Answer to a Question
Question: Hamas announced from Doha on Monday, 2017/5/1, its acceptance of a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders as a "national consensus formula," deleted the phrase "destruction of Israel," and declared its independence from the Muslim Brotherhood. My question is two-fold:
First: Is Hamas's announcement of its new document linked to negotiated peaceful solutions carried by the new US administration? Or was this "reversal" in Hamas's goals influenced by Europe in a line separate from American policy?
Answer: In order to understand the motives and dimensions of the announcement of the new document, called the "Document of General Principles and Policies of the Hamas Movement," and its relationship to America and Europe, we review the following:
First: The results of the PLO's concessions and Hamas subsequently following suit:
The PLO—the "alleged representative of Palestine"—conceded 80% of the land of Palestine (the 1948 occupation) under the pretext of having a mini-state in the 1967 occupied territories. However, instead of the Jews providing recognition of the remainder of Palestine (the 1967 occupation) to the Palestinians in exchange, they provided recognition to the PLO! In fact, the Jewish state and the West in general quickly and successfully transformed the entity arising from the PLO, the "Palestinian Authority," according to the ill-fated Oslo Accords, into a security servant for the Jewish entity and into a series of treasonous concessions under the pretext of establishing peace. America and Europe know that the Jewish entity’s refusal to provide any concessions, no matter how small, under security pretexts, is the main obstacle to achieving so-called peace. The PLO has made massive concessions and is ready to provide more in exchange for the announcement of any settlement called a "Palestinian state," even if it is demilitarized and stripped of sovereignty—meaning it has nothing of a state but the name. Yet, the Jewish entity wants more because it realizes, as everyone does, that he who becomes accustomed to humiliation finds it easy to endure.
Hamas continued its heated statements against the PLO’s concessions to the Jewish state in exchange for a mini-state in the 1967 occupied territories. This placed the Palestinian Authority in a weak position in its negotiations following the signing of the Oslo Accord. Thus, the malicious plan was to make Hamas follow the PLO by bringing it to power under the shade of the occupation, then dealing with it and accepting negotiations for a state in '67, which naturally leads to recognizing the Jewish entity! Because the PLO is involved to the core in the projects of the West, headed by America, to bring the people of Palestine to their knees and force them to accept the Jewish entity, the PLO participated with the West in the conspiracy to bring Hamas to power under the occupation. The PLO contributed to this behind the scenes or openly because it realized that ruling under the occupation would lead Hamas to where Fatah and the PLO arrived. Thus, Hamas succeeded in the 2006 legislative elections, and the rest of the factions refused to form a national unity government with it, which was to entangle it in ruling under the occupation. At the same time, Qatar was intensifying its contacts with Hamas and announcing its support for it, and subsequently, Hamas seized the entire Gaza Strip. By becoming immersed in ruling the Gaza Strip and being isolated in it, the trap was fully set. The Jewish entity refuses to deal with it regarding service matters for the two million people who are residents of the Gaza Strip, considering it a "terrorist" group. As for Egypt, it tightened the siege on it, especially after Sisi took power. Thus, the Gaza Strip and Hamas’s rule in it became caught between the jaws of the Sisi regime and the Jewish entity. The Authority in Ramallah completed this encirclement by being the party that deals with the Jewish entity regarding the Gaza Strip. Consequently, Hamas could no longer secure the basic necessities of life for the people living under its rule. By ruling Gaza under the occupation according to Qatar’s advice, Hamas placed itself between two bitter choices: either collapse and the return of Abbas’s authority to the Strip—which Hamas rejects—or respond to the advice of its supporters, especially Qatar, by softening positions toward the Jewish entity, building a type of relationship with it, and openly walking in settlement projects, including the '67 state! Every conscious person realized that taking over the government under occupation must lead to dealing with the occupier, accepting and supporting negotiations with the Jewish entity, and downsizing the goals of the resistance to establishing a Palestinian state on the '67 borders with all the concessions that entails. Naturally, this is something where ignorance is not an excuse.
