On July 7, 2000 IslamOnline held a live dialogue with author-journalist, Nagui Ebrahim Slaim Allosh. Born in the year 1935 in Bir Zit, Palestine, Allosh is currently the Secretary General of the Palestinian Writers and Journalists Association. Over the years, Allosh has held many prestigious positions. He has been member of the Palestinian National Council, 1975-1977; Secretary General of the Arab Liberation Movement; Member of Fatah Movement Revolutionary Council; Secretary General of the Palestinian Writers and Journalists Association, 1972-1977, 1980; re-elected in 1980 and is still in position to date; Member of the Board of Trustees of the Arab Unity Center of Studies, 1974 to present; Member of the Board of Trustees of the National Council for Arab Culture, 1985 to present and member of the Executive Committee; Manager of Al Tali'a Printing and Publication House and layout manager of Arab Studies magazine, 1965-1972.
Allosh has written and published several articles and books. Work such as The Contemporary Arab Revolutionary, 1960; The Revolution and the Masses, Stages of Arab Struggle and Role of the Revolutionary Movement from 1948 to 1961, third edition, 1973; The Vietnamese Experiment and its Political and Military Lessons, 1973; The Line of Struggle and Fighting and the Line of Settlement and Liquidation, 1976; Arab Unity: Problems and Obstacles, 1991.The National Project from Defense to Offensive, 1991; Ideology of Palestinian Resistance from 1984 to 1987, Bir Zit Heritage Committee, 1993; Democracy: Concepts and Problems, 1994; Oslo and the Dimensions of the Arab-Zionist Conflict, 1992; Badr Shaker Al Sayyab's Poetry Works; Egal Alon: Creation of the Israeli Army; Nagui Allosh-supervision and editing: The Arab Nationalist Movement in 100 years, 1977.
Poetry collection, including: A Small Gift, 1976; Windows Opened with Bombs, 1970; On Flowers and Fire, 1991.
Literary studies: Some Aspects of Innovation and Compliance with Fundamentals in Arab Literature, 1987.
The Dialogue
The topic of the dialogue "What comes after Camp David 2?" The following is the dialogue between viewers and Allosh:
Name: Ebrahim Mohammad.
Question: Why has the Camp David Summit failed?
Allosh: America aimed to reach a final solution at Camp David Summit. America believed that such solution meant a complete rearrangement of the Arab scene, in the sense that the Syrians should sign an agreement, the Iraqi problem should be solved, and the stage should be reset in Egypt and the Arabian Peninsula. Such rearrangement would guarantee any solution to be stable or not. However, as long as there are political, economic and military situations being shaped in Arab countries, solutions are only temporary. In this respect, the American opinion coincides with that of the Zionist side. As to the Palestinian side, it believes that any solution signed with the Zionist side would be unfair unless all Arab sides sign agreements. This does not guarantee a stable situation. As the Palestinian side is apprehensive that Syria may adopt the Palestinian opposition as it has adopted Hizbullah, and that such action could lead to a situation similar to that in Lebanon. Therefore, the Palestinians adopted the Syrian attitude in the Camp David talks, including withdrawal of Israeli troops to the June 4, 1967 borders, full withdrawal of Israeli forces and elimination of settlements, which was not on the agendas of any previous negotiations.
Name: Abu Mohammad.
Question: Do you consider the failure of Camp David as the end of the march for liquidating the Palestinian cause?
Allosh: We do not consider the failure of this summit as the end of the march, nor do we believe that the liquidation council has stopped. Since 1976, we have believed that there are two lines: the line of struggle and fighting. The line of liberation, and the line of settlement, will eventually lead to liquidation. The Camp David Summit was a part of the liquidation program, because the Palestinians went to Camp David and insisted on a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. They completely ignored the fact that there are occupied Palestinian territories that stretch from Al Naqoora to Ghaza. The proclamation of a Palestinian state with its capital in Jerusalem involves a negligence of the fact that there are those who have been homeless since 1948, who are called refugees in political terminology Yasser Arafat is more interested in proclaiming a state and in announcing that the capital of that state is Jerusalem and in being called President Arafat more than he is interested in Palestine and the refugees. Therefore, when he was given the title of "Ra'ees, " (president) the Israelis made a condition that his Arabic title be translated into "Chairman," not "President." On the other hand, the Zionist side thinks of things that are practical and symbolic at the same time. For instance, the Zionists say that Jerusalem should remain unified. The Zionists wants the land, but it does not want the people. It does not want the return of refugees; it wants to drive more people of their homes and make refugees of them. We were surprised today by the resignation of the Refugees Commissioner in the Palestinian Authority, Dr Asaad Abdel Rahman, who said that the reason for his July 27, 2000 resignation was that he had been ignored in the negotiations and was not taken along to the Camp David talks. This means that the issue of refugees was discussed in Camp David, for why should he resign if that issue was not discussed there?
