Introduction

The objectives of this document which sums up the dialogue and the interaction going on inside the organizations of The Popular Front for the Liberation Palestine PFLP in homeland and diaspora before culminating at the sixth National Conference of PFLP which took place in the form of three integral cycles in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and diaspora include: reaching to methodological reading of the Palestinian political developments taking place since the first National Conference in 1994; formulating a political vision to deal efficiently and clearly with the problems ensuing from them and to point out the directions of work in accordance with the rights and interests of our people on the basis of the continuity of the struggle and resistance until our inalienable rights have been achieved and to uncover the dangers and deviations, taking place in the national arena at a time when the American Israeli liquidationist plans have not disappeared.

In this context, this document tries to distance itself from minor details to focus on the main direction of developments and the essential aspects of the struggle in conformity with our deep understanding that the function of the national conference is an essential station at which it would be possible to reconsider our conception of the struggle and the way to manage it, on one hand, the contents and dimensions of that struggle, on the other. Thus, it would be possible for us to manipulate our capacities in a long term policy and secure that party bodies would be able to evolve in form and content and to be suitable for the conditions and objectives of the national project at present and in the future.

Within this perspective, it would be recommended to pay attention to the following points while dealing with this document:

Firstly

This is a scientific document reading the developments depending on our vision, role, national function and our leftist democratic and progressive thinking. However, it still remains a subject for debate, criticism and, enrichment in agreement with the dynamics of the situation and the struggle process. Within this meaning, it remains relative in terms of evaluation.

Secondly

This document should be looked at and dealt with as an integral part of PFLP positions and vision embodied in other documents issued by previous conferences and other leading central committees. Reference should be particularly made to the document of the first National Conference in June 1994, which is considered the foundation of what was included in the document to the sixth National Conference which adds to and enriches the vision, rather that than abolish it. Consequently, the document of the conference referred to above remains politically and ideologically in a agreement with this present one.

Thirdly

Since the Sixth National Conference, the Palestinian arena and the national problem have both witnessed very remarkable developments most important of which is the uprising (Intifada) continuing since 28 September 2000, which broke out to defend the rights and aspirations of our people. Thousand, of martyrs, fell and tens of thousands were wounded on the road of freedom and independence and in the confrontation with the endless terrorist war launched by the occupant army against our besieged people in order to break their will and impose political solutions on them.

Accordingly, there are many subjects and political as well us social questions which need to be dealt with and formulated. This is the task of the leading central bodies of PFLP (The General Central Committee (GCC) and the Politburo) in order to further promote the PFLP vision and positions and enhance its national role continuously. So, it is necessary to paid remember that this document is limited by the period it covers and deals with when dealing with it.

Fourthly

When dealing with this document, which has condensed the general vision, the party and the tendencies of its political analysis of it should be always remembered, that a considerable attention has to be paid to the peculiarities of the different party bodies at the socio-economic political levels, and that flexibility as well as creativity will no doubt be indispensable while drawing work programs and means of struggle for every Palestinian community in consistence with its own priorities and characteristics, provided that nothing should cross the boundaries drawn in the central document of the party.

Finally

Any document, regardless of how strong it is, remains unable to include all the details and dynamics of situation. It would be enough if it were able to envisage the right course governed by the national, liberational, socio – economic and democratic determinants.

The will and comprehensive awareness of all party members and bodies are required to change this vision into an effective practice, cadre, and institutions, on one hand, and to change the vision and the policy into accumulated national achievements. These are the factors that give or justify the role and function of any party and guarantee its position among the people and help it gain their respect.

Chapter One: No dreams beyond reality-No future without present and past

Political Report of the 6th Congress of the PFLP-2000
Political Report of the 6th Congress of the PFLP-2000
Author	PFLP
Written in	2000

Firstly: We don't begin from Zero point

When we say that the Palestinian problem is in a unique stage, this does not mean that we jump over everything in the past as if history and the Palestinian national work began with Oslo. One simple reason makes us say the above mentioned fact, namely, that the Oslo process and its repercussions are absolutely and completely engrossed by the results of the struggle in the previous decades. This does not refer to the Palestinian dimension only, but certainly the Arab, Israeli and international dimensions, as well.

That is the reason why PELP has taken this systemic step while analyzing the crisis of the Palestinian National Movement, including the crisis in PFLP, because we believe that the phenomena and results should be linked with their historical socio-economic and ideological reasons. Furthermore, such a stop reflects a firm belief that should the mentality of treating consequences apart from the reasons continue, it would mean we should go indefinitely round ourselves in a vacant circle. Besides, it threatens to distort awareness, spread illusions, accumulate mistakes and consequently waste much more time and other components of struggle in the future.

What was mentioned above represents workable methodology in the socio – political and organizational practice-especially because it emphasizes the continuity between history and reality. It is necessary to understand very well that insistence on a link with reality does not mean having it fragmented or being separated from it. Similar to history and the present, reality, with all its components should be present. An absolute separation from reality and history embodies an absolute extinction.

In the same context, the present should not be regarded as an automatic continuity of history. It is a conclusion or summary of the historical interaction of the struggle, which resembles, to a very large extent, a chemical interaction, which begins with certain qualitatively and qualitatively definite elements and compounds. At a certain minute, and in certain conditions, the elements and compounds are changed into a qualitatively new material which consists of the very same elements with new characteristics bound together by new relations.

Naturally, the socio-historical interaction is more intricate than it is believed to be, because the dynamics appearing in the reality we live would interfere and thus draw and determine the courses of history. It is a process whose results are governed by the form and content of the management of the struggle resorted to by individuals as well as socio-political forces. It is a process which has historical characteristics, is governed by the socioeconomic development, and effected, to some extent, by human consciousness.

Accordingly, it is necessary to be aware of and recognize the dimension, and intricacy of the process, because that would help keep the transparency and efficiency necessary for a scientific and quiet reading of our experience, preserve the remarkably rich experience of the Palestinian people and the Arab nation, maintain historical and spiritual value of the great and sacrifices, and turn them into a material power complementing the power they have already possessed. Such a power, which can never, at any rate, be little, helps maintain the internal balance in the collective as well as the individual psyche.

It should always be kept in mind, while we are trying to read the present situation, that retreat has a potentiality of a revival and that it has valuable lessons which have to be analyzed and highlighted so that they might be transformed into constructive factors. Otherwise, retreat might become a destructive spiritual and material factor of exhaustion. The best proof of the above-mentioned assessment what is we, as a party and a national movement, have felt and lived. We have found out that the problem is not limited to the defeat in the battle field, but goes beyond that to the state of incapacity to reach a political and intellectual vision capable of transgressing defeatism engulfing all the currents and factions of the Palestinian national movement whose work and discourse continued as though nothing had happened.

Defeatism has led the to frustration, motionlessness, the deterioration of confidence between the organized political movement, on one hand, and between the parties and their popular grassroots. Confusion, complaints and inefficiency spread everywhere. We believe that the atmosphere of disappointment has neither rational nor scientific grounds, once we are able to form a comprehensive and clear vision of the conflict with its premises and continuously open dimensions whose keys are not in the pocket of any one if even if he wanted or imagined. Are we exaggerating or merely projecting our desires? Let's carefully, prudently, and openly examine the situation in order that we might find correct answers to our questions.

Secondly: A historically open–ended struggle:

The historical evolution of events was deeply contrary to the illusions of those who imagined that the American-Israeli project would easily dig its way through Palestine and the Arab World. The peace process has revealed that the more the characteristics of the enemy project got clear and its dimensions became concrete the more socio-economic and popular strata were involved in it.

We should point, in this context, to the intensifying resistance and popular opposition all over Palestine, they are gaining much momentum at the popular level and the levels of the forms and means of confrontation. There were times when the struggle looked as though it had been at its embryonic beginnings, but later an uprising broke out, for example the uprising which followed the opening of the tunnel beneath Al-Aqsa Mosque and the confrontations with settlement expansion policies.

Besides, there is qualitatively and quantatively developing resistance in south Lebanon which has led to a change in the political positions of the majority of political, social, and official powers towards, embracing this phenomenon, regardless of the serious pressure exerted by the enemy alliance to break this stand. That resistance to the normalization of relations with the Zionist regime has acquired a really popular and organized dimension. Prior to that, it was limited to the form of imposed political resolutions. Currently, resistance to normalization takes the form of initiatives by society activists and trade unions.

There is a remarkably noteworthy phenomenon which is growing and spreading everywhere across the Arab World from the east to the west. Such a phenomenon is represented by intellectual activity which has deep and far – reaching significations. It has already crossed the borders of the regional ghetto and begun discussing the concerns of the Arab nations, the conditions of its awakening at both the regional and national levels. The level of this intellectual activity is high enough and capable of preserving the unity and integrity of both mind and dream.

In addition to what has been mentioned above, there is a symptom of a return of the pan Arab co-ordination and an attempt to control the tempo at the national level. The value and significance lie in the fact that the initiative and the cooperation related to it are among the centers of official resolution in the Arab World nowadays. The examples and phenomena mentioned above represent a flagrant announcement of an effective and deeply rooted interaction in the collective memory and conscience of the Arabs whose content is so huge and constitutes and essential push force for the natural oppositions which are fed up continuously, spiritually and materially by, the objective factors which cause the historical struggle with the Zionist enemy.

The various forms of the comprehensive and growing resistance and opposition reveal that the objectivity of the conflict is neither limited to nor released by the wishes of individuals or leaders, or the good or bad wishes. It is a process with an endless action and reaction, latency though it sometimes experiences stages of retreat, stagnation or curvature, there is always capacity to create means to face the new challenges of the conflict through limitless manifestations, which would connect things to their roots or references.

The creativity of any party or political movement appears in the ability to be in harmony and interaction with the course of action, to have this movement consciously and scientifically managed, and help it move from spontaneous reaction, to a comprehensive process and vision.

Being aware of the historicity of and objectivity of the struggle helps keep the debate within its right and logical course, and will inevitably lead everyone to deal with it as a socio-historical confrontation between the Arab nation, particularly the Palestinian people on one hand, and the Zionist imperialist project on the other. Such a radical sociohistorical struggle of the Arab nation for existence is directed against the infinite attempts to distort, derail or subject it to opponent project. Within this meaning, the struggle has a variety of forms including the armed one.

An insightful reading of the practices of the Zionist project one hundred years after the first Zionist Conference in Basle in 1897, would reveal that, in spite of the great victories of this project, it has been constantly reviewing and reconsidering its strategies and tactics to guarantee preserving the successes achieved, on one hand, and secure the required conditions for an offensive assault to achieve more targets. Such a fact suggests that it is essential for the enemy project to consolidate its ideological, political and cultural bases and have them continuously developed in order that they create a firm and renewable impetus to mobilize more powers and capacities to be at the service of expansionism and aggression.

An awareness of this fact would enhance the quality of dealing with the current situation, explain the qualitative deflections witnessed by Zionist imperialist project in each and every stage of the socio – historical development of the struggle to complete the accomplishment of the objectives, it has reached in accordance with an accumulation process taking place, and indicate the revision in strategies and tactics which reflect dynamically as well as flexibly the balance of power or both sides of the conflict.

The struggle over existence does not necessarily signify an absolute physical liquidation of one party to the conflict, but an accumulation of power to expose the Arab party to bitter historical defeatism, compel it to capitulate through various forms of socio– political and military pressure and violence, forcibly make the Arabs in a stage of an almost complete submission and surrender to the Zionist–imperial project. Here, we believe, is the place of the opinion which stresses the historicity of defeats, demands that the situation we live in be referred to the total consequences which have been accumulating since Sykes–Picot. Such consequences have an accumulative nature and become heavier with the passage of time.

Furthermore, there are the symptoms of backwardness engulfing the Arab peoples, which, with the passage of time, have generated their own internal dynamism and rules. Unless such symptoms have been broken and removed, they would always feed up the state of underdevelopment and according to this imbalance, pave the way for further defeats. A deep understanding of this fact necessitates the awareness that the removal of these symptoms is a far-reaching socio-historical process, which is independent of the volition of one party to conflict because the factors and dynamics of the conflict are more comprehensive and intricate than those possessed by each of the two parties. It is a combined, historical and dynamic summary of the historical struggle process as a whole.

Due to progress and retreat, along with their own complexities and social consequences, the struggle acquires a historic as well as dynamic character. The state of latency and motionlessness are temporary and transient because they are the result of either a temporary defeat or victory, on one hand; or the unavailability of the required conditions for a rise to a higher level. As long as the requirements of struggle are renewable and accomplished, it is possible that the struggle will break out at each of the so many historical curvatures.

The assessment mentioned above would necessitate more insight and accuracy while reading the current Palestinian situation, bearing in mind the facts which have been created since the singing of the Oslo Accords. These facts show beyond any doubt the depth and continuity of the conflict reasons. They also provide everyone with a framework to protect any analysis and save it from falling into the lethal traps of haste, impatience, subjectivity or the illusions that it is possible to put an end to the struggle, which comes to an end once its reasons have disappeared. Here we move to another title.

Thirdly: Oslo: The Reproduction of the Struggle in Other Forms:

It is not necessary, we believe, to repeat the debate about the dangers and grave accumulated damage befalling the Palestinian cause as a consequence of Oslo and its aftermath, because the political document approved by the first National Conference in 1994, in addition to other documents issued by PELP are more that enough. What we would like to discuss now goes beyond this aspect and aims at deepening our vision and analysis on the basis of the variables and data which have come into being during the few last years.

The Oslo Accords and the agreements that followed it, along with the threats they embodied and carried, are no more than a transient stage in the struggle regardless of how long it might continue. This does not mean an underestimate of the detrimental consequences of those agreements and difficulties they have brought about, nor does it mean minimizing the agreements as though they had not existed. Contrary to such an assessment, we would like to reiterate that the agreements embody a qualitative stage in the struggle which led to the disappearance of factors, components, constructions, structures and patterns and usher in other components, factors, means and new patterns, some of which have already been active others will soon be activated.

The collapse of the Soviet union, the change in the structure of international alliances, the domination of the United states, the changes in the Arab world since the second Gulf War, the establishment of the Palestinian National Authority, the change in the internal balance of powers, the crisis of the democratic powers, the opposition the normalization with Israel are no more then examples.

The movement from one stage into another is not so easy as some people believe. It is much similar to giving birth to a baby, with all the sufferings, bleeding and spiritual as well as psychological transformations. This means at the final stage giving birth and the start of the cycle of a new stage of life, with all its determinants and factors. Accordingly, the current situation, along with the transgression of previous stages it includes, remains tied, through thousands of secret cords, with the previous stages which have their own impact and their shadows on the current situation.

After the collapse of the second Gulf war and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Palestinian leadership has put the majority of the Palestinian cards, including the most important ones, at stake when it trusted U.S.A and the claims of the Zionist regime's readiness for peace. The dangers of such a policy, and the ensuring options for limited agreements, stem from that fact that they do not have a correct vision of the struggle and its roots to depend on, and uncovers a terrorized and superficial conception of the current balance of powers as wells the nature of the Israeli–American peace project and its objectives.

It has responded to the requirements of the American-Israeli strategy, and allowed the dynamics of that strategy to control it and its options. Correspondingly, it has been expropriated of all the factors of legal, historical and material power. The political practices of the leaders looked as though what happened had been the sole possible potentiality or the end of the Arab – Israeli conflict and at its heart-the Palestinian-Zionist conflict.

This policy is a result of a miserable understanding and management of the conflict with the enemy which is the other face of another miserable policy toward inter-Palestinian relations, which took the form of disabled mentality, growing with the passage of time to take the from a destructive bureaucracy armed with corruption. This, in turn, led to the depletion of a lot of the constituents of power, the absence of a far reaching and comprehensive vision aiming at the consolidation of the structure of the Palestinian society everywhere, through the consolidation of the structure of the organizational and administrative institutions of this society.. etc.

