with left groups and parties in the Arab world and in the West, not only for our benefit, but also for the benefit of the global left forces.
Question: From outside it looks like as if Fatah has given up completely or at least substantially a position of resistance on Palestine, that it has give in to American and Israeli pressure and has joined their project. What is your position on this opinion?
Fatah is a big movement and there are different currents. Sure, for the official leadership it might be true what you are saying, but at the level of Fatah’s grassroot membership there is still believe in resistance. But Fatah is facing two problems. The first one is corruption, inside the PLO and the Palestinian authority which is affecting also the Fatah leadership. The second weak point of Fatah is its leadership which is quite old and out of order.
Cairo, April 8, 2007 by Doris Höflmayer and Margarete Berger
(1) The Prisoners Document was signed in 2006 by all political forces except Islamic Jihad as a miminum consensus document.