Name: Khalid Taha.
Question: How do you assess Arafat's seriousness with regard to proclamation of the Palestinian state on September 13 this year? Do you think that European and Arab countries will recognize this state as they have promised, or they will take the failure of Camp David as a pretext for backing on their promises? What would the borders, aspirations, economy, and foreign relations of that state be like?
Allosh: I do not take Yasser Arafat seriously on anything, because I know him personally. I am sure that he will postpone the date of proclamation of the Palestinian state, because there has been talk about postponement for some time, as was the case in the announcement of the failed summit. The so-called state to be proclaimed is not only without borders, it is without territories as well, because the Zionist side in the recent negotiations made a condition that if the Palestinian state would have Jerusalem as its capital, it would annex 95% of the territories of Ghaza and the West Bank. What will remain after that? Besides the Arab governments that are connected to the American solution would never recognize such a state if and when it is proclaimed. Their recognition would antagonize the Europeans who are keen on pleasing the American government. In addition, how could there be Arab enthusiasm at official or popular levels for a Palestinian state that made concessions on its land and its people?
Name: Muneer Hassan.
Question: Do you think that Israel will turn to the Syrian track after Camp David, or will it focus on the domestic situation and put the Palestinian Cause on the back burner, particularly as the United States in going to be preoccupied with elections in the coming phase?
Allosh: I do not think so, because the Zionist enemy is thinking right now of creating crises that may change the course of events. They are preparing itself for delivering strikes. It has threatened to strike at Iran when Teheran made its Shihab-3 missile experiment. It is apprehensive of the domestic build-up currently taking place in Egypt and Iraq. That is why it planned for provoking the problem of Copts in Egypt but did not succeed. It fears Syria much, too, and I do not rule out the possibility that it may launch military operations in Syria and Lebanon under any pretext, or in Palestine to start the process of migration that I mentioned previously. The Zionist enemy does not believe that it would be able to end the Palestinian Cause before the Arab scene is rearranged.
Name: Muneera Oraiqat.
Question: Were the Palestinian demonstrations and public pressures a reason for the failure of the summit, or the problem lies in the settlement march itself, particularly with regard to the final settlement issues?
Allosh: The failure of the summit was known for anybody with knowledge about the nature of Zionist and American policies and the character of the Palestinian leadership. If I were asked about the summit before, I would have said the same thing. I think that the problem lies in the settlement itself. Meanwhile, we cannot also ignore the fact the awareness of the Palestinian public opinion of the dimensions of the talks that deal with the future and destiny of the Palestinian people warned the Palestinian leadership that the fixed principles of the Palestinian Cause should be respected, although the leadership had not been accustomed to respecting the principles of the cause or Palestinian public opinion.
Name: Usama Hassan.
Question: How do you assess the Arab and Muslim attitudes to the Camp David Summit?
Allosh: We have not been used to seeing effective Arab and regional pressures in all the stages of the Palestinian Cause. The Palestinians have claimed that the Arabs and Muslims left the Palestinian team in the negotiations without help. We must not forget the role played by Hizbullah through its resistance, which has altered the concept of conflict and proved that Arabs and Muslims can inflict losses on the Zionist enemy. There is no doubt that this causes concern to the Zionists and the Americans at present, and one of the questions that they must be asking themselves now is: What would the Palestinians do if they followed the example of the Lebanese? Besides, we must not forget the stand taken by the Syrian government when it urged the Palestinian side to withdraw from the talks, nor should we forget the Iraqi stand of refusing to settle Palestinian refugees on Iraqi territories, or the Iranian stand of slashing at the Americans and the Israelis. The Iranians announced that the summit had failed as a result of the Zionist intransigence. We have always appreciated any Arab or Muslim stands in support of the Palestinian Cause. The Palestinian leadership has tried since the start of the settlement process to show us as standing alone, and it has taken every opportunity to decry this state of affairs, which is unreal because the number of Arab and Muslim fighters on all the Arab has been large. Financial, military, and training assistance has also been quite generous, to the extent that an Arab official whom I once met at a meeting that comprised most Palestinian leaderships, where the leaders were complaining that they had not received support, said, "You received from us alone a total of $ 996 million, or close to $ 1 billion, over the past years."