The most remarkable example of what was said above is the fragmentation and dismantling of the most important national framework in our contemporary history, namely, P.L.O. which was being dealt with in a sorrowful manner. If ever this signified any thing, it would be a proof of the short – sighted policy which had been practiced and the foolhardiness of the treatment with this significant framework which was supposed to remain an all – embracing national framework and a real representative of the Palestinian people dispersed and diasporized geographically, economically and socially.

Besides, there is an incapacity or unwillingness to make use of the national capacities and abilities in order to enhance the social structure and strengthen the pillars of national confrontation. Such a policy has constantly been self-revealing and acquired the form of hegemony, unilateralism, corruption of the institutions of the Palestinian society in the occupied homeland, and disrespect of the rights of citizens. So, a Palestinian citizen finds himself between two jaws of pincers: the brutal oppressive and expansionist practices of the occupation, on one hand and the practices of the authority and its apparatuses, on the other. Consequently, the crisis of the Palestinian masses, the national problem in homeland and Diaspora has been aggravated.

Along with what was mentioned above, attention should be paid to other practices which are equally dangerous and short – sighted, namely, the manipulative approach to the Palestinian popular movement. The gap between this movement and the political authority got wider and wider. There is no confidence in the authority which has not preserved nor protected the minimum level of national rights. In the meantime, the policies of the authority have not pointed to any respect to the Palestinian society. These policies have taken three forms.

1-Pursuit and detention of activists upon orders dictated by the occupation

2-Opportunism and temporariness in dealing with the popular movement.

3-An attempt to have the opposition adapted to the ceiling of the authority and its policies.

The impact of this policy on the Palestinian national movement has been grave, because it contributed to the state of dissidence and fragmentation , preserved the causes of depletion and implosion , emptied the policies of the authority as well as the concept of national dialogue of their contents. The problem of national unity, therefore, became a means for maneuvering, not a stable and fixed political line governing the actions of the Palestinian national movement with all its different colors, currents, and organizations.

The political and intellectual mentality which led to this hasty and disabled betting on the American – Israeli peace project is the very same mentality which led to the dramatic state of sub-mission availing itself of the state exhaustion befalling the Palestinian people as well as the Arab nation because of the pressure of the enemy alliance as well as the internal incapacity which was caused by this mentality which was excellent at depleting resources instead of accumulating them.

Since Madrid conference, the enemy has pushed to the political stage all Arab defeats when he deemed it was high time they had had to take a remarkable step embodying the forcible imposition of defeatist policies and having them officially legalized at both the Arab and international levels. This is a movement from direct to indirect war leaning on an imbalance of powers to the benefit American Israeli alliance.

What happened in Madrid and the other stations, agreements and attractions which followed did not go beyond the political offensive led by U.S.A in full coordination with Israel. The American peace project for a settlement, as it appeared in Oslo, is no more then a project to impose, by force, political, and economic capitulation on the region. The dimensions of this project have become unreasonable according to the minimum level of dignity.

The American role has thus been explained, because, once it has made all parties engaged in negotiations, on the basis of general principles, taking into consideration, even partially, the resolutions of the international legitimacy, it began to exert various forms of pressure and blackmail to help Israel dictate its vision for a settlement which, in essence, is not different from its American equivalent. In other words, it aimed at imposing submission on the Arabs not achieving a peace process as they hypocritically claimed. The logic of this policy is applying the philosophy of power as a basis for international relations. The foundation of this philosophy is the right of triumphant to dictate his conditions on the defeated.

This, and nothing else, explains the continuously and flagrantly biased American policy towards Israel. It is high time to put an end to the naïve belief that the American administration which possesses lots of information and expertise in the management of international conflicts is not aware of the fact that a speech about peace in the Middle East would be merely meaning less and deceitful, unless it included the minimum amount of Palestinian the and Arab national rights.

The United States is more conscious of this fact than anyone else. No one is able to defend the lie concerning the intention of U.S.A to reach a real peace in accordance with the simplest bases and principles of international law and the concepts of freedom, justice and balanced relations instead of the philosophy of power to impose what is in conformity with its interests.

Therefore, the problem is not with this or that administration as some people would like to say, but it is basically with the American–Israeli project for peace which is really and logically identical. Otherwise, the United States would have submitted a clear and precise text containing its own project for peace in the Middle East which would be a part of a comprehensive reassessment which will result in making its policy consistent with the minimum level of justice, equilibrium and respect of the inalienable rights.

Hadn't the United States continued its antagonistic policy, it would have put an end to the ambiguous and floating language while talking about peace, stopped exerting the greatest possible spiritual and material pressure on the Arab parties, stopped providing the Zionist regime with all the components of power and ceased pledging to guarantee the continuation of the Israeli qualitative superiority to all the Arab countries. Yet, the United States insists on securing an umbrella for Israeli practices at the international institutions or building military and security alliances which are secretly or openly antagonistic to the Arab world and besiege the Arab world and its interests.

The developments of the recent years have disclosed the objectives, targets and manifestations of the American Israeli peace project which are limited to launching an intensive campaign to achieve the very same targets which have accompanied it ever since its beginnings namely, hegemony, political domination, the annexation of the Arab world economically, the liquidation of the Palestinian problem through a political war, mixed if necessary, with political and economic violence and organized military pressure.

This is the fact which the successive American administrations and Israeli governments have been trying to conceal through a propaganda campaign claiming that the Arab parties are those who always refuse to reach a peace settlement for the conflict. The military operations of the American – Israeli alliance have completely uncovered these targets, because the alliance's war have been going on through political means to make the Arabs surrender instead of making peace with them.

This is the situation that causes the increasing Palestinian and Arab reactions, which have moved from the state of betting, during the Madrid conference and immediately after that, on the peace options, to a state of opposition and widely-spread rejection of the American Israeli projects.

The value of the opposition and rejection referred to above, stems from the fact that they have been assuming a popular character which is growing and constantly expanding and has taken the form of popular initiatives, attracting greater strata of the Arab popular masses who are moving into a state of action. An advantage like this has not been available previously, because the conflict took the from of confrontation between states and commando activity later.

The Arab popular opposition in this stage is characterized by comprehensiveness and expansion, and is based on a conviction that American and Israeli proposals aim at nothing except for attempting to make the Arabs give in by political pressure or threats of war.

This opposition, we believe, is heading towards growing and crystallizing, absorbing new Arab social strata. It is noteworthy here to remember the opposition to the cultural normalization, the rejection of the economic hegemony, the insistence on the principle of a comprehensive peace which should meet the minimum level of the national rights and targets, at the head of which are; the rights of the Palestinian people to return, self-determination and national statehood with Jerusalem as the capital. Some of the manifestations of the opposition appear in the form of intellectual activities in the Arab world, taking the form of debate, criticism, raising essential and crucial questions, trying always to link problems to their basic elements, which, sometimes, include a state of incapacity, backwardness and defeat, others, try to rediscover or reiterate the nature of the struggle which expresses itself through a comprehensive and historical struggle.

The dynamics of settlement according to the American–Israeli criteria have revealed another fact, namely that an Arab citizen has to choose either a humiliating surrender or confrontation and engagement. This is what provides the struggle with new dynamics and constantly new impetus in such a way that a hopeful observer might conclude that the struggle has just begun.

According to the fact mentioned above, we would like to emphasize that the displacements that have taken place represented in signed agreements are no more that temporary and transient displacements of the ground of the struggle itself and can never lead to stability nor to peace. Consequently, any betting on this process expresses a short – sightedness, tragic disappointment and a capitulation to a fate predestined by the American – Israeli project.

Such a discourse does not intend to belittle the dangers of what has been happening, and consequently to deal with the process as if nothing had happened.

Contrary to that, what has happened is weighing heavily on everyone. It should be seen and dealt with in order to change according to revolutionary criteria, considering it as an additional dimension of the struggle.

The Palestinian people as well as the Palestinian national movement, according to what has been said above, should be accustomed, psychologically and mentally, to the required changeability and flexibility, to feel and absorb any movement or variable in the situation, to reduce the noise and shouting, to extensively read the situation and to act according to a comprehensive and integrating vision of the struggle. It is no more a secret that it is a struggle over existence itself, taking place in a tangible reality and governed by the law of the balance of powers.

Fourthly: Achieve the Required Depending on the Available

To start with, let's emphasize that the speech about new facts does not necessarily mean the annulment of the historical reasons of the struggle. Rather, this would refer to a vision of the new facts, data and reasons which have been added to the stage and which no one is allowed to ignore, either positively or negatively, because of their quantitative and qualitative nature which practically necessitates a reconsideration of the main aspects of the struggle including its management.

The remarkable events that took pace in the international arena and the Arab world as well: such as the collapse of the Soviet Union, the second Gulf war and the dynamics released by the American peace project, have led to a group of serious breakthroughs followed by signing agreements with the Zionist regime, most important of all of which happened on the Palestinian side and culminated in Oslo and the agreements which followed it. These events were accompanied by loosening the Arab boycott front, establishing relations at different levels and in different ways between Arab countries and the Zionist state.

The losses caused by this process vary. The historical basics of the struggle, especially Palestinian national problem were being frivoled with, when the official Palestinian leadership unilaterally signed an agreement with Israel. It dealt a grave blow to the Arab dimension of the Palestinian problem, and threatened the national and historical fixed dimensions, threatened the unity of the Palestinian people, the role of PLO as an all embracing national framework, and threatened the charter of P.L.O. itself. The Palestinian national movement was also divided, as some Palestinian factions began dealing with Israel as partner in the peace process with all the results that come out of that.

The above-mentioned review, condenses the difficult aspect of the Oslo process, whereas the other aspect is represented by being more and more exposed to the aims of the Zionist regime. Furthermore, the resistance to the Zionist regime and opposition to Oslo were being exposed to threats. These are some of the grave fundamental variables created by Oslo. The details of these dangers have become well-known and have been extensively dealt with by our different documents, especially the document of the First National Conference.

The following question sums up the new facts in this field: is it enough to handle Oslo and its consequences with more analysis, diagnosis to uncover the dangers coming out of it? Is there another duty, namely, to push by means of mind and practice towards new fields, which neither ignore Oslo nor jump over it, but at the same time, do not confine themselves to it and become its hostage. Here lie the roots of a methodological dispute over intellectual and practical politics. To confine oneself to diagnosis and uncovering of threats would leave the party at the mercy of the eddy of the dynamics released by the Oslo project. In other words, should we remain within the circle of reactions, the enemy would be also able to take the initiative, and so, be able to manage the conflict in such a way that helps him achieve more targets, and would be relieved of the painstaking effort to face united and organized opposition armed with a clear and comprehensive vision and positive practice. Such an opposition is supposed to know exactly what is needed under the new circumstances, and facts, which have become among the forcible determinants of the ongoing struggle and its management.

It is required to raise the level of vision and practice from the level of propaganda opposition or sporadic reactions to the level of actual confrontation. To put in other words, a comprehensive historical alternative should be made available, i.e. to have the Oslo project faced by an absolutely contrary one, which could secure a chance for taking the initiative and exploit all the components of power, including the active and latent ones, on the basis of both the simultaneous continuity and discontinuity of the struggle. This means the continuity of the objectives as well as the historical and national facts of the past, on one hand, and the discontinuity of the gaps, misconceptions, intellectual, practical and political mistakes.

In consequence to the above – stated facts, the only way is to pile up the factors of program and to bridge the gap between us and the enemy as a step towards achieving victories or imposing them. This depends, inter alia, on the ability to positively adapt ourselves to the facts of the situation, and the determination to refuse to take them as accomplished or eternal facts-that is to avoid being alienated or passively adapted, which would mean surrender and becoming dependent on circumstances. It is necessary to deal with the situation with its dynamism and limitation in time and place. At the same time, it is necessary to keep all the circles of actions open to all directions in accordance with the temporariness and historicity of the struggle and its objectivity. In one word, it is not necessary for us to indefinitely read the past, formulate a program for an infinite period. Our place and status can not be determined by escaping forward or backward. Rather, our place and status are at the heart of the action.

Within this meaning, we are in front of a limited process which requires formulating a socio-political, intellectual and organizational vision on the basis of the historical experience piled up so far, in addition to the details of the stage distributed at all levels. Bearing the above – mentioned consideration in mind would pave the way for the continuity of the struggle, or more precisely establish and vindicate practical steps to approach the higher national objectives. Furthermore, it would also secure a suitable level of flexibility and ability to curvature in the difficult paths as an indispensable condition to avoid making the party as well as the people suffer unjustified losses.

In conclusion, bearing in mind the systemic points mentioned above, it is necessary consider the qualitative change and remember always that it is an essential fact to be dealt with. Unless we did that, we would lose the requirements for possessing a scientific vision and ability to endorse the suitable programs depending upon what really exists to achieve what is required. Here are some of the basic considerations determinants which should be kept in mind as the main characteristics of this stage.

The first consideration:

The main characteristic of this stage is retreat and recession/defensive whereas the opposite project is in a state of offense. The content of the concept/defense used here is not negative as some people would believe, rather, it is positive and provides us with an ability to continue to employ, in the best possible ways, the factors and components of subjective power, provided that it is not uselessly wasted and that losses are being reduced to the minimum level. Such things can be secured by possessing a political vision and mentality to decide on the direct and medium-range targets on the basis of a defensive strategy, or in other words, to dissociate ourselves from the current mentality characterized by arrogance, haughtiness and roaring discourses. We should also dissociate ourselves with the unnecessary confrontation which we can not afford.

In this context, it is necessary that we enhance the levels of our own performance to meet the same levels used by the enemy, because the outcome of the confrontation with the enemy is under all circumstances governed by the condition of the confrontation with this historical enemy. We should go beyond the egoist-whimsical inefficient criteria, according to which a ruler or leader is being evaluated ore estimated in the light of the performance of another Palestinian leader or organization and adopt another practical criterion, i.e. the very same criterion adopted by the enemy.

So, it would be necessary to draw attention to a theoretical and methodological aspect, to block the road in the face of all those who would try to obstruct such an analysis by resorting to revolutionary slogans. The nature, material and social content of each stage should determine the ceiling of the revolutionary work which should be in accordance with it. What is revolutionary in a certain stage will not be suitable for another which has different facts, rules and social forces. Accordingly, defense is the revolutionary ceiling for a stage whose general characteristic is defensive. Another ceiling will no doubt be suitable for a stage of offensive and uprising.

The armed struggle was the main feature of the struggle against the enemy in the sixties and sensitivities. Then, it was replaced by the uprising as a suitable ceiling. Currently, the struggle takes a social form to prevent the enemy from making new achievements, and to stand against the concession process and the wasting of Palestinian national rights by the autonomy authority. This diagnosis of the main feature in this way does not drop out the intermingling of the different forms and symptoms of struggle which happens naturally.

A heavy price was being paid before we could realize the consequences of the mistake, or the sin, of innovating clashes and divisions among different forms of confrontation. Although it was clear from the very beginning that it is a social struggle, the factions of the Palestinian national movement committed one of their gravest and most catastrophic mistakes when they jumped over the essence and reality of the historical struggle. This has resulted in disabled policy which believed that the armed struggle, for instance might substitute the societal engagement, where as the enemy has never, even for a single minute, dropped out this fact. So the Israeli management of the struggle was as much precise and comprehensive as possible.

What we should like to highlight here is that in the all – embracing struggle there is no contradiction between the means and forms of struggle regardless of how many they are. Each form is important in as much as it is in agreement with its definite function because it occupies the space required by time and place which are irreplaceable except by that certain form, besides the definite social factor.

Thus, the factors of conflict could react and continue their impact on the social dynamics at various levels and would try express themselves in form and style according to the position they occupy on the stage of events. A process like this has an absolutely objective course. This raises the importance of the subjective factor and its capacity to read the objective conditions of the conflict, to direct and unite all the tributaries of the struggle within an all – embracing struggle.