All statements issued by Hamas leaders confirm the document's goal as improving international community acceptance of it, maintaining its rule in the Gaza Strip, and agreeing to be an element in the equation of settling the Palestinian issue—meaning removing everything that was rumored that Hamas stands as a stumbling block against the liquidation of Palestine through negotiations. Among those statements:
a. Khaled Meshaal stated that ("the political document keeps pace with changes and reflects the practices, thought, and vision of the Hamas movement. The decision to prepare the political document was taken 4 years ago, and the drafting process began two years ago...") (Noon Post, 2017/5/1). Meshaal said, "Hamas has chosen a new approach, which is development and flexibility without compromising constants and rights" (Al-Arabiya Net, 2017/5/1). He added in the press conference: ("We agreed to develop a political document that reflects the development of Hamas's thought and political performance... we do not seek wars but rather liberation and getting rid of the occupation... After adopting the final version, we met for 9 hours with a group of international law experts to take their notes. Hamas, through the document, shows that it is a developed and renewed movement that develops intellectually and politically, as in the resistance...") (Ma’an News Agency, 2017/5/2).
b. In response to a question about the importance of this document for the movement internally and externally, Barhoum replied: ("This document means a lot to this new generation in the movement that is looking for flexibility, development, enlightened thought, and keeping pace with changes. It opens new horizons in dealing with society, defines for it the landmarks and nature of the conflict with the enemy, and reforms the methods of dealing with the 'other' and openness to the world." Barhoum added: "Listen to Hamas, and do not listen about it from its opponents and enemies, so your compass does not deviate in avoiding ways of dealing with it"...) (Noon Post, 2017/5/2).
Furthermore, the clauses of the document speak for themselves:
Article 8 of the new document states: ("The Hamas movement understands Islam in its comprehensiveness of all aspects of life, its suitability for every time and place, and its moderate middle spirit; it believes it is a religion of peace and tolerance, under whose shade followers of faiths and religions live in safety and security; it also believes that Palestine was and will remain a model of coexistence, tolerance, and civilized creativity.") Coexistence and tolerance between religions intended here is with the Jews—meaning closing the page of the past and opening a new page of coexistence and tolerance. This is a sign of a great degree of leniency and also points to the goal of announcing the document, which is presenting the movement to Europe and America in a way that improves their acceptance of it and their recognition of it in the Palestinian equation.
The document stated in Article 34: ("The central role of the Palestinian woman in building the present, the future, and the political system...") This text was not placed in the context of Islam raising the status of women, but rather to approach Western concepts about what they call "women's rights," which is nothing but a tool to attack Islamic civilization, not real demands for women's rights. The West does not demand of itself not to kill Muslim women in Iraq, Syria, and Palestine; rather, it does not consider preserving a woman's life as a right, but only demands the idea of freedom for women as it wants it in order to strike Islamic civilization.
Through these statements and the texts of the document, the goal becomes clearly evident. The document frees the movement from ideological husks that make the West doubt it, despite them being mere husks! It colors it with a pragmatic view devoid of any Islamic ideological dimension. By doing so, it wants to position itself in a place where it is not suspected of hindering peaceful solutions—meaning opening the way for negotiated solutions and supporting them as a "national consensus formula"! In fact, Hamas's document coincides with the possibility of opening negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and the Jewish entity. Its announcement on 2017/5/1 is explicit in its timing with Abbas's visit to Washington on 2017/5/2. As for the linguistic sophistry about Islam and the non-recognition of the Jewish entity, it is worthless. How can accepting a Palestinian state on the '67 borders be reconciled with non-recognition of the Jewish entity? Hamas's announcement of its acceptance of a state on the '67 borders, and calling that a national consensus formula, is nothing but the beginning of concessions, which will be followed by more. This scene reminds us of the steps and gradual concessions taken by the PLO until it transformed into a security servant for the Jewish entity. As is apparent, Hamas's "authority" in Gaza since the 2006 elections and then seizing power in Gaza is not far from those gradual steps, especially since Meshaal’s speech in Damascus on 2009/6/25, in which he announced that he wants a state on the '67 borders. We issued a publication then on 2009/6/26 under the title "Hamas’s Authority follows the Sunan of Fatah’s Authority inch by inch and cubit by cubit!!" in which we said: ("When the Fatah movement was established in the