Name: Mayy Abdooni
Question: How do you assess the relationship between the Palestinian track and the Syrian and Lebanese tracks after Camp David, particularly under the new regime in Damascus?
Allosh: I believe that unification of these tracks is necessary. It would help the Palestinians achieve more gains and become stronger. This is my view, but this issue is seen in a different angle by the Palestinian leadership, which is under Arab and international orders to sever the relation with Syria. That is why I have always supported coordination and have always tried to push matters in that direction. But our trend has turned into a Palestinian opposition trend, while the Palestinian leadership has adopted a line for breaking the tracks of negotiation apart at all times, because it believes that if it goes to the negotiations alone, it stands a chance of scoring better results and will have more room for maneuvering, not to mention that it will not be restricted by points that carry no benefits for it, such as compliance with the 4 June 1967borders or return of the land and the people, and the Syrians insist on the withdrawal from the Golan Heights and return to the June 4, 1967 borders.
Name: Mohammad.
Question: How has the failure of the Summit effected on inter-Palestinian relations?
Allosh: The Palestinian opposition expected the Camp David Summit to fail, but the Palestinian leadership and the pro-liquidation Palestinians did not expect that failure. This means that the Palestinian opposition should close its ranks and get rid of the pro-settlement members that infiltrated into its conference that was held in Damascus. The opposition must unit the Palestinian people around it and isolates the surrendering Palestinian leadership and its followers. It must rebuild the Palestine Liberation Organization along the lines of a the program for liberation and armed struggle, not the ideologies of the settlement advocates, who have followed Arafat and supported his ten-point program of 1974,which implicitly proposes recognition of Israel and establishment of the Palestinian state on any "liberated" square feet of land. This was the start of the settlement program, after which he announced the so-called staged program that was the actual beginning of the settlement process. The Palestinian side, or the so-called Palestinian Authority, will strive from now on to uproot the Palestinian resistance in the Occupied Territories, so as not to have matters going out of hand in its co-existence with the Zionist enemy.
Name: Murad.
Question: Will the failure of Camp David make the Palestinian opposition factions stronger? Will it make Syria and Lebanon stronger as well?
Allosh: The failure of the summit should make the Palestinian opposition factions close their ranks and consolidate their positions and mobilize the Palestinian people for continuing their refusal of surrender. If they do not do that, they will be wasting a big chance that deserves investment. The excessive involvement in the program for surrender should make the opposition forces stronger and reunify the Palestinian people around the main program for liberation of Palestine, to which the struggling Palestinian forces have committed themselves since the beginning of the Palestinian struggle in the early 20th century. As to the second part of your question, we are not worried about the strengthening of the positions of those governments that have proved their mettle in the face of American and Zionist policies. We Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims in general are interested in the unification of the stands of all the parties that oppose the Zionist enemy and the Imperialists, regardless of any sensitivity that may exist.
Name: Hussein.
Question: Given that the Arab situation is very bad, is there any hope for reaching an agreement before the Palestinian make full and unconditional concessions and succumb to all the conditions of Israel?
Allosh: It can be said that the Arab situation is very bad, particularly where Iraq and other nationalist issues are concerned. But the Arabs have reserve forces that have not been used yet. Even the Palestinians who know Lebanon well had not known before, the forces brought to bear by Hizbullah. The Lebanese government demonstrated this and people in their unity around the resistance are a source for pride. Therefore, while we see in the deteriorating official Arab situation, we also see the stupendous capabilities kept in store by the Arab people, which will be brought to bear at the proper time to overthrow the "very bad situation" and build a new Arab situation that would be a source of pride for all of us and for all honest citizens.
Name: Maryam.
Question: In your opinion, what are the expected solutions for the refugees after the failure of Camp David?
Allosh: There is only one solution to the refugee problem, regardless of whether the Camp David Summit was a success or a failure: that the refugees return to their land after its liberation. I was not expecting the Camp David Summit to solve the problem of refugees, because the Zionists still believe that they have occupied the land and that the law of occupation allows them to drive more people out of their land, not to let the people driven out before return.
Name: Hussein.
Question: Israel plans for the future and puts its plans into effect with America's help. What is the role of Arabs in this life? Do they really have what might be called a life under this humiliation and degradation? What will history say about Arab rulers whose regime survival has become one of the missions of the Mossad?