The second consideration:

Defeatism has revealed the extent of the structural crisis shaking the Palestinian National Movement. This is a historically accumulative crisis which led to two fundamental consequences:

1-That the official leadership has surrendered to the Israeli – American settlement process, which led to a state of functional engagement between the Palestinian National Authority and Israel to the advantage of the latter. The result is to jump over the basic Palestinian national rights which should be guaranteed in order to be able to speak about national liberation and independence, achieve the peace of the brave, reach a just solution or achieve the program of the right to return, national statehood with Jerusalem as its capital.

2-The inefficiency of the opposition powers, and aggravation of their own crisis substantiated in their inability to formulate and play the role of a national substitute capable, through uniting its forces on the basis of a common national program taking the form of political and organizational frames, of being legally a substitute of the leadership which quit the national program. Such a situation has led to a state of confusion influencing the practice and performance of the opposition forces vis a vis the popular masses who are still waiting to have such a program implemented.

The consequences of the incapacity and weakness of the Palestinian opposition powers have resulted in creating a group of factors, including, the ability of the occupation to exert pressures and erode the Palestinian rights without being faced by an all – embracing and organized resistance.

The incapacity of the opposition powers paved the way for Oslo, gave the authority team a chance to manage the Palestinian situation and decide on the fate of the Palestinian people without being exposed to any united opposition, consequently that team made its own decisions as though there had been no one else to oppose it.

The confidence of Palestinian popular masses in themselves, and their own ability to unite their forces was shaken. The results were more fragmentation, dissent, ambiguity, and the use of general slogans.

The opposition powers lost the confidence, reliability and efficiency. Such a description of the opposition does not invalidate its role as a part of the opposition to the occupation and the liquidation projects. Still, this role is much below what is required when compared with the size of the national project, the nature of the stage and the claims of the opposition that it represents a national democratic substitute.

The third consideration: The main and secondary contradictions:

The main contradiction was and is still with the occupation and the strata connected to it. According to the nature of the stage which is a democratic national liberation one, and because the aims and the basic rights of the Palestinian people have not yet been achieved, the occupation has to be resisted.

The post Oslo events proved this historical and objective fact. Yet, the consequences of Oslo, and the state of engagement between the self rule authority and the occupation, a new dimension of the complexity of the struggle has been added though it had not changed its nature. The acceptance of this fact means that the contradiction with the Palestinian national authority which fluctuates to and fro every now and then because of its relation with the main contradiction remains a secondary one. This contradiction has to be dealt with through democratic struggle including popular and a democratic movements and confronting corruption and its representatives with all possible means.

Because the enemy project and its concept of peace go much beyond what is anticipated or imagined by the Palestinian Oslo team, this fact has gained much credibility. The topics of the final status solution cover the basic issues of the Palestinian problem. Besides, the results of Oslo have become substantial facts according to which policy got mingled with different social problems, including civil institutions, services, education, law… etc.

The Palestinian National Authority, which has an Arab and international legitimacy, and has its institutions on matters related to security, institutions, finance and popular masses, is currently administering the affairs of the society. So any social or political activity within the Palestinian community in the west Bank and Gaza Strip would lead to being in contact with the authority. Within this context, and on the basis of respecting the determinants as well as, the requirements of the main contradiction, besides, the interplay and dynamics of the social situation, the relations with the Palestinian National Authority is neither fixed nor static. It is dynamic and its main characteristic is democratic confrontation and political struggle which governs the stance on the national cause and the fixed and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. In-fighting is prohibited.

As the situation of the masses in the occupied territories is getting more aggravated, the suitable equation of the struggle is becoming more complicated. This demands that all efforts be united in the confrontation with the occupation, but at the same time the struggle against the political options of the Palestinian National Authority and its concessions should continue.

The social democratic struggle aims at putting an end to the socio-political, economic and administrative performances of the Palestinian National Authority, particularly after experience has shown that corruption has been functionally used as a basis of the political entity.

Monopolies, making money at the expense of citizens, the emergence of strata whose interests are closely integrated with a those of the occupation with which they have been working as agents, commissions and subcontractors without any moral or national consideration because their selfish interests have become top priority, all these are only examples. Besides, there are violations of liberties and basic human rights, chaos in security apparatuses which have become octopuses threatening the political level itself; weakness of the administration, wide spread bribery, nepotism and the exploitation of the capacities of the society to the benefit of opportunity and self – seekers.

All the things mentioned above prove that the democratic confrontation with the authority, and what it represents politically and socially, is a special case of war and a main field of a multifaceted confrontation. We are not the only party whose duty is to mobilize the popular movement, enhance its performance and help it move along the right path. No doubt, the depth, maturity and extension of this process would lead to many consequences which would influence the struggle against the occupation.

The fourth consideration: The Arab Dimension

The Rough Track of the American-Israeli Project:

After the smooth flow of events in the aftermath of the Madrid conference, the Arab world, it appears, has begun witnessing a state of struggle between the forces pushing the American-Israeli project, on one hand , and the forces opposing that project and materializing that natural state of opposition which has been spreading widely in the Arab world. Once the real purposes and essence of this enemy project have been reveled, the opposition spread extensively because such a project deprives the Arabs of the least amount of dignity and political and economic independence.

The different levels of interaction in the Arab world are:

The first level:

There is an increasing contradiction between the politics of the official Arab regime which favors submissive and swinging stances as far as the American – Israeli alliance is concerned, on one hand, and the aspirations of the Arab popular masses which sense and feel the dangers of such political projects which threaten their national interests and rights.

This contradiction reflects the social dimensions in the current national and social struggle. The aggravation of this contradiction comes as a result of the appearance of the essence of the American-Israeli settlement which tries to avail of the potentiality of settlement to dictate the rules and restructure the region in order to place it under American hegemony at the expense of the national rights and resources of the Arab nation.

As the settlement process continues, it becomes very clear that the concept of putting an end to the conflict in the Middle East is no more that a tool to tightly control the region, steal its resources and deal a blow to the aspiration of the Arab nation to be united and liberated.

An Arab citizen realizes well these days that a settlement is only an instrument to impose a state of socio – political and cultural normalization due to the state of imbalance of powers, threat of war and liquidation of Arab national rights to the benefit of the Zionist project in Palestine and the Arab countries.

This is why the resistance to the normalization is growing stronger in the Arab countries, Egypt, Jordan…etc. because it is the direct Arab response to the accelerating confrontation with the strife and inseriousness of such regimes which are wasting national rights.

Experience has shown the Arab masses the value and importance of aspirations and the components of power in their possession, once they continue to be actively and effectively directed and organized because they would secure a real protection against the politics of concession and surrender to the American-Israeli dictation of rules.

The second level:

The contradiction is between the objectives of the American – Israeli settlement project and the minimum level of the rights and interests of Arab peoples proved by the facts and events which have happened since the Madrid conference. The antagonistic project manipulates all components of its power to dictate the rules of the settlement with the least possible concessions. The Oslo Accords, Arave Valley Agreement, the pressure exerted on Syria to accept the Israeli terms and resume the negotiations have also proved this fact.

The economic conferences in the region, starting from the Casablanca conference, through the conferences in Cairo, Amman and Doha disillusioned everyone and proved that the political objectives of such conferences do not exceed sowing illusions and wishes among Arabs as regards economic development and well – being if they kept silent and accepted the political settlement envisaged by U.S.A and Israel.

The third level:

It has been really realized that the American role in purpose – built settlement process intends to tame the stance of the Arab regime, as well as the Palestinian party and expose them to pressure purposely so that they endorse the Israeli political terms. This role has also been reflected by the containment policy and the use of veto against all the resolutions condemning the Zionist regime. There are also the American insistence to jump over the resolutions of international legitimacy, on one hand, and the deprivation of Europe and Russia of any role in the peace process, and the commitment to impose terms of reference of the negotiations on the basis of American – Israeli unilateralism.

Such a role was apparent when U.S. A pressured Syria to compel it to subdue to the Israeli conditions, and to have the security and political understandings, and deals on the Palestinian path endorsed.

Thus the concept of the disinterested sponsor and mediator has collapsed due to the political practices which have built an alliance with the Zionist regime opposing the Palestinian Arab rights and interests defined by international legitimacy.

In the light of these facts, Arab popular masses have become aware of the political practices and projects whose intention is to perpetuate the imperialist hegemony in the region through imposing a political settlement which is opposite and contradictory to the least level of Arab and Palestinian rights,

In addition to this political dimension, there is the social crisis which is deepening more and more. Poverty, unemployment, absence of liberties, economic dependence, spread of consumption culture, political, cultural and economic alienation are common phenomena.

Because of these and other contradictious, the Arab popular masses are getting involved in the resistance and popular opposition more than ever. While the phenomena of official normalization is spreading more widely, the phenomena of resistance is spreading and is being shown in a way reflecting the real position and national feelings of the masses while confronting the adamancy and terrorism of the Zionist regime.

The Arab popular masses have shown a huge energy which could be transformed into a serious power in confronting the American Israeli settlement projects.

The remarkable Syrian position reflects the refusal to subdue to the enemy alliance, and the Egyptian stance appeared after the Egyptians had realized the heavy price they had had to pay which includes annulment of the Egyptian national and regional role and transforming it into a tool of the American – Zionist project in the region. The interaction taking place in the Arab world has compelled Saudi Arabia to cautiously reconsider its policies and come closer to both Egypt and Syria, because of the annoyance caused by the adamancy of Israel and humiliating rush of some Arabs toward Israel.

Once the Likud, had assumed power in Israel, and openly revealed the essential Israeli stance, the crisis became sharper, the pro-American Arab regimes were deeply embarrassed. The biased and extremely provocative American policies helped reign in the Arab rush towards Israel and obliged many Arab regimes either to reconsider their stances or to adopt the approach of wait and see.

These developments have pushed the doctrine of new world order, the new Middle East order into a critical corner. The local, regional and international situation and conflict have grown so complicated that the deceptive simplified view which spread when these two doctrines were announced collapsed. The aim of the two doctrines included spreading illusions and mixing papers to facilitate the passage of the American – Israeli project under camouflaged and deceitful slogans hiding the essence of this project through dreams about development and progress in the region if the peoples of the region responded to the American – Israeli appeals to reach a settlement for the conflict. These developments played a role in the attempts to reconstruct inter-Arab relations, the Arab-Iranian relations and the Arab-European relations.

The fifth consideration: The difference between the American and European visions to solve the struggle:

Though such a difference, for a variety of reasons, has not reached state of confrontation between them, it really exists. In spite of the fact that Europeans are committed to guarantee the security and interests of Israel in general, such a commitment has reached a state to view Israel alone as guarantor of European interests in the region. The European commitment remains within the limits of guaranteeing Israel's security and right to live at peace within recognized borders.

On the other hand, the Europeans, generally speaking, recognize the Arab and Palestinian rights, and believe that through this way it is only possible to put an end to the struggle in the Middle East and lead the area to stability and a climate suitable for economic and political relations suitable for European interests. In the mean time, hegemony and unilateralism are the main determinants of the American policy and project according to which Israel has been made a strategic ally and an effective indicator of the American power-based mentality.

The Zionist regime has managed to manipulate the bases of American policy, its ideological and practical prompts to serve the Zionist interests and mentality.

The results of the second Gulf War strengthened the American domination and control of the region, particularly the Arab oil sea, consolidated the Israeli refusal of any active European role in the peace proposals because that role should be confined to an observer status whose duty is confined to be dependent on and supporter of American Israeli policies and projects.

Within this context, we can interpret some European initiatives, especially those ones supported by Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal, and to a lower extent, Germany. Possibly, this course of action will continue as European march toward unity continues, on one hand, and as the east European countries, particularly Russia, manage to retain a suitable level of power, coherence and effectiveness and regain their international role. Needless to say is the fact that the more the Arab resistance to the American – Israeli projects rises and blocks the way of those projects, the more powerful the European role will be. These factors and other have helped and are helping regain some sort of balance on the international level against the American unilateralism and create an equilibrium between the economic and historical European influence in the region and its political role. This objective tendency governed by contradictory interests enhances, the cultural debate currently taking place in European societies the threatened by American global domination. Everything is being challenged by Americanization, once America has ceased to be only a geographical and a demographic concept and become a concept with ideological dimensions expressing power politics, the negation and crushing of others to the benefit to tyrant power.

It is important to stop here and study carefully globalism which is invading the world politically, economically and culturally. The world is certainly witnessing immense and qualitative developments in science, technology and communications, which, in turn influence the relation among peoples, states and even Man himself and change views, conceptions and values. The fundamental contradiction here lies between the forces and philosophy trying to exploit these changes to strengthen the control of colonial powers on the resources, and peoples of the world, and accordingly widen the gap between industrialized and underdeveloped peoples, on one hand, and the forces and culture which consider the scientific revolution with all its dimensions an evolutionary social process which should be formulated and guided in accordance with the interests of humanity to combat poverty, famines, and natural disasters on the basis of justice and mutual respect.

In this field, American monopolies assume a leading position attempting to make the peoples of the world surrender and adapt themselves to the politico – economic and cultural domination of monopolies and their political tools which control American and the capitalist world.

There is another, contradictory conception which believes that globalism, a long with all its political, cultural and economic interpretations should be rejected and replaced by a substitute vision based on the interaction of peoples, cultures and civilization, and the integrity of human kind experience, historically speaking. This conception contradicts the conception of hegemony, exploitation and policies of plunder and looting, which, due to technological progress, take and infinite number of forms.

We believe that globalism as a conception should be centered on interaction, continuity and respect of the peculiarities of cultures, civilizations and various experiences of humanity. Scientific developments, the telecommunication revolution, media and information, turn into tools at the service of humanity regardless of color, race or sex. Peoples should unite to confront imperialist globalism which is employed as a tool for oppression, plunder and attempts to impose certain types of civilization on peoples regardless of the peculiarities and interests stemming form their peculiar historical evolution.

Fifthly: On the concept of the stage and struggle Management

The central systemic subjects which have been so far discussed on the previous pages, constitute the frame of the struggle taking place in the region with its different political and social dimensions. Consequently the primary requisite of the management of the struggle effectively and actively lies in the capacity to envisage the frame of the struggle or the terrain of operations, so to speak, completely and precisely.

The ability to possess such a vision, in such a complicated, intermingled, dynamic and movable situation requires the capacity to guarantee the necessary conditions and criteria, at the head of which is the necessity to have an intellectual, political and organizational basis capable of providing the required conditions, including intellectual, mental, scientific methods, besides, a safe and continued epistemological feed which covers the historical and current aspects of the struggle at the political, social, cultural and economic levels.

It is a conviction of ours that the struggle is open to all directions. This is because of its natural and historical foundations. This also means that it is a continuous and objective struggle reflected historically in all fields, in the conflict between the objectives and interests of the American-Zionist project, and the aims and interests of the Arab nation, at the head of which is the Palestinian people.

The continuity or the cessation of the struggle is irrelevant to the volition of either party, as long as contradictions continue to feed the struggle, as historical and every day life experience has proved. The curvatures of the struggle stem from this basis, and are continuous and mobile as much as the balance of powers permits, and bases/contradictions on which it stands continue.

Since the Madrid conference, practical experience has revealed that the enemy project is consistent with its objectives, and historical stimuli, which include occupation, domination, control, annexation, perpetuation of the dynamics of backwardness and fragmentation. The contents of the American Israeli proposal show that the purpose was to exploit the imbalance of powers to dictate the terms of the solution which leads to a new political and comprehensive defeat of the Arab nation and the Palestinian people.

The American – Israeli alliance has so far succeeded in piling up achievements, especially at the Palestinian level and thus pushed the Palestinian problem into a critical corner where it experiences a real crisis. However, the Arab and Palestinian dimensions of the struggle are becoming richer, acquiring a growing popular nature and this is consistent with the axiom mentioned above, namely, the objectivity and comprehensibility of the struggle and historical engagement.