mid-sixties of the last century, it announced that it adopted resistance to liberate Palestine from the River to the Sea, then it ended up losing the River, the Sea, and what is between them! Fatah’s authority recognized the Jewish entity in most of Palestine and began negotiating with it for a state in what remains of Palestine under American auspices... Yet, Fatah’s authority until today, and after long years of negotiations, has obtained nothing... Then Hamas was established about two decades after the establishment of Fatah, and it began the path that Fatah walked from the beginning. It announced that it adopted resistance to liberate Palestine from the River to the Sea, and began criticizing the Fatah movement for its recognition of the Jewish state, and for its demand only for a state on the 1967 borders, and that it throws itself into the arms of America... Then Hamas’s authority likewise ended up demanding a state on the 1967 borders, alongside the Jewish state in most of Palestine! and it extends its hand to America to negotiate the achievement of this matter!... In the speech of Hamas’s senior leader Khaled Meshaal in Damascus on 2009/6/25, he spoke explicitly that "Hamas wants a state on the 1967 borders, and that it extends its hand to negotiate with America for this purpose!") Thus, the beginning of the steps of gradual concession began about eight years ago—meaning double the period mentioned by Meshaal in the current Hamas document, where he said ("the political document keeps pace with changes and reflects the practices, thought, and vision of the Hamas movement. The decision to prepare the political document was taken 4 years ago, and the drafting process began two years ago...") (Noon Post, 2017/5/1).
The concession began before, but the difference is that Meshaal then mentioned a part and now has added parts to it. Previously, he mentioned the '67 borders but kept the destruction of the Jewish state in his charter, and also kept Hamas’s link to the Muslim Brotherhood. Now he has conceded these two in line with gradual concession! Another difference is that the previous was a speech where things were said, but now it is an adopted political document!
Second: Hamas's document and its relationship to American projects for a solution:
In light of the explosion in the Arab region, especially in Syria, and the heat of tension between America and North Korea, the Palestinian issue is no longer an urgent priority for the current US administration. Therefore, America is in no hurry regarding this issue. It is exploring the horizons of solutions to the Palestinian issue, studying the possibility of opening negotiations between the Arabs—especially the Palestinians—and the Jewish entity, and seeing what happens. This is confirmed by what the BBC reported on 2017/3/11 ("Reuters news agency attributed to Nabil Abu Rudeineh, spokesman for the Palestinian President, saying that Trump told Abbas that he wants to discuss how to return to negotiations, and emphasized his 'commitment to a peace process that leads to a real peace'"). He also said in a joint press conference at the White House with Abbas: ("I will do everything necessary... I would like to act as a mediator or an advisor or an arbitrator between the two sides and we will get this done...") (Russia Today, 2017/5/4). This means that America is not presenting specific plans for a solution in Palestine now, until it makes progress in the war or calming down regarding the issues of Syria and North Korea. Trump has not specified how to return to negotiations nor the type of peace process he wants; rather, he is in a stage of discovery, exploration, and chat with the parties to the conflict in Palestine. He also wants these parties to meet in direct meetings to agree on the solutions they want—or rather, that the Jewish entity wants! Therefore, it demands direct negotiations ("The US delegate to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, met the Palestinian delegate Riyad Mansour for the first time last Tuesday. Later, she said in a tweet on the social networking site 'Twitter' that the Palestinians should meet the Israelis 'in direct negotiations instead of resorting to the United Nations to get results...'") (BBC, 2017/3/11).
The current American administration supports the Jewish entity more strongly than previous administrations. This is because America saw that the Middle East has become a turbulent region swept by revolutions rejecting the status quo in all its aspects. While America is able today to face revolutions through existing regimes in the Islamic world, it may not be so in the near future due to the increasing weakness of these regimes; in fact, some of them are on the verge of collapse. As a result, the importance of the Jewish entity in American strategy returns to occupy priority in serving American interests after the weakening of the Arab regimes. For all this, what seems strange in what the Trump administration offers—such as the possibility of abandoning the two-state solution and adopting a one-state solution, and moving the American embassy to Jerusalem—even if America is maneuvering in it, is an expression of the extent of the danger America feels toward its interests in the face of the Muslims' revolutions. Consequently, it focuses on supporting the Jewish entity, thinking that it is capable of protecting its interests after the shaking of its agents in the region.