Allosh: First, I would like to correct you here: the United States and the Zionist enemy have made and executed plans together. Known Arab regimes and forces assist them. As to the role of Arabs, it has yet to become as effective as it should be, because the Imperialist and Zionist planners have been keen in their efforts for imposing a long-lasting occupation of the Arab World on establishing two facts: (1) the creation of dependent regimes that would find it difficult to disengage from the Imperialists and the Zionists; and (2) the establishment of schools which would graduate surrogates who would promote this policy and defend it publicly. An American author wrote a book titled "The Middle East and International Policy" that has not been translated into Arabic yet, in which he affirms the following: - First: the Middle East is a region where only international resolutions apply, and the five great powers have owned the decision-making in that region since1973. - Second: no power is allowed to come out victor or vanquished in any conflict in that region except with an international decision. We have seen examples of this since the days of Mohammad Ali Pasha, who defeated Greece but was declared vanquished by an international resolution from the five great powers that declared him, defeated and established the Greek state. The author, Carl Brown, speaks of the role of ruling forces and the mentalities that were developed under the concept of international resolution, which always call implementation of international resolutions, just like some Palestinians. It is strange that some of them went to Iraq to call on Baghdad to comply with international resolutions, despite the fact that it was those international resolutions that caused Iraq's dilemma. Arabs lead a life of humiliation at present. And why not, when they are unable to fend for themselves? If any Arab side tries to defend itself, they gang up on it, as some of them did in the case of Iraq. Could there by any more humiliation? However, I have not despaired of the Arab Nation, for the Nation, as I said before, has its elements of strength, and it will bring this strength to bear at the right time. We are waiting for the great Arab upheavals that will rebuild the Nation and restore its natural position and role that it had at the time of the Islamic conquests.
Name: Shireen.
Question: Can the Palestinian Authority resume the struggle once more, or it is too late for that?
Allosh: I do not think that there is hope for the Palestinian Authority to revert from its misguided conduct. It did not succeed in using the armed resistance when all the people were ready for it. At present, the Authority believes that its main mission is to protect the privileges has its gained. The Palestinian Authority's only concerns now are how to build palaces, how to steal money and land, how to hoard illegal money, how to open restaurants and bars for its members in conservative cities like Naples, how to assassinate opponents like Abdel Sattar Qasim, the professor of political sciences in Al Nagah University in Naples, and Muawya Al Masri, Member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, who were shot on account of their opposition. The armed resistance will be restored not Yasser Arafat's leadership, but by the freedom fighters of the Palestinian people … the heroes of Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, Fatah, the Popular Front for Liberation of Palestinian and the General Command.
Name: Shireen.
Question: Which do you prefer, Israel's hell of Arafat's paradise?
Allosh: I am not saying that Israel's hell is better than Arafat's paradise. I will only quote the words of an Arab poet, who said, "An injustice done by kin is more bitter than a slash of a sword." I would also like to add that, from my experience in the resistance, the corruption wreaked by Yasser Arafat in the Palestinian people and its cadres is more serious than that done by all the Arab, American and Zionist intelligence services combined together. Arafat has beliefs, practices and policies that all lead to corruption and destruction. To give you an example, he believes that a little of something is better than a lot of nothing, and this belief governs all his actions. He also believes that everybody has a price, and he likes to tell the anecdote of the old Arab ruler, Abu Ja'far Al Mansour, who wanted to get rid of Abu Muslim Al Khurassani, so he took him by surprise, killed him and beheaded his body and sent his head to his soldiers, whom Arafat claims worshipped Al Khurassani. Al Mansour threw Al Khurassani's head to the troops together with a handful of gold coins. Arafat never failed to give the moral of the story by asking, "Where did the soldiers go?" and he would answer himself by saying, "They went for the gold, not for Al Khurassani's head."
Name: Ghada.
Question: Do you expect another Intifada? If so, will it result in a war among the Palestinians?
Allosh: Our people must go up in another Intifada, so that it may weaken the domination of its domineering leadership over its affairs and show the Zionist enemy that it will not surrender or accept the liquidation of its cause. War among the Palestinians would be started by Arafat's leadership, which used artillery against the refugee camps in Lebanon in the past and used bullets against freedom fighters. Those who do the injustice, not by the wronged, start civil war. If this leadership respects the sanctums, will and dignity of its people, there will not be a civil war. All those who fear the outbreak of a civil war should go to this leadership and ask it to stop its summary actions, its follies and its breach of sanctums before the situation explodes.