The interactions have made the political and social contradictions so complicated that a more advanced management is required in order that it might be able to deal with those contradictions. A successful management of the crisis required that it should be efficient, enhanced, and aware of the conditions and criteria of the struggle, on one hand, and is always guided by the higher national and patriotic interests and aspirations, not the desires and preferences of this individual or organization, on the other.

A realization of these various dimensions and interactions of the situation is considered a starter when it is recognized that it is necessary to deal with the struggle comprehensively, within the dialectics of continuity and accumulation and to open new dimensions in such way that it is possible to guarantee the best methods to invest the components of potential power at the national and international levels.

To understand and deal with the struggle as a historical one signifies that it embraces all aspects of life, beginning from the liberation of land, moving to the issues of Jerusalem and settlements, education, economy, pedagogy, arts, literature and finally the ability to fight the enemy for every piece of ruins stolen to falsify the history and facts of the region. This is what gives the struggle its different connotations and manifestations as an objectively historical one.

To accept this view requires that we should go beyond the incapable and limited visions which confine the struggle in one aspect, believing that this is everything. Such a belief leads to an indication to prefer easy work, namely general political discourse, which thinks that it says everything while it says nothing, in fact. This necessitates that the Palestinian political discourse should be developed and matured through relieving it from spontaneity, demagogy and improvisation. It is high time to lower voice and intensify action. When we say this, bearing in mind one hundred years of struggle, we have to remind everyone that the loud voice of the Arabs was trying to make up for same time lack of action. At the same time, the Zionist regime, and the Zionist gangs before that conducted all their wars and achieved all their victories using only the language of defense. With a little shouting and lots of work, they managed to avail themselves of all the opportunities to boost their social, political, scientific and military might, including possessing 200 nuclear war heads. Yet they still call their army the defense army. To further develop the political discourse and performance and endorse a quieter tone will indicate much self – confidence and an intellectual and scientific evolution. The above mentioned facts require a qualitative enhancement in our performance in such a way that it is raised to suit the level and requests of struggle. This is only possible once the criteria used are based on cognition, science, labor and time, and the will to exploit all the potentialities available in or societies.

These are the conditions required to enhance our political intellectual, performances, and to enable us move from negative spontaneous reactions to positive reactions. The way leading to it is the possession of a positive political vision. So, we can go across the dangerous whirlpool because of which the Zionist occupation has continuously been holder of the initiative, and consequently, a head of us. It is time that our political and social performance went beyond the state of confusion, incapacity and perplexity which is possible once we possessed our own vision of the struggle and the balance of powers, and began, accordingly delineating the lines of confrontation in accordance with the components of power we possess. Thus, we can deprive the enemy alliance of the freedom of maneuvering, and start the confrontation at the time and place needed. On the basis of such an understanding, formulation of programs and performances becomes a positive process, highly effective, and not merely a rejection of the proposals of the of other party, that is, the opposition, however important it might be. It is time the opposition were turned into struggle.

To deal with the struggle comprehensively is not volitional because it has its own conditions, logic, determinants, including deciding on targets and missions in combined and intermingled ways which allow the attraction of all political and social capacities and powers to the field of confrontation. It is high time we realized that confrontation would either be comprehensive or would never be at all.

The fundamental condition for that is the realization of the uniqueness and diversity of the capacities in the Palestinian must society. As long as the Zionist projects threaten all aspects of Palestinian social life, the confrontation takes place everywhere. The wide space of the conflict covers: the right to return, the state, Jerusalem, sovereignty, dismantling of settlements, water, economic, independence, agriculture, protection of national civil institutions, education, health, sports, development, industry, heritage, archeology, liberties, environment, law, music, cinema, theater, literature, labor, culture, history, rectitude, women's freedom, the rights of children… etc.

Each of these titles needs mechanisms, programs and capacities necessary for and relevant to them, in the light of the plurality of the Palestinian communities. The basis should be that each title is so important that it can not be ignored nor underestimated whatever the reasons might be; once it happens, it will lead to mutual usurpation between the general and particular, the main and subsidiary and the result of such a situation is the loss of everything.

This vision of ours, a long with its pillars, reveals more and more the temporariness of the Oslo Accords, because the content of the Declaration of Principles and its supplements all appear incapable of resolving the conflict. Real experience has proved that the conflict is expanding more and more. This has to do with the disclosure of the targets of the American – Israeli proposal for settlements. So, new dynamics have been added to the field of operations, these dynamics have become an integral part of the situation from which it cannot be dropped out nor separated. There are several options for an approach to the situation, including:

1-Negative adaptation, which is submission and capitulation to what really exists, therefore, work does not go beyond the limits of skirmishes, to introduce some improvements in the situation itself.

2-To reject the situation and continue working as though nothing happened, this leads to inefficiency and inability to realize what is happening, so the result will be escapism from the requirements of confrontation in accordance with the requirements of the new era toward, 'revolutionary phraseology and slogans which remain limited within general rejectionism and recording position for history.

3-Confusion, marking time and improvisation the results of which is a hazardous diversity of works fluctuating between general rejections, on one hand, and compressing obstinate facts on the other. Such a situation signifies an absence of any program or vision which governs confrontation, hesitation, fluctuation, hegemony and ambiguity will prevail.

4-Positive adaptation which is based on the historicity and comprehensiveness of the struggle, and starts from the actual facts as the compulsory determinants of dealing with the situation, which is a new stage with its own dimensions and operations. These facts must have their impaction on formulating political performance, organizational structural and the struggle in a way that is consistent with the facts and objectives, that is to implement the principle of continuity and discontinuity within the frame of the struggle.

5-It is very necessary to determine the available options very clearly and precisely so that it might be possible that each option is suitable for the requirements and conditions of the stage. We state the above mentioned things because we believe that a safe option is objectively determined, not by volitions, illusions, subjective projections, or consequence of mistake or incapacity to read the situation. The most popular or emotional slogans can give is that they can satisfy gaudiness or personal aspirations. Sooner or later, they would be disproved by reality and lead to further disappointment and failure.

Compliance with the conditions of struggle will protect the party and the national movement in general against wrong performance or to be distorted by inefficient awareness of the struggle which triggers more defeats and bitterness. So, the suitable option for the stage and its facts is that which is able to conceive it as a comprehensive and inevitable cycle of the struggle and contributes to the enhancement of political and social performance on the road to magnify the capacities and thus transform theoretical purposes into achievable targets.

Through this way it is possible to determine possible objectives which have to be achieved at every level of the struggle in a certain stage, and can be differentiated as political or social, current, medium term, strategic, or temporary targets. Thus, it is possible to move to activity and begin the required accumulation process to effect historically concrete and continuous displacements towards securing the required basis to achieve the desired aims.

This option is possible, provided that the political vision is able to creatively mix between the constraints of the current situation and the absolutely infinite higher aims.

This is a comprehensive and conscious process which should take place concurrently everywhere and at every time as the struggle continues. And in the context of conceiving the struggle as a socio-historical process, and the management of this struggle is an art and precise counting not merely jumps in no more.

The administration of such a complex historical process takes place under many influential pressures. It never happens behind closed doors where every thing is under control. It is open to all options. On one hand, the occupation establishes and releases various dynamics, there are also the performances of those who believe in the fait – accomplait option as it was drafted at Oslo talks.

At the heart of everything lie the dynamics and activities of natural society, which are rich, diverse and reflect the diversity of the social classes and strata, besides the diversity resulting from the diasporization of Palestinians. The positive and negative operators of the national and international dimensions of the struggle, will also appear.

In conclusion, we stand in front of a contradictory, active mobile and completely open toward the future picture. Our share in this picture is equal to our burden. So it is not possible to successfully and dynamically deal with it without possessing a competent awareness of it, acquiring a mind and vision able to absorb fully the dynamics, contradiction, and activity in the struggle with all its time, place, consciousness, connotations, bearing in mind that it is a normal democratic and social liberation movement.

Chapter Two

Firstly: A war to build and building up for a war:

The determinants, guidelines and facts mentioned above are to be considered as the landmarks delineating the general frame according to which political performance is estimated and controlled within a scientific method. So, policies, programs, and positions can't be determined spontaneously or hazardously. It is a scientific process whose reference is the current situation entirely, and whose objective is to achieve the higher national and patriotic interests.

Some problems may appear here. How to deal with these controversies is considered a test for the vision and methods upon which we depended while reading the dimensions of the stage. This test is not merely mental sport; it has its own scientific and practical value represented in the ability to suitably deal with the challenges and problems the reality throws at our faces. These include the various aspects of national work. To deal successfully with these problems and challenges determines to what extent a party or national movement has succeeded in the management of the crisis, in such a way that is suitable to serve, with the utmost capacity, the national struggle, and helps us achieve the current an long term national aims.

Political struggle and social construction:

The first problem facing the Palestinian national movement lies in the relation between the liberational and the social aspects of the national program. The document of the First National Conference has already dealt with this problem. The Palestinian performance, it is noted, has separated the political level from the social one which is the carrier of the political liberation project. So, this led to the appearance of an increasingly deepening state of imbalance, between the two bases of the national program, namely, the liberation and social dimensions.

Because the leadership of the Palestinian national work has been all the past decades living and working outside the occupied homeland has resulted in widening this deficiency which was accompanied by some negative symptoms witnessed as regards the relation between the factions of national work and Palestinian communities. The rise of the resistance movement in the sixties and seventies of the last century alleviated the deficiency. But the signs of an internal crisis appeared and were aggravated to such an extent that the vision of the factions of the Palestinian national movement appeared shallow and superficial.

After the Oslo accords and the establishment of the Palestinian self-rule authority in the occupied territories, the state of deficiency assumed tragic dimensions. It became very clear that a social program with a clear vision and definite aim was missing. The result was an additional social aggravation in all fields. So, the doors were thrown open to overtime the society and get it drowned in a whirlpool of internal attrition. The enemy manipulated this critical situation to exert as much pressure as possible and escalate the exhaustive war to break the willingness of the Palestinian society to resist.

The situation referred to above reflects the misery of the Palestinian performance at this level, which took the form of a mentality and political performance believing that it is possible to launch a liberation struggle against the occupation, achieve victories, apart from securing the suitable social conditions. Thus, the two bases of the national program were unjust and arbitrarily separated, the liberation basis and the social basis. There is no need to pay much attention to what was included in the discourses and documents in respect of the social aspect because what matters is practice and the consequences.

In the light of experience, and what really exists, that retention of balance becomes very crucial. In accordance with this vision, the increasing capacity to struggle to attain the national aims: the right of return, self –determination and national statehood with Jerusalem as the capital, besides the struggle against settlements and terrorist activities – is related to the progress achieved at the social, economic, cultural, educational and health levels, in addition to the enhancement of democracy in the internal relations. In this context, social objectives are an indispensable requirement for national liberation.

The titles / headlines of the liberational program constitute significant demarcation lines with the occupation and are considered to form the historical dimension of the struggle. Similarly, the titles and headlines of the social field constitute demarcation lines which are equally important. The occupation policies are not limited to chiefly politicized victories and the annulment of the Palestinian national rights, bemuse they aim at the depletion of the capacities of the Palestinian society, deepening the dynamics of social backwardness and ignorance and blocking the road for economic and scientific progress. All this would naturally in turn lead to entrenching the mechanism of dependence, weakness, deficiency and inability to invest in the capacities of the society. This policy is manifested in the consumption of greater part of the Palestinian labor force in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the Israeli economy, encouragement of pupils to drop out, control of water, marginalization of industry, abandonment of land and the complete Israeli control of the input and output of Palestinian society. The second aspect of this complicate process appears in the capacity to manage the confrontation with the policies of the Palestinian Authority in the social field. Wide sectors of popular masses are showing unease with those policies based on nepotism and unilateralism, which harm their interests.

The social democratic struggle, thus, is considered an essential approach to rehabilitate the alternative national democratic program. The differences, at the political level, among opposition forces are very minor, but the serious difference lies in the social field. Therefore, should the democratic current be able to formulate a social program of its own on a progressive democratic basis, and according to the facts of situation, this would enhance the ability to retain its social role and would represent a serious test of its seriousness and efficiency. This is not possible without a radical review of performances and discourse.

Within this conception we wonder: where are the democratic current's social programs in respect of women, youth, workers, doctors, arts… etc? We don’t mean slogan nor general titles here, we are talking about a vision and a social program, at the level of the society and the different Palestinian communities. In another word, what is meant by a social program are not sporadic ideas nor general slogans but programs carefully prepared by specialists, based on the facts of the current situation and take into consideration the available potentialities while selecting the objectives and drawing the programs.

Such programs should attract wider sectors to active social labor, and be able to consider every social field as very important. Thus, no one of the dimensions of national or social work might be usurped by another one. This vision is the one which guarantees that all the aspects, of the struggle process, including the two dimensions the liberational and the social democratic, are dialectically brought together.

Thus the subordinate, social activities are integrated in the general objectives of the grand strategy, temporary and direct are integrated with the long term and the particular with the general. Democratic social activity becomes an organic part of a wider political project. This is the condition of protecting the party and the national movement against two dangers:

1-to be isolated within the direct, particular, and temporary issues.

2-To aimlessly float around strategic, abstract or general political issues.

In this perspective, it is probable to establish a wide popular mass movement with an organized social democratic content, capable of creatively differentiating things. This also will help political as well as social powers which constitute the infrastructure for any political or social program for a real change regain the lost confidence. In the same context, the conception of the vanguard could be reviewed because it acquired the meaning of deputizing or abducting the will of the society.

On the basis of the concept of the vanguard, and that it is possible to bestow it on any political party completely obsessed by the freedom of society, capable of playing its role, selecting its aims democratically, the function of political parties is reflected in the capacity to heighten the natural social dynamics to become more mature and integrated in an all-inclusive strategy capable of preserving national aims and interests and functions appropriately at every level.

Secondly: Diverse peculiarities of one people:

The second controversy which we face in this stage is the dispersion which governs the life of the Palestinian people, and the consequent objective peculiarities, which, unless realized, understood and dealt with nationally, efficiently and objectively, the party, the people and the national problem will fall in a real dilemma.

The dispersion of Palestinians is an objective reality which, with the passage of time, has resulted in social and economic changes and transformations and the consequent variety of peculiarities in the socio-economic sense. Besides, the great complexities of the Palestinian national struggle are much more diverse than some could imagine because they have created an imbalanced development of Palestinian communities and adversity of structures and types of thinking, socio-economic life and social hierarchy. In as much as this diversity is complicated, it is a source of wealth once it is properly dealt with.

The speech about the impact of diaspora on the formation of Palestinian communities (Palestinians in 1948 territories, the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria….etc) does not invalidate, in spite of all the setbacks and the attempts to liquidate or deplete the Palestinian problem, the unity of the Palestinian people which was galvanized by the pressures of the continuity of the Palestinian problem. Inasmuch as we witness the continuity of dispersion, in the geographical demographic and economic senses, we also witness, and to the same extent, a rise in the collective Palestinian consciousness, uniqueness, similarity of sufferings, and adherence to national aims.

The necessity to realize this process as an objective stage means that it is not governed by individual or group volitions, because it is a natural product of the struggle which feeds it up every day and every minute with hundreds of thousand simple or grand facts. So, it refers any Palestinian, continuously, regardless of his place, to the historical prejudice he has been exposed to, only because of his being a Palestinian, because a mere presence of a Palestinian is the best proof of the illegality of Israel. Due to this and other reasons, the war against the Palestinian existence continues, everywhere, in every field and almost all levels by the enemy and his followers.

Although the daily and strategic politics and performances of the Zionist project relations between the particular aims and realities relevant to each Palestinian community with the grand aims and realities governing the life of the Palestinian people, because the general, in the Palestinian case, doses not mean a mechanic gathering of peculiarities, such a process would lead to the creation of fragile and unstable structure.