From this interest and support for the Jewish entity, President Trump asked the Palestinians to stop incitement. In his first meeting with Abbas on Wednesday, May 3, Trump called on Palestinian leaders ("to speak with one voice against incitement to violence against Israelis...") (Reuters Arabic, 2017/5/4). This is in addition to the unfair conditions Trump demands of the Palestinians if they want a two-state solution, as reported by Al-Monitor on 2017/5/2 ("What worries Palestinian negotiators most are the American conditions for resuming peace talks presented by the American envoy Jason Greenblatt in March when he met Palestinian and Arab leaders. The nine-point plan includes conditions set by the United States to accept the two-state solution, including the necessity of reforming Palestinian security in coordination with (Israel), ending the open checks being sent to Gaza, and showing that Palestinians oppose terrorism in practical ways.").
Third: Europe's relationship to the document and is it in a line separate from America?
The European countries are too weak to have projects at the present time separately from America. Although pro-British Qatar had an active role, it does not mean that Europe can find a solution to the Palestinian issue independently of America. In any case, recognizing the Jewish entity and negotiating with it is a demand of the entire West; Europe and America are agreed on that. Moreover, Britain—especially after the beginning of its journey to exit the European Union—is more ready than ever to walk step-by-step alongside America to solve the Palestinian issue and not place obstacles, and this Trump administration recognizes some interests for Britain and is ready to throw it some of the spoils. Especially since both the American and European sides stand before the massive Islamic dangers and witness them up close in the revolutionary Arab Islamic region, and the entire region may be on the verge of slipping out of Western control.
Fourth: We repeat what we always say:
The recognition by Fatah and Hamas of two states in Palestine will not make the Jewish entity legitimate in Islam. Fatah and Hamas are not Islam and the Muslims; rather, they are a small portion of the caravan that has deviated from the path. As for Palestine, it is a blessed Islamic land, the property of the Islamic Ummah, and it lies in its mind and heart, since Allah (swt) linked its furthest mosque to the Sacred House in that great event, the event of Al-Isra’ wal-Mi’raj:
سُبْحَانَ الَّذِي أَسْرَى بِعَبْدِهِ لَيْلًا مِنَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ إِلَى الْمَسْجِدِ الْأَقْصَى الَّذِي بَارَكْنَا حَوْلَهُ لِنURِيَهُ مِنْ آَيَاتِنَا إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ
"Glory to (Allah) Who did take His servant for a Journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the farthest Mosque, whose precincts We did bless,- in order that We might show him some of Our Signs: for He is the One Who heareth and seeth (all things)." (Surah Al-Isra [17]: 1)
This is Palestine; its solution will not be through the hand extended to America by negotiating over a two-state solution, nor by negotiating with the Jewish entity. Even if it actually withdrew from all the occupied territories in 1967, any inch in Palestine occupied in 1948 and any inch in Palestine occupied in 1967 are equal in the eyes of Islam. The Blessed Land was mixed with the blood of the martyrs of the Islamic army throughout the ages of the Islamic Khilafah, until there remained no inch of Palestine where the blood of a martyr did not fall or the dust of a Mujahid's horse did not settle.
Palestine, since the event of Al-Isra’, was and still is a trust (amanah) on the necks of Muslims, and no free Muslim has the right to betray this trust. For Allah, the Mighty and Powerful, says:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا لَا تَخُونُوا اللَّهَ وَالرَّسُولَ وَتَخُونُوا أَمَانَاتِكُمْ وَأَنْتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ
"O you who have believed, do not betray Allah and the Messenger or betray your trusts while you know [the consequence]." (Surah Al-Anfal [8]: 27)
15 Sha'ban 1438 AH 2017/5/12 CE