The unity of the Palestinian people is a product of a similarity of the practical situation and a historical struggle interaction, so to speak. Here the particular and general would get tied to each other by thousands of visible and invisible ropes. This is because the achievement of the grand national aims of the Palestinian people is not possible without the complete contribution of all the different communities to the struggle. Similarly, the particular interests of any community can not be achieved apart from the attainment of the grand interests. This does not rule out the possibility of a relative improvement at the level of a particular Palestinian community.

Within this meaning, a safe connection between the general and particular in sociopolitical performance becomes, absolutely vital. So, the general acquires superiority to the particular in as much as it satisfies the needs of all peculiarities, the particular acquires superiority to the general in as much as it secures its presence and supports the continuous lines of the mentioned general. Thus we face a very intricate and interwoven complexity whose objective nature continues from the beginning to the end. Here we would like to refer to several conditions.

The first condition:

Should the vision and performance be straight forward, follow a safe course and achieve continuous progress at the level of interaction of the process referred to above, we should be obliged to admit that the situation is governed by a definite condition, without compliance with it, the whole process would plunge into chaos, spontaneity and slogans; both the general and the particular would have to pay the price in cash. So the practicability of the vision necessitates that we deal with the particular as an objective fact, as it expresses a certain peculiarity, it reflects the general in its essence.

This actual fact means that we have to recognize the scientific and practicable independence of the particular, which possessed a high flexibility and freedom to accomplish its own missions. Any Palestinian community capable of deciding on and defining its own political, social, economic and cultural programs can not be dealt with through orders. The party should behave within each Palestinian community considering itself as the son of that community, not an immigrant nor a commanding parent.

The second condition:

The success of the party in performing its duty and socio-political function as a real child of community is dependent on its capacity to fully realize the conditions under which that community is living, and to envisage the role that community as an integral part of a system for a more inclusive national work. This function or performance is not projective. It would satisfy the need of a particular community to possess a sense of belonging to a more inclusive general.

The third condition:

It is necessary to deal with the contradictions among different peculiarities as natural and reflect the different conditions, and priorities of each community and thus avoid any struggle over priorities, because the outcome of such a struggle is that everyone will certainly be a loser. Suppose that the priority for the Palestinians in Lebanon were the social problem, because it is a real rather than an artificial or fabricated one. In the territories occupied in 1948, cultural independence, equality…etc are priorities. But in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the topmost priority is to sweep the occupation.

The application of this condition would lead to releasing the activities of every Palestinian community and spare the political forces the danger of putting the priorities of a certain Palestinian community in opposition to those of another, and protect the party from becoming haughty in its relations with the community. A productive work that reflects the peculiar interests, of communities, we believe, ensures the material and moral basis to achieve the inclusive national tasks.

So, the various inclusive and integral aspects of the struggle process get intermingled.

Everything remains dependent upon the capacity of the factions of the national movement to understand this complex process, so that they might enhance their roles, functions, structures, performances and thinking to a level that provides them with dynamics, a vision capable of managing the struggle, and effectively dealing with peculiarities. In a word, this means the capacity to make use of the diversity of the situation, employ it to serve the grand aims against the main contradiction.

Otherwise, we would face a stage of confusion and waste our power miserably. The results are failing to meet the demands of the peculiar, and pushing the general so that it becomes abstract. What we have just said becomes very important, should we bear it in mind the impact of the enemy policies and projects which threaten the unity of the Palestinian people through such projects as resettlement, compensation, immigration, the disappearance of P.L.O. and its convention as a national legal, organizational and spiritual representative of the Palestinian people everywhere.

Within the context of the same methodology, and the same intellectual determinants, we should deal with the general Palestinian situation in its connection to a more general Arab one. This cycle is sacred, so to speak in the light of the separate attempts to the crime which was and is being committed and materialized by the disengagement the Palestinian problem and the Palestinian people from their Arab depth politically, and socio, economically.

Though such attempts do not frighten us in the far future, because they are contrary to history, geography and Arab cultural interests, they surely would increase the difficulties and obstacles on our road, strengthen regional sectarian values which have assumed much lower position in the last two decades. Frustration factors facing the Arab unity and national Arab awakening will no doubt increase accordingly. Finally, it is necessary to refer to an axiom which has been proved by historical Arab and Palestinian experience, be it bitter or sweet, that it is impossible to defeat the imperialist – Zionist project by a regional project be it Syrian, Palestinian, Lebanese or Egyptian. This means any regional struggle should be an organic part of an inclusive national one.

Thirdly: The Palestine Liberation Organisation-Where to? Options and solutions

One of the most controversial and critical issues is the Palestine Liberation Organisation. (P.L.O. ) so, it should be dealt with carefully, prudently, responsibly and scientifically if the discussion were to raise to a level equal to the subject of concern. Thus discussion should avoid being superficial or reckless, and should be based on a solid ground if it were to reach suitable stances.

A very necessary and indispensable basis in this case, without which discussion turns into meaningless emulation or empty competition, is reflected by a real situation, neither the desired nor the imagined one. Consequently, the situation should be scientifically, practically, and inclusively read including all the factors and effective forces in this respect. Otherwise, the result will be more confusion and more losses which reflect an ignorance of the simplest facts.

To have this basis vindicated by political performance and thinking, and to protect it against becoming aimless, it should be centered upon realizing and respecting two essential factors, which act as two compulsory determinants.

1 – The balance of powers governing the internal Palestinian situation.

2 – The criterion of all the process and its terms of reference are the interests and aims of the Palestinian people related to the facts, of the current situations, its potentialities and main contradiction which was and is still, with the Zionist enemy.

The value of these two determinants stems from the fact that they save the dispute from slipping into an intellectual chaos becoming a general discourse floating like haze, dissociated from reality. To those worried by our emphasis on reality, we would like to make it clear that we mean concrete reality which reflects all the aspects of the conflict:the aspect of repression including its elements and power, besides the aspect of confrontation revolutionary action with its forces, on the basis of the socio-historical evolutionary process and according to the objective conditions which controlled and are controlling the struggle.

This rectification aims at saving some people from misinterpreting the real situation in such away that leads to selectivity and justifies submission to the current situation, or jumps over it, chasing empty desires. There are many serious difficulties resulting essentially from the inability to easily dissociate ourselves from wrong performance and discourse which have accumulated and crystallized during the Palestinian experience relevant to P.L.O.

This reality requires a mental power, straightforward thinking and moral values which transgress the current thinking, which, because of the frequent repetition has become an axiomatic fact. It is necessary, therefore, to reconsider and reexamine these axioms, courageously to tell which is which – to point out the wrong one’s or those contrary to the requirements of struggle or the balance of powers, in inclusion to interests and aims of the Palestinian people.

The first task is: How do we understand P.L.O? What does it mean to the Palestinian people? There is almost consensus that P.L.O. is one the most important achievements of the Palestinian contemporary revolution. It appeared as a response to the attempt to wipe out the identity, unity, and national rights of the Palestinian people. So, it is a national achievement which appeared and evolved in the context of a historical struggle process. This fact reflects the established realities of the Palestinian national struggle, regardless of all the mistakes which accompanied P.L.O.

Here it is important to remember more of the principles highlighted by PFLP in respect of this issue in the document of the first National Conference in June 1994. P.F.L.P. differentiated between four ways in dealing with P.L.O.

1. The dominating leadership of P.L.O.

2. P.L.O’s institutions:the Executive Committee, the Central Council, the National Council, the secretariat of the National Council.

3. P.L.O. as a convention, and national liberation program, and a wide national front.

4. P.L.O. as an entity, an identity and a sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.

The aim of this differentiation is to point out how things intermingle in respect of P.L.O. So a strategy should be drawn in connection with each of the above mentioned points.

We realize, as we say this, the transformation witnessed by P.L.O. at different levels. Included are the weakness of the institutions and how these institutions were employed to serve the policies and plans of the dominant leadership.

In accordance with what has been mentioned above, and to sum up our point of view, we would like to say, that P.L.O. with the convention and national consensus program are the inclusive Palestinian national framework which through the struggle of the Palestinian people and its organised forces, managed to enforce itself as a political, legal, organisational representative of the unity the entity and identity of the people. Thus, it acquired an Arab and international legitimacy and recognition, which go beyond the contents of the previous summary:the limited meaning of P.L.O. as a framework for the unity of the main socio-political forces in the Palestinian arena, or to what is more limited than that.

The concept of P.L.O. as national framework, role ore function is more inclusive when compared to national unity, though the latter has been always absorbed by P.L.O. during all the stages of struggle, when concepts like authority, statehood and society intermixed with P.L.O. and decided its own picture. The greatest problem with P.L.O. is that it was being dealt with as a framework for the unity of the political forces by everyone from his own perspective, rather than as a material and spiritual expression of the grand national interests of the Palestinian people.

The problem is really substantiated by the whole way in which the factions of the Palestinian national movement had dealt with P.L.O. Fatah for example, dealt with P.L.O. from an early date as a carrier for its own organisational political program. This led to the deterioration of its status from an inclusively national one representing the unity of the people to a functional means to be employed for narrow organisational purposes because it believed that it had a natural right to dominate all the resources and institutions of P.L.O.

So, instead of becoming a framework to attract material capacities and spiritual skills of all the Palestinian people, instead of being led according to a national vision which is enhanced and proportionate to the open struggle with the occupation and instead of improving the efficiency of the Palestinian people and deepening the socio – political foundations according to democratic bases and values, instead of all that, P.L.O. was transformed by short-sighted policies to a mere framework to be exploited by the dominant force to ensure legitimacy for its own options and programs.

To get rid of this short-sighted and vocal manipulation of P.L.O. , has always required possessing a safe vision of P.L.O. which can help P.L.O. to raise its status to the level of the real representation of the best capacities of the Palestinian people. This, in turn, demands that every one be disciplined to respect democracy which constitutes an infallible guarantor of reigning in chaos or reigning in the national option, chosen democratically by the majority, to reflect the opinion, interests, rights, and will of the Palestinian people.

The opposition forces, including all the components, have not gone beyond this methodological shortcoming regardless of the relative progress reflected by political discourse and performance when compared with those of the dominant force. The thinking and performance of the opposition forces had been mainly characterized by a conscious or unconscious compliance with the terms of the game stipulated and run by the dominant force which employed P.L.O. as a framework for its relations with the opposition forces. While the struggle over the quota consumed the capacities of the opposition whose function and turn should have constituted a historical, democratic, all-inclusive and real alternative, the dominant leadership did not spare any chance to make use of the weakness and fragmentation of the opposition to deepen the state of depletion.

It is possible in the light of what has been mentioned, to reiterate a very important fact which explains the hesitation and fluctuation which govern the positions and performances of the opposition forces in respect of P.L.O. This fact is reflected in the contradiction between the role and function of P.L.O. as an all-embracing framework expressing the unity of the Palestinian people, on one hand, and the state to which P.L.O. has deteriorated due to the dominance, hegemony and factionalism, in addition to the inefficiency of the opposition forces which are unable to transgress, the imposed ceiling and consequently subdue to the rules, of the game according to the traditions and determinants set up by factionalism, hegemony and individualism. The contradiction mentioned above expressed itself through two tendencies. The first one emphasizes the importance of the continuous adherence to P.L. O. The second one pushes toward quitting P.L.O. Between the push and pull powers, and in a state characterized by the absence of an inclusive vision and a safe management of the contradictions governing the real situation and experience of P.L.O. , spontaneity, improvisation, emotions and fluctuation of positions from one end to another prevailed.

To stop all the attempts aiming at diverting the debate through having it enshrouded by details such as who bears responsibility most, we should like to emphasize that the problem does not lie here, because we have already lost a battle, and a heavy price has already been paid by the Palestinian people. The turbulent crisis, furthermore, is befalling the Palestinian national movement, at core of which is P.L.O. There are questions to be answered. The core of the problem or the crucial issue now is: How can we ensure that the tragedy will never be repeated?

To begin with, we have to emphasize the necessity of the movement forward toward the future, and to seriously and whole-heartedly work to avoid the repetition of the tragedy. So, it is necessary to storm one's mind to formulate a safe and practicable vision of such a deep and sensitive problem as this. It should be remembered that it has been and is still an Israeli plan to wipe out P.L.O. , destroy the symbolic and spiritual state it has been representing, tear out the national liberation convention, disfigure the framework which embodies the unity of the Palestinian people and waste the Arab and international legitimacy it has so far acquired.

This explains the American and Israeli insistence to alter the convention of P.L.O. as a preliminary step towards wiping it out materially and spiritually forever. Though the dominant leadership of P.L.O. realizes the seriousness of such dangers, it rushes to meet the Israeli demands and conditions which concentrated on the necessity to strip P.L.O. of its contents and to destroy its institutions as an introduction to erase its national function.

The rapid and even hasty response to the Israeli condition to alter the convention of P.L.O. , put an end to its jurisdiction, gradually replace its national and historical, Palestinian, Arab and international legitimacy by the jurisdiction of Palestinian legislative Council (P.L.C.) in the areas of the limited self-rule and its authority governed by the terms of the Declaration of principles legally and politically, and finally to belittle the national program to become suitable for the low ceiling of Oslo, all these things prove the fact mentioned in the previous paragraph. However, that leadership has not heeded the dangers of the Israeli plan which broke out in two integral directions; to impose that Israeli existence is officially recognized by P.L.O. before altering the national convention and simultaneously to deprive the Palestinian party of anything that refers to or emphasizes the national and historical rights of the Palestinian people. This background explains why the Zionist entity rejoiced once the amendments of the Palestinian national convention were declared at the session of the Palestinian National Council in Gaza in spring in 1996, which was described as the most important ideological victory of Zionism in one hundred years.

The continued demolition of this historical, strategic national achievement by the Oslo group shows that it is still determined to go on and has not learned anything. This is represented by the same individualist mentality and politics of factional domination accompanied by the gradual marginalization of the role and institutions of P.L.O. which are to be activated only to be functionally used for short – sighted purposes.

The opposition forces proved themselves unable to formulate an inclusive and unified policy to protect P.L.O. In practice, their policies fluctuated between imposing a complete boycott and washing their hands of P.L.O. and its institution once and for all. The political Islamic forces factions, on the other hand, do not recognize P.L.O. as framework representing the unity, entity and identity of the Palestinian people. They consider themselves as an alternative. The democratic current forces suffer from confusion and a crisis situation; their role does not cross the borders of appealing, offering some initiatives under the title to reconstruct P.L.O. "while the problem remains without any tangible definite dimension.

The question, in the light of what has been mentioned above is: which is the correct policy to deal with P.L.O? Here, the distinction between politics and stance is not in vain, because we are dealing with a comprehensive process.

To correct the current situation needs a required length of time to pile up the causes and conditions of change. This can not take place apart from the struggle process as a whole, and the internal and external balance of powers in order to effect a gradual displacement in positions that lead to achieving serious and radical formulations of the position of P.L.O. Here we have the following options:

1-To consider P.L.O. a framework with a certain temporary function, and that the function has expired, and that P.L.O. has reached a stage of decaying and vanishing, to endorse such an option means to accept the aim of the occupation to wipe out P.L.O. Besides, it completely destroys the content of P.L.O. as a representative of the Palestinian people and its legal statehood.

2-To work so as to set up an alternative national framework instead of P.L.O. This remains dependent upon the capacity to set up the alternative structure and to make sure that it will be of the same level, if not higher than that of P.L.O. in the consciousness of the Palestinian people. Concrete facts reveal that such conditions are not available materially, socio-politically, and legally. Still regardless of all that has befallen P.L.O. , it still enjoys an Arab and international recognition and legitimacy.

One should add to what has been mentioned above that the Palestinian balance of powers, and the current fragmentation of the national movement and society obstruct the road to implement such an option which, in case it really happens, will lead to the deepening of the fragmentation and divisions so as to engulf the last national collective Palestinian frameworks. So, any attempt in this direction, and under these circumstances, would not produce more than an ingathering of forces of the same political color, and in conclusion this option will never gain a chance to be representative of the unity of the Palestinian people. Rather, it will represent some of its political forces only.

3-The continuity of the status quo, that is to leave everything at the mercy of the current situation. The result will be that the Israeli project will have a proportionate chance to remove P.L.O. without any resistance, on one hand, or to leave P.L.O. at the mercy of the dominant party, on the other.

To avoid discussing unnecessary details to adopt this option, we believe, would mean the evacuation of one of the fields of national work without confrontation.

4-The fourth option envisages that, regardless of all that has happened, P.L.O. still, legally and popularly, represents a collective national framework expressing, materially, spiritually and structurally the unity of the Palestinian people, that is to view and deal with it as an entity of the Palestinian people. This signifies that P.L.O. remains as a expression of the meanings and contents of the Political unity of the people.

The consequence is that it is, besides its connotations, a field of conflict among political forces, provided that this conflict should not damage its legal status and general institutional framework.

This option provides us with multifaceted dynamics, because it keeps P.L.O. as a field of struggle with the enemy and its policies aiming at wiping out P.L.O. It also preserves the continued association with P.L.O. as a national achievement, a national liberation convention, and a representative of the unity of the Palestinian people institutionally and legally, so that it is possible to employ the Arab and international legitimacy it has acquired to serve the Palestinian people, its national project and grand interests.

With such an option, the possibility to strengthen the combat against concessions, the usurpation of the will of the people and the monopoly of making decisions on behalf of the people increases. It also ensures a front to continuously combat the legitimacy of the Oslo Accords and the institutions it triggered which try to confiscate the legitimacy and jurisdiction of P.L.O. Such a process has not come to an end yet, although the convention was amended.

This option is in conformity with the natural and objective tendency justified by all the communities of the Palestinian people which would disapprove any step, policy or performance that might contribute to damage the Palestinian unity, regarded as a red line which no one can go beyond regardless of the pretext. Further, this vision permits us to partly influence the social and organizational grass root bases supporting the leadership of the authority which declare their support to P.L.O. in spite of the contradictions between the two things.

Given the above mentioned data, we have to bear in mind the variables in the process of struggle, the contradictions they trigger, including those that might arise between the authority and the occupation in accordance with the various points of conflict, especially on the ground. This compels all forces to mobilize and unite their capacities. It would be absolutely wrong to dissociate oneself with the requirements of this process. It is this fact that makes us take part in the national dialogue and attempt to rearrange the Palestinian affairs in collaboration with the basic opposition forces. Such a policy is correct in general.

The data, determinants and vision mentioned above demand that we deal with the subject of P.L.O. on the basis of the answers of the following question: Where do the interests of Palestinian people lie? The answer of the question determines the appropriate option including all the relevant intricacies and complexities. The answers here is not of course an arbitrary one. We have already tried to reveal the different factors and aspects that would lead us to the suitable answer to the controversies and contradictions related to the situation we are dealing with.

In the light of what has been mentioned, it is easy to decide on the possible option and the suitable policy in respect of P.L.O. It should be based on the principle of preserving P.L.O. as representative of all the people, as entity and role which are independent of the authority. This would demand hard and effective work to guarantee its independence and to prevent its being annexed, or that its jurisdiction and legitimacy are being usurped by the institutions of the limited self rule, for one simple reason, namely, that the ceiling and role of the authority do not go beyond the self – rule areas, while P.L.O's role and function are all embracing, and include all the communities of the Palestinian people.

Then, it is compulsory to be take part in the confrontation aiming at regaining the role and function of P.L.O. , to the benefit of the main aim, namely, to protect and solidify the unity of the Palestinian people and its national project, starting from a scientific belief in the continuity of the historically open struggle according to subjective and objective considerations. This means that the current situation can not be perpetuated.

The way to deal with P.L.O. is one of the several aspects of struggle, and within the context of the axiom that the solution of its problem can not be separated from the progress in the solution of the Palestinian problem as a whole.

This signifies that it becomes a part of an entity in continuous formation. This demands that P.L.O. issue be transformed into a field for confrontation against the procedure that has been wasting P.L.O. role and function and employing it functionally to serve the Oslo option. This is advantageous to the Zionist state's attempts to wipe out and put an end to P.L.O. Then it has to be dealt with as a dynamic issue, the criterion being its commitment to and defense of the national constants.

Anyhow, to confine the confrontation within the bases and methods used previously, namely, the lofty political debate, will never lead to the desired purposes. This suggests that it is necessary that the Palestinian opposition forces should do away with the previous thinking, methodologies and performances, and resort to more effective procedures capable of transforming P.L.O. to a force in the concrete confrontation in which sociopolitical force from all the gatherings of Palestinian people take part.

This interpretation means that there is no justification for withdrawal from confrontation, once we have understood it as a fundamental struggle process. The contradictions can not be solved by appeals, political pressure, statements and meetings. If it were so, the solution would have been very easy and did not need all this presentation and analysis. To understand the problem and resort to recessionary policies is contrary to the current situation which reflects, a certain balance of powers, and contradicts the realization that any change is the consequence of a struggle between socio-political forces.

The Palestinian Authority, and its Chairman, in particular, will try to invest all their powers, to the utmost extent, including P.L.O. as a cover for their policies. Anyone who expects something different is absolutely deceived.

The beneficiary stratum really wants this and will be very pleased if it were left in the field without any political confrontation and relieved of pressure and socio-political confrontations.

Though what has been said previously represents a background of how to deal with P.L.O. , the foundation stone remains: What do we want? As forces claiming to be an inclusive substitute of the policies and methodology of the authority: What shall we do? It is very crucial to proceed crystallizing a national democratic alternative, depending on the potentialities available now, so that it might be possible to push the confrontation, at this level, few steps forward.

An effective and productive policy is that which is helpful in mobilizing forces to achieve a direct national task: P.L.O. with its convention which represents a national liberation program, is a sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. This slogan/ target constitutes the scientific and practicable ground to attract real sociopolitical forces to the field of confrontation, consequently it will open new horizons to practicably manage and launch the struggle at more than one level and place.

In this way, the confrontation will be transferred from the political to the inclusively social level of all the Palestinian people. The Oslo team will have to face a continues and comprehensive process, and will be prevented from easily wasting P.L.O. potentialities, once it has become an every day habit to be in a state of confrontation with social forces which are growing more extensive and efficient all over the gatherings of the Palestinian people. These forces will be defending P.L.O. trying to protect it and preserving its function as a collective framework materializing the unity and entity of the Palestinian people.

It is high time now, more than anytime before, that we had this process put within a framework with an organizational structure. The engaging organization will have the name:" Defend P.L.O". The dominant force in P.L.O. will be demanded to clearly keep up its commitment to respect the rights and duties of other Palestinian forces according to the discipline and constitution of P.L.O.

Such rights, can not be usurped or abused by any forces regardless of its size. So, it is wrong to give up these rights under the pretext of fears of misinterpretation or confusion because national and realistic politics, position and performances, whose aim is to really protect the Palestinian people should not arouse worries of misinterpretation. Those who try to jump over the constants should be worried.

Thus, we have convincingly decided the direction in a way that relates to requirements and long –term targets, on one hand, and the available potentialities in the current situation. In conclusion it should be clear that such an extensive explanation of the important and controversial subject substantiates, to a large extent, a ganglion of all Palestinians situation, and sums up, in this way or that, all the internal contradictions.

Fourthly: National unity and Dialogue: form or content

The accuracy of facts and methodological basis of thinking on which the political vision is based, in addition to the position vis a vis the problems of the situation, all these things would ensure a correct system which determines and governs the required policies in respect of the different problems facing the Palestinian national movement.

This means that the vision governing our intellectual and political performances has already had its own logic whose strength is related to its being scientific, stems from the situation and is based on the dynamics of the situation besides the determinants of the struggle which are more inclusive. Here are the main constituents:

The objectivity of the struggle, because the stage is that of national and democratic liberation. So, the main contradiction remains and continues to be against the project and policies of the occupation. The characteristics of the stage include defense and retreat. The Palestinian national struggle takes the form and content of a socio – political and historical struggle as an organic part of more embracing, Arab – Zionist and imperialist one.

The situation is complicated, interlinked, diverse and mobile, the Palestinian society is diverse, divided geographically into a variety of peculiar communities. This leads to an interaction between the national liberation struggle and the socio-democratic one. In the light of what has been said, every situation or socio – political project is governed by dynamics which reflect, in a complicated way, the dynamic relations between the main contradiction, the all – embracing governor, and the secondary contradiction, on the basis of accumulation, continuity and integrity of factors.

Consequently, this situation demands a clear and objective pluralism of political opinions and interpretation. To deal with and manage the situation correctly is a requirement of a successful political leadership. We preferred to reiterate what has been said because we have proceeded handling the two more controversial and crucial issues, which raised continuous dispute over the politics and performance of the Palestinian national movement.

It is not optional to deal with these tow issues. Rather it is a practical and political necessity because they would sum up the vision of the party, its coherence, practicability and seriousness, as regards the rearrangement of internal Palestinian affairs. Unless this task has been safely and realistically accomplished, the confrontation and struggle against the occupation will lose one of the main conditions of a successful political work.

To combat the occupation successfully demands an ability to unite the Palestinian capacities, employ all the components of power the Palestinian people have as much efficiently and intensively as possible. In this regard, there is a crucial question to be answered: Is there any other target more crucial and important than preserving the unity of the Palestinian people in view of the dangers threatening its very existence? Is it possible to accomplish this mission without a clear vision backed by, a suitable framework and performance to unify the national movement?

Theoretically speaking, the answer is very easy and axiomatic, but it will soon turn into a real problem once we have moved to reality. The problem here is neither fabricated nor invented, it is the result of the diversity of methodologies and political options proposed by every faction of the Palestinian national movement. This will have to do with the diversity of these factions, the class and ideological dimensions they represent, the standard of development of each one, besides the real power it has among the Palestinian people.

The problem gets more critical once we bear in mind the geographical dimension, that is the objective influences each Palestinian community is exposed to and which reflect the role played by geography in the formulation of policies. Things get so complicated that they would lead to complete division, under the conditions created by the Oslo Accords and the agreement, that followed. The dispute/ contradiction includes the basics of the Palestinian national problem, and its sociopolitical and liberation project.

The concept of national unity has become deeply – rooted in the Palestinian consciousness. Unity means strength, contact, self-confidence and self – respect which reflect a social and psychological state supporting unity as an instinctive as well as rational defensive reaction to the uprootedness, and fragmentation to which the Palestinian character, the Palestinians, as individuals, families and society have been exposed. Further, there are the battles and wars launched against Palestinian communities and the consequent tendency to self – protection and the preservation of collective memory and the enhancement of its function and role in the fight against the threats of dispersion and wiping out of identity.

The inclination for unity has had its very intensive psychological, social, political, and intellectual illustrations, in the attempt to make up for the instability of the material and social grounds and the interruption of the courses of natural development of the Palestinian society. The concept of national unity in the performances of the factions of the Palestinian movement took the form of political coalition of these factions on the basis of the national consensus. This means that national unity has had a finite political and organizational interpretation in the light of the differences between Palestinian organizations, the power and role of each of them according to the internal and external balance of powers.

Here is the essence of the controversy about the problem of national unity; i.e., the confusion of the concept of national unity as an expression of a deeply-rooted psychological, sentimental and social situation, on one hand, and national unity which is confidence, a framework of the political forces at a definite historical and political moment to achieve a definite purpose, or to confront a danger or a project threatening the interests of the Palestinian people.

This problem becomes more widely-spread and raises much confusion under the circumstances of confusion between the concept of national unity and P.L.O. as we said earlier in the topic entitled P.L.O.

P.L.O. has been treated, to some extent, as though it were the organizational and political framework and the practical interpretation of the concept of national unity. Accordingly, the first mission we have to accomplish is to disengage these concepts, dimensions and framework from each other so that the concept, role and status of both P.L.O. and national unity become clear.

Once this definition and clarity have been achieved, it will no more be perplexing if such confusion takes place in practice because the boundaries between them have become so clearly defined that there will be no room for a serious mistake. The importance of such a process stems from the fact that it makes designing policies easier and determining the directives of work less troublesome. Long – term vision could be kept safe from being blurred because the clearer a vision is the more apparent the aims are, the more they can protect themselves by themselves.

This proposed process is not merely a mental one, but it is a decisive step bestowing upon the political vision a real dynamic and applicable power, which can pressure and strengthen what unifies the Palestinian people, and responds to the natural inclination which the Palestinians have, due to the social, psychological and sentimental interactions mentioned above, and which occupy a large place in his body as a natural consequence of dispersion, fragmentation and wiping out.

On the other hand, the political movement faces direct aims and a situation in which policies are determined, and struggle in the field is launched. Besides, there are also the daily challenges, direct, aims, in addition to field unity.

Thus policies are determined by very cool heads. Emotions are being reigned in willingly sometimes, and unwillingly very frequently. Standing face to face with a situation, the party or national movement has to deal with these events and incidents, as much effectively and flexibly as possible. Otherwise, there will be great losses, in accordance with this vision, the meaning within which we dealt with P.L.O. in this document has become clear.

To sum up, we reiterate, P.L.O. , having acquired a convention and national liberation program, being considered a national and historical achievement of the Palestinian people, having been recognized by the Arabs and the international community as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in all its gatherings, having symbolically and materially substantiated the Palestinian unity and identity constitutes the national framework representing the unity of the Palestinian people. Within this meaning, and regardless of all of its shortcomings, it remains a framework and an expression of the grand national aims. It materializes the conscience, grand values and the natural inclination of the Palestinian people toward unity.

National unity as a concept of power should be materialized through a relatively stable political and organizational framework to unify the work of the all or the majority of the Palestinian political forces in each stage on the basis of a definite and common program, or to face certain threats. Thus, it is a dynamic ad mobile framework which is binding as long as the participant forces are committee to the definite program.

As the position of the political forces reflect the mobility of their position, their class, political and intellectual options, and the degree of the developments of these forces themselves, the framework for national unity should be logically, motioning up and down. Similarly, as the struggle continues, so do the engagement with the occupation, its policies and project, national unity at each of the stages of the struggle will become a central national purpose, because the defense of the interests and rights of the Palestinian people in general or one of its gatherings logically requires the unity of all the forces on the basis of common ground constituting the minimum level of the common program.

In principle and theory, national unity reaches the level of a national aim. Practically, to successfully preserve its status as a national aim, in as much as it succeeds in transforming it to a political and organizational tool to manage the struggle against the occupation to mobilize the capacities of the Palestinian people and to organize its forces, the concept of national unity takes theoretical and practical interlaced and dynamic dimensions. It becomes simultaneously a means and an end, a cause and an effect, as well.

Understanding national unity according to these dimensions, transfers it from the level of limited organizational or factional understanding to a more inclusive and sublime level because it is considered a national determinant of the struggle. In this way, national unity becomes the continued title of the struggle against deviation politics, or the attempt to degrade it to such an extent that it might be used in a bargain or a cover for untrue policies. In other words, there should be a continuous and practical confrontation to preserve national unity as a national and organizational necessity though it might be viewed by the dominant groups differently; also, it should be protected against attempts to distort, empty or destroy it.

Given these facts, we would like to stress the need of the concurrence of an enhanced understanding of national unity, as a governor of national struggle and the availability of a democratic climate and performance, which would ensure that national unity can play its role and do it, function with as much efficiency and dynamism as possible. Otherwise, it will sink deeper and deeper, in the mud of minor authoritarian factional policies which might strip it of its main function, namely to unite all forces and invest all available capacities to help achieve the national aims. The subject of national unity should be debated within this context.

The achievement of national unity requires national dialogue, should national unity be the end, national dialogue then had to be the means to achieve it. Otherwise, how can we reach the political and organizational basics and determinants on which national unity can be established? The position on national unity can not be decided arbitrarily. It should be considered as the required condition and the natural framework which govern and control the performances of political forces confronting the occupation and bear the heavy burden of the socio-political and intellectual issues which raise controversies and debate, on one hand, and lead to position of national unity on the road to confront the common problems, on the other.

The effectiveness of dialogue is dependent upon understanding it as an objective necessity in the current situation in which the political forces and Palestinian society are living, on one hand, and the clarity of the problems, subjects and aims the forces are trying to achieve in each stage on the basis of the question: where does the national interest lie in each stage of the conflict? In this meaning, there are several options for a dialogue which might be all – embracing to reconsider all the policies and options, or limited to certain issues imposed by the flow of events, such as confronting occupation plans in Jerusalem, settlements, economic blockade. Sometimes it might be limited to one subject only such as a void the threat of in – fight.

So, bearing in mind that dialogue is governed by the problems and aims to be dealt with and achieved, the problem does not lie in whether one should participate, or not. Rather, it lies in the realization of the aims each political force tries to achieve through dialogue. Thus dialogue becomes an integral part of a common policy responding to the requirements of national work within a realistic balance of powers and threats, and a means to reach common national denominators.

In other words, it is a new field of struggle and confrontation to raise the ceiling of the performances of the Palestinian political forces as much as possible and to reign in, even to some extent, the politics of concessions. Accordingly, it becomes a every vital problem to decide the issues, because it is very difficult to reach common denominators about some issues. The position on such issues has to be decided beyond the boundaries of debate and dialogue. Similarly, there are problems which are possible to reach common denominators for. The crucial questions can be summed up as follows:

What do we need dialogue for? What are the aims and program to be raised at dialogue sessions in order to be achieved? To start from this point, the party will find itself relieved from being conditioned upon what the other party thinks of. Thus, it provides its own options with a wide margin for positive mobility in all directions. The formulation of a positive vision in respect of certain subjects demands that good attention be paid to the possibility of mixing things together and distorting the borders and conjunctions.

The crucial issue raised above stems from the political and intellectual method governing the performances of the authority team whose mentality is confined to the manipulative use of the frameworks of national work beginning with P.L.O. , going through national unity and ending by national dialogue. Given the heavy burden of the fact referred to above, one would like to insist that it reflects some concrete aspects of the situation. This makes it one of the factors of the struggle and internal confrontation, so it can not be cancelled by merely refusing to deal with it.

The politics of confusing issues, distorting the boundaries, the manipulative use of national frameworks, and providing the political performances of the official dominant leadership with a political cover cannot pass off unless the policies of alternative are essentially vague, open to manipulation and unable to stand as a socio-political, practicable and intellectual force of confrontation.

Once the requirements of national, clear and safe policy were ensured, it would be able to guarantee self – protection and clarification of its positions.

We emphasize this fact because we are in front of a situation governed by the ceiling of the struggle against occupation i.e. the main contradiction. This means that the internal Palestinian situation could always carry what could be agreed on and coordinated about; consequently, problems could no more be related to projective resolutions. As long as the struggle and engagement are so inclusive and deep, dialogue and collective work will remain a wide field of attraction. Therefore, the problem can no longer be a matter of dissociation or participation, but it is dependent on deciding on the aim and interest which can be achieved through each option. Here it is necessary to pay attention to two dangerous deviations which are:

1-To surrender to the situation and be conditioned by it, this leads to an emotional short – sighted policy governed by temporariness which transforms it into sporadic practices and tactics which are the closest to reactions and improvisation, while one of the functions of a scientific policy is to be an inclusive means of managing the struggle according to a comprehensive vision, a system of multidimensional political, intellectual and social work and performance practically and intellectually leading to a separation between current politics and the governing strategic vision and aims.

To jump over the situation and work on the basis of grand slogans or a political discourse which would satisfy some psychological inclinations more than it could reflect the situation. It would be convenient to psyches and sentiments but the controversy rises because it lacks anything leading to an understanding of the struggle. The process will no more be concrete because it will be turned into "point counter point" or a duel between slogans.

The long experience of the Palestinian people, so did the experience of other peoples, proved that the problem has never been at any time how to select national aims but how to achieve those aims. The concept of achievement here can not be limited to the narrow meaning of work/performance, that is the process of action itself. But it should combine work and performance which are considered a socio-political and intellectual process with all the needed requirements. Consequently, the rearrangement of internal Palestinian affairs in principle or in the light of the practical requisites becomes one of the remarkable priorities in this stage.

Such a problem has become a subject of internal conflict between a unionist policy based on the principle of preserving the multidimensional national interests at different-levels the current, medium term and long term ones – and the opposite one which could lead, through unilateralism to a more weakening and exhaustion of these interests. The result will of course be an increased aggravation of internal crises and widening of the divisions. Within this meaning, the subject of national unity and the management of internal dialogue will remain a hot issue whose extremely political, intellectual and practical importance demands that it be managed and dealt with in accordance with the above mentioned determinants.

To deal with this issue frivolously will result in deepening the imbalance in the management of internal contradictions, whose consequence will be more exhaustion and erosion of internal powers.

Objectively, this means the perpetuation of the state of weakness and making a free service to the enemy.

The process mentioned above acquires a dangerous dimension in the current Palestinian circumstances, at a time occupation efforts to penetrate the Palestinian body and impose more political concessions have increased.

The situation will become more critical once we have recalled the requirements of the final status negotiations. This thing makes it necessary that the factions of political Palestinian opposition movement should decide on clear directions for confrontation which should go beyond general rejections to a more active and effective level. This is conditioned by the availability of a political vision and performance capable of lunching a field struggle at various levels as an organic part of a popular resistance.

The current situation is characterized by a great amount of objective interaction and interlinks which have impact on the contradictions inside the Palestinian arena. This requires dynamic politics and practices which respond to the motion of the situation and the consequent influence on the national missions and interests within the context of fighting the occupation which is, no doubt, the main contradiction we have to face in this stage.

What proves the ideas mentioned above is a wide ranging network of subjects constituting the aspects of the struggle against occupation some of which are relevant to every day and current politics, (repression, detainees, economic field,…. etc). This means, inter alia a great chance to mobilize powers and capacities to meet the demands whether through bilateral limited work programs or general national missions including every one.

This requirement is accompanied by another one which is equally important and is represented in the fight against the policies and practices of the authority both at the level of standing against the concession process and its policies in administering the Palestinian internal affairs.

A dialogue with the authority does not, for objective reasons, drop out a conflict with it, except in the minds of some people. Both the struggle and dialogue, according to the objectivity of the positive and negative contact with authority, constitutes an aspect of the confrontation.

A very clear management of this process by the opposition forces within the conditions and vision referred to above can transform these slogans and programs into a material power for work and change them from being abstract to concrete.

As long as the national determinant is governing the management of the whole process and the realization that it is a socio – political struggle reflecting the national program besides both of its aspects the social and liberational ones, the process will be in control of the conditions of its progress and this will ensure a social and popular attraction and move forward to influence even the socio – political forces, supporting for one reason or another the Oslo option.

The national dialogue at any level should remain related to the national constants and interests in the political sense, on one hand, and committed to definite mechanisms for execution, supervision and revisions.

We refer to what has been mentioned above, to state that this option is essentially contradictory to the interests of these forces which are included in the grand interests of the Palestinian people except for the very narrow strata and chieftains who view Oslo as a personal fate or a means for wealth and privileges.

This is the suitable and objective approach to make gradual displacement in the internal balance of powers as a prerequisite to create a democratic national alternative which is considered a comprehensive socio-political and intellectual process.

Fifthly: On The So–Called Final Status Negotiations

Now that ten years have passed since the Madrid Conference, and the consequent agreements and understandings which followed that conference, including the Cairo, Paris Economic, Herbron, Sharm El-Sheikh I, Wye Plantations, Sharam El-Sheikh II agreements, besides the Arava Valley Accords between Jordan and Israel, the features of the settlement envisaged by the American – Israeli alliance have become very clear. The alliance viewed these interim agreements and understandings just as a means to liquidate the Arab-Israeli conflict and its essence, the Palestinian problem. The prelude to this aim was the forcible imposition of Israeli status quo policies as regards sovereignty, settlements, Jerusalem, refugees and economy, besides the distortion of the concepts of struggle and degrading them to concepts about a dispute or strife. The resolutions of the international legitimacy, which constitute a reference in international law received a blow once they had been replaced by the negotiations terms of reference which reflect the balance of powers and the consequent Israeli hegemony. Within the same context, the enemy alliance tried to dissociate the Palestinian party to compel it to surrender and forcibly accept the settlement and the final status resolution of the Palestinian problem in such a way that the Palestinian negotiating team cannot but accept the Israeli demands and conditions.

Through the last ten years the occupation has persistently been depleting the Palestinian situation and constantly pushing it toward the point of conceding the national Palestinian rights until the time comes when the Palestinian negotiating party accepts the Israeli demands and conditions.

Thus, it is possible to say that the Oslo Agreement has accomplished its definite mission. The Zionist entity (be it led by a Likud or Labour Government) is trying, through an all-embracing American support, to dictate the terms of a final status settlement by striking a blow against the fundamental components of the Palestinian problem: the right of return, self-determination, Jerusalem and a Palestinian state with full sovereignty.

This means that Zionist entity has been employing all its capacities and the achievements piled up through the past decades to consolidate the occupation and its related projects. Having strengthened its occupation of Palestine in 1948, Israel, through all-inclusive pressure, is trying to grab more land, imprison the Palestinian people in the West Bank, and Gaza Strip to strip the concept of Palestinian statehood of the elements of sovereignty and independence, legalize settlements and a strike a blow against the right of refugees to return. In case it succeeded, it would have liquidated all the constants of the Palestinian problem as a case related to historical rights, national liberation and independence.

A vision and policy like this could lead to the consolidation of the Zionist project which is a project of hegemony and domination at the heart of the Arab World.

In the light of the successes achieved by the Zionist project through the Oslo Accords, the consequent imbalance of powers and the new fait-accomplait on the ground, the occupation believed that it was high time a final status of the struggle and the Palestinian problem had been dictated.

Thus, negotiations between the occupation and the dominant Palestinian party which signed the Oslo Accords began. The Israeli negotiation strategy was designed in such a way that it would make the Palestinian party accept the results of the interim agreement and transform these agreements and their contents into the foundation of the final status resolution. Zionist entity had illusions that suitable conditions had come to impose a final resolution according the notorious red-lines or taboos:

1. No to the return of Palestinian refugees.

2. No to the dismantling of big settlement clusters; yes to the annexation of these settlements to Israel.

3. No to the partition of Jerusalem.

4. No to the withdrawal to the June 4, 1967 lines.

5. No to the presence of any foreign army to the West of Jordan River.

These lines clearly sum up the aims of Zionist entity on which both the Likud and Labour agree, with a relative difference in compromise and flexibility.

In this perspective, we see that the Palestinian problem, as a result of the politics of concessions, have reached to a decisive cross roads really threatening the national rights and opening the way so that the Zionist project can achieve more achievements and victories at the expense of the Palestinian people and its grand national interests.

Although the Palestinian people had had some anticipations during the interim stage, it realized that the whole national problem is at a critical crossroads. So, once negotiations were renewed, the resistance operations and rejection of any concessions that might harm national constants were enhanced. The P.FL.P believes, in the light of what has been mentioned, that the negotiations of the socalled final status resolution will surely be based on the combination between the Oslo Accords and the final resolution, and that the negotiation process will continue to based on the American – Israeli unilateralism as terms of reference instead of the resolutions of international legitimacy, the resolutions of the Palestinian National Council and the program of national consensus. So, the negotiations will never lead to the attainment of our inalienable national rights, a part from the dangers of compromises carried by them.

Accordingly, we call for:

First:

To consider the Oslo Accords and the interpretations triggered by it as outdated. So, there is nothing in common between Oslo and the concept of the final resolution. This requires that a new national Palestinian policy be formulated on the basis of quitting the Oslo process and its institutions, that the institutions of P.L.O. be activated and reconstructed on comprehensive and democratic bases and that the Palestinian National Convention and program be committed to.

Second:

The terms reference of the transitional resolution of the Palestinian problem should be built on the basis of the resolutions of international legitimacy which should be implemented completely by the Zionist entity.

Politics of power and hegemony which USA and the Zionist entity try to impose upon the Palestinian people should be dismissed. The international terms of reference in the framework of the United Nations and its institutions should be insisted upon.

Third:

The declaration of sovereignty of the Palestinian State on the territories occupied since 1967, because such a position is considered a means of struggle to continue the resistance against the occupation and its policies. This is a transitional resolution on the road to achieve the strategic aim which is to establish the democratic state of Palestine.

Fourth:

The adherence to resolution 194 as a legal basis for the resolution of the Palestinian refugee problem which is the essential part of the national problem. Without a just, and serious resolution, the struggle will continue. There is no force or law which allows a political leadership to concede or wipe out the right of a Palestinian citizen to return to his home, land or village of origin from which he was expelled forcibly, by massacres and terror. This right does not cease by passage of time or the imbalance of powers.

Fifth:

As we understand it the final resolution should guarantee the rights of our people to return, national independence and sovereignty completely. Any harm to the right of return, the Arabism of Jerusalem, the preservation of settlements, on one hand, or to grant Zionist entity the freedom of movement and the right to use the territories of the Palestinian state for security or military purposes, on the other, harms the criteria of sovereignty and liberation and consequently triggers resistance and various forms of struggle.

Sixth:

In view of current imbalance of powers, on one hand, and the insistence of some Palestinian forces to continue the negotiations on the basis of the former policy, on the other, there might be conditions leading to a socalled final status resolution or a framework agreement. In this respect, we would like to reiterate that any final agreement, or anything else, which harms the constant and just rights of our people will not be binding to our people and its militant forces which are called upon to continue the struggle until the interests of out people have been achieved according to international legitimacy.

Bearing in mind the above mentioned positions and practices by the occupation, the declared aims of the current negotiations between Zionist entity and P.A, sponsored by U.S.A, we conceive that all the forces of the Palestinian people will continue the resistance and struggle. This requires that all the forces and currents of opposition should meet the demands of mobilizing the capacities, organising the activities and finding a framework for the practices to defend the national rights. Special emphasis should be put in this stage on the right of the Palestinian refugees to return, the Jerusalem issue as central subjects of the struggle. Accordingly, there should be popular struggle in the Palestinian communities at homeland and in diaspora. Creative forms suitable for the activation of the masses in the camps should be found in order that refugees might defend their constant right to return to their homes in Palestine from which they had been expelled.

Sixthly: Forms of Struggle, Nature of the Conflict and the Characteristics of the Stage

The vision as well as the determinants included in this document have narrowed the margins of dealing lightly with the major issues. Now, any discussion has had a ceiling and criteria which no one can easily jump over or violate without pushing everything back to the starting point-the crisis zone. So, dealing successfully with the forms and methods of struggle is governed by the requirements of the situation. To what extent this responds to the requirement conditioned by its being effective and consistent with the mobility of the situation, and with the objective and subjective conditions this mobility is based on.

Otherwise, freedom will lose its meaning and turn into a miserable chaos and inability in front of the factual situation which will transcend those who might deal with it lightly or with ignorance whether they are individuals, a party or even by a people. To view the current situation with all its dimensions and contents will simply point to or even impose the suitable forms and methods of struggle.

This means that it is compulsory to determine the forms and methods of the struggle in conformity with the conditions and requirements of the situation.

The result will be that the struggle will be no more in the circle of spontaneity and improvisation, but in the circle of the objective necessity, consciousness, and a political and intellectual vision. Then, it will be possible to design policies that will be able to function properly, and do their functions naturally, and with the utmost coherence and conformity with one another, on one hand, and with the situation, and its conditions, plus the objective dynamics of the struggle, on the other.

The peculiarities of the forms of struggle stem from their ability to do certain functions within the context of a comprehensive vision, not without or against it. Otherwise, these forms will be no more than merely special desires. The objective nature of the struggle is substantiated by its being an inclusively historical one between the Arab nation and the Palestinian people, on one hand, and the Zionist project, on the other.

The implication of this reality is that the struggle and confrontation will include various forms of confrontation on an objective basis and to the utmost extent. Due to this reason, the forms of political, economic, intellectual and military struggle, under the circumstances of the Palestinian case, remain open-ended and include all the forms without any exception, as long as they can effectively defend the Palestinian and Arab rights and regain them. The reality, referred to , objectively and concretely reflects the determinants, contents and dimensions of the struggle at this level. They can be briefly enumerated as follows:

First:

The nature of the enemy is governed by colonial, ideological, racial and settler aims and interpreted through political and security practices based on the sanctification of power and piling up its components, including mass destruction weapons and viewing the military superiority of the Zionist entity as a constant foundation of the common Israeli-American strategy. The continued aggressive and offensive policy against the Palestinian people and the Arab nation illustrates what has been mentioned above.

The aim of this policy, as it is well-known, the perpetuation of the status quo, the destruction of the components of Arab power, and the abortion of the Arab attempts to obtain what the Zionist or imperialist project in the region consider a real or a potential threat against them. The use of violence, force, limited or comprehensive warfare directly or indirectly, has become a permanent subject in the social and intellectual indoctrination in Israel, and Israeli political practices.

This concrete policy has led and is leading to a state of constant and forcibly imposed confrontation because of the aggressive occupation policies and practices. So, it is natural to react spontaneously or organisationally, in the form of a popular resistance or regular war. To neglect this declared or secret, actual or potential aggression, reflects a state of internal conflict. Neglection of these facts, dealing with them lightly, oversimplification of them or attempting to escape, reflect a phobia, a capitulationism and short-sighted mentality.

The reality we should never miss is that the violent confrontation is imposed by the nature of the Zionist-imperialist project, due to its flagrant contradiction with the logic of the natural evolution of the Arab people and nation. Such an evolution is viewed as a future threat, so all efforts are employed, and all the components of power are manipulated to trap this evolution, whether by political or economic repression, or, should that be insufficient, by armed aggression.

Second:

The occupation of Palestine, the uprootedness, and the dispersion of the majority of the Palestinian people in diaspora, the rejection of recognizing the basic national rights, represented by the right of return, self-determination, the establishment of a national and independent state with Jerusalem as its capital, the strengthening of the occupation settlement and terrorist practices, the resort to material /body violence (expulsion, detention, land grab, killing, destruction and psychological and moral violence) the distortion of Palestinian economy and annexing to the Israeli besides many other things, all these things would bestow upon the stage its characteristic and content as the stage of the national liberation movement of the Palestinian people.

This means that it is a natural right, and duty that the Palestinian people should defend itself, resist the occupation through various means of struggle, including armed struggle. This is in accordance with international law, the resolutions of the United Nations, which give peoples the right to use force to attain their rights and to defend themselves.

Any practical or intellectual attempt to transcend or neglect this fact under any pretext, be it in the name of peace, coexistence or reality....etc, is condemned to failure because it does not objectively possess the requirements to life. Simply, it is contrary to the actual situation, the nature of the struggle and its objectivity. The question which should always be present is: what is expected from a people crucified on the wall in front of the peoples of the world for more than half a century other than self–defense and the retention of its rights.

Third:

The two headlines mentioned above, with their own objectivity, and practical dynamism, grant the struggle its comprehensive historical characteristics and expressions which we find in a network of features and subjects around which the struggle has been going on. In such a situation, the nature and features of the struggle will go beyond the particular determinants of each party. This means that the struggle has become a socio-historical phenomenon which has acquired its own objective dynamics which no party alone can control. Even the two parties cannot control it, in the light of the ramifications of the struggle, the material and historical consequences related it, and the dynamics it generates due to the continuity of the struggle and its regeneration.

Due to this reason, and in the light of objective reasons, besides a scientific reading, we believe that it is an objective historical struggle. In conjunction with what we said that the objective forms of struggle constitute a natural result of this objective conflict which the enemy tries to cancel without ever trying to remove its causes. Thus, we are in front of an open-ended struggle in all directions, including all levels required and imposed by the nature of the struggle and aggression which were not historically started by the Arabs nor the Palestinians.

Accordingly, the slogans raised by the Zionist entity and the conferences organised by it, the campaigns it has been launching under the title “Combating terrorism” will not solve any problem, because they are targeting objectively the Palestinian and Arab existence.

The Zionist entity, more than any one else, realizes what has been said above, particularly as experience has revealed that it was unable to end the struggle and confrontation in all its forms. Rather, it is growing larger and more varied. Had Zionist entity had the power to achieve this aim, it would not have hesitated one minute. The truth is that the Zionist entity, for the long decades of confrontation, has not spared any effort, to end the struggle in the way suitable to its aims. However, the results were not proportionate to the desires.

The aims the Zionist state tries achieve through these slogans are:

1. To pay lip service to the world public opinion to create an atmosphere antagonistic to the Arab and Palestinian resistance, to manipulate that atmosphere to mobilize material and political support and to justify its aggressive policy and put it within the limit of the right to self – defense.

2. To extort and threaten Arab regimes, to push them to adopt policies antagonistic to popular resistance and to defend the security of the Zionist entity to avoid reprisals.

3. To feed the factors of Palestinian infight, and push the Palestinian people toward the circle of internal erosion through exhaustion and self-depletion.

The Oslo Agreement, and the conditions it included, came to increase this danger, due to the acceptance of the self-rule authority to perform the job of defending Israeli security, under the illusion that it would ensure the peace process and to get some concessions from the Zionist entity. This is what the Zionist entity is trying to do in the context of securing the utmost security for the settler society. Yet, regardless of the success achieved every now and then at this level, nothing has changed in respect of the essence of the struggle which is still remaining within its objective determinants. Events have proved this fact and have continuously renewed it, apart from regression and latency experienced through history of the struggle.

Through the above mentioned ideas, we can transcend the aggravated or defeated thinking which views that the armed struggle has come to an end and has been buried, and as a consequence the national liberation movement has expired. This supposes that we are in a completely new stage which is the democratic social construction era, and the rest of the national rights were to be achieved only within the framework of diplomacy, peaceful negotiation and the legal framework coined by the agreements which have been so far signed.

This policy has revealed the absence of a correct vision of the struggle according to its objective factors and conditions, instead of illusions related to a concept that the struggle is based on the smartness of individuals or chieftains. On the other hand, there is also an absence of a correct understanding of the enemy as well as its political projects. This has resulted in positioning the national rights and interests of the Palestinian people below a ceiling designed and imposed by the occupation.

This policy has degraded the struggle from the concept of an all – embracing historical one which includes the different forms of struggle to the concept of tactics and maneuvers, as if the result of the struggle might be determined by negotiations between just men, not by the impact of the balance of powers, and according to the ability of each party to manage the struggle, including the negotiations through employing all the components of power smartly, and the ability to neutralize, as much as possible, the components of enemy power.

Due to this reason, the policy referred to above has yielded options and consequences that are contrary to the determinants of the struggle and the terms of its management, that is, the rights and interests of the Palestinian people and the Arab nation.

In conclusion, the nature of the struggle goes beyond the minor politics governed by pale and improvised political vision to one which is capable of reading well the portrait of the struggle and consciously managing the process on the basis of piling up, integrating, and continuously activating all the latent powers.

We have, according to what has been said, to completely manipulate all the capacities of the society, face the occupation in all fields and at all corners, defend every meter of land threatened by settlements, refuse paying taxes to the occupation, defend every well of water, resist the demolition of every house, confront the be smirching of any holy place, resort to comprehensive or limited forms of uprisings to confront the enemy and to use different forms armed struggle.

To adopt this vision does not mean chaos nor improvisation, because the decision on the suitable form and means of struggle requires envisaging the political moment and conditions surrounding it and this demands that there is a safe and national management of the capacities available to us. What has been mentioned above is the condition to possess the capacity to take the suitable step at the suitable moment, with flexibility of thinking and working and readiness to move forward, backward, to be latent or to rush as required.

The things mentioned above should be understood on the basis of an essential axiom which states that the sacredness of any of the forms of the struggle is dependent upon its ability to serve the national project at the suitable time and place.

This means that the form of armed struggle should be dealt with at each stage as a means to serve the inclusive political vision which is responsible for determining the function to be done at each stage of the struggle, in conformity with each one of the peculiarities of the Palestinian people – that is its function is continuously mobile according to the mobility of the struggle.

Seventhly: The National Alternative: An Inclusive Democratic Project or a political Declaration For History

It is apparent, in the light of the vision this document contains that we are in front of gigantic momentum, and an all-embracing struggle extending to the furthest and smallest corners. Though the struggle is being densely centered in Palestine which was chosen as an area for the “landing” of the Zionist-Imperialist project at the heart of the Arab World, this colonialist historical landing goes much further beyond that. Such a fact like this would transfer the struggle to highly interlaced levels, and attract tremendous forces to the scene whether that be at the level of the Arab nation or the level of the forces supporting the Zionist project.

Within this meaning, though the subject of the struggle is the liberation of Palestine, it becomes a struggle to liberate the Arab nation and ensure the material and cultural factors of its revival. Because the consequences of the struggle are determined in the light of the ability of each party to concentrate and pile up the components of comprehensive power, to effect the suitable displacement in the balance of powers, it becomes scientifically axiomatic to consider that the internal factor is the decisive one in the struggle. The content of this factor can be determined by the capacity of the political powers of the society to effectively, intensively, efficiently, for a period of time, ensure the conditions and components of the material and moral confrontation and revive all the latent capacities and have them activated.

The nature of the enemy, and consequently the nature of the struggle do not give us the luxury to waste even some of our possessions, because the cost of any depletion is very high and will be directly paid in the form of more imbalances of powers, and more defeats. Any imbalance of powers will take the form of a multiple geometric progression, because its effects will go into various directions and reach all the social structures. A century old experience in the struggle against the imperialist-Zionist project has an abundance of hard lessons. Our defeats are not successive coincident nor are the victories of the other party a predestined fate.

This historical process with both national/liberational and social and awakening dimensions constitute one process taking place at the same time. It is practically impossible to separate one dimension from the other even if we wanted. The enemy will not stand with folded arms because the struggle against it is open-ended and inclusive, and has acquired its own dynamism and rules. Thus, the subjective and objective, the current and the historical, the liberational and the democratic social factors have got interwoven together.

The state of interweaving referred to above through its manifestations, interactions and mobility requires a sublime level of practice, management, leadership, a commanding mentality which possesses elements of knowledge and efficiency to deal with the developments and requirements of the struggle. In this perspective, we can understand that the document tries to further promote the debate and intellectual activities to meet the level of this inclusive sociopolitical process and guarantee a mature vision capable of reading the era with all its dimensions in relation to the higher national interests.

We don’t miss the truth if we said that the struggle against the Zionist project has reached a stage of unprecedented aggravation on one hand, and popular Arab and Palestinian activism, which grows towards becoming enhanced, organised, wide and extended through out the Arab World, on the other. This enhancement gives us good news of a real popular and conscious movement in which both mind and the cultural dimension occupy an advanced position, when compared to previous stages. Such a movement should be correctly and carefully dealt with and manipulated.

Such a movement is considered a significant turning point which has many qualitative significations. It reflects that the nature of the struggle which was almost confined within the limits of armed struggle, which changed the society from a field and a carrier of the struggle at different levels into what resembles reserves to be mobilized when needed and to be demobilized after a time. More dangerous still, it helped hollow out and forge the popular will, get a variety of minor and incapable policies passed under the name of popular legitimacies, which later were abused and became the jurisdiction of the authority or semi authority. The situation referred to above highlights more than a phenomenon and lesson whose expensive price has been paid through out our contemporary history.

The first and the most dangerous phenomenon is the absence of or the usurpation of socio-political democracy which resulted in the reigning in of the development of society and the destruction of creativity and initiative. With the passage of time, this created alienation dynamism, the loss of confidence in the regimes, their slogans and wars, social inactivity, the absence of the environment, the mechanisms, values criteria, and institutional legal structures capable of advancing the socio-political performance to a level suitable for the requirements of the struggle and the standards governing the performance of the other party, to transfer society from being negatively recipient to become an initiative, active social carrier and governor of the political performances at the official and popular levels.

The second phenomenon is the loss and distortion of a socio-political and intellectual vision, which leads from time to time to an eruption of debates and intellectual activities in an attempt to search for the reasons of the defeats and the conditions of revival. The third phenomenon to be recorded is the popular Palestinian uprisings in the occupied territories in the eighties. Among the lessons to be taken from these uprisings one can mention that the wide-spread and inclusive popular work has regained its signification.

The experience of these uprisings, including the sacrifices and innovations, is considered a successful attempt to reform the equations of the struggle, and to work according to a general fact: namely, that the Palestinian people possesses a renewable stock – pile of capacity enough to sustain the struggle, enhance it from being a political, military, superior and limited struggle, to a social struggle which can be as much tiring and exhausting for the enemy as possible. The enemy has so far been accustomed to easily gained-victories and limited clashes to be run and governed in accordance with his designated strategies.

The Intifada has obliged the occupation to stand face to face, for years, with a new pattern of struggle, which is open-ended and continuous and in which the Zionist state cannot hold the initiative and be the decisionmaker. For the first time, it will assume a defensive position, because it has to face the flagrant dimensions of the struggle: all the demons, symbols, myths and components have been brought, besides the forces of the current resistance fed by the popular opposition/resistance at all levels.

Exactly here one can observe signs of the fear felt by the Zionist entity, which discovered it was not fighting against a regular army, or a group of commando fighters, with due respect of their importance. But it was engaged in a war with an active, energetic, initiative people who can attack, defend, build and chase. A people who realizes the importance of a workshop, an olive tree, labor force, school, university, media, the danger of a settlement, the value of Jerusalem, a molotov cocktail bottle, the rejection of paying taxes......etc. To sum up, it is a people that acts as an equal to the enemy, is always ready for confrontation and engagement at each and every corner, crossroads or on each meter of the area of struggle.

The fourth phenomenon we would like to refer to is the degradation of criteria and the lightness in dealing with minds and the consequent intellectual chaos and the loss of vision. The result is a widely-spread populism and vulgar pragmatism in the form of endless attempts to justify the policies and failures of the leadership. The crisis has been aggravated and deepened by the absence of a democratic climate and performance, the spread of factional thinking at the expense of national thinking, the degradation of scientific criticism criteria, effectiveness, moral and intellectual disinterestedness.

The facts referred to above explain the phenomenon of the glorification of people vocally, where as the practical performance shows that it is being dealt with as though it were a herd. This is a mentality that shows disregard and frivolity no more or less.

The essence of the idea we would like to convey through the enumeration of phenomena / patterns referred to above is related to the result of the negative dynamism produced by the minor socio-political and emotional performance that led to a complete internal exhaustion, and the incredible material and moral, political, intellectual depletion of powers. The result is a continuous degradation of the standard of the political, liberational, social and intellectual performance. The result is also a further deepening of the imbalance of powers between the two parties of the conflict. This in turn paved the way for the enemy to manipulate the imbalance as political, intellectual and field victories.

The accumulative imbalance of powers at the Palestinian level has appeared in the form of an overwhelmingly inclusive structural crisis in every direction. Thus, the different factions of the Palestinian national movement "suddenly" found themselves face to face in front of a crushing structural crisis, in spite of the clarity of the premises of the crisis and its preliminary symptoms. The crisis has expressed itself through essential facts which are:

1 – The surrender of the Palestinian official leadership which has tied its political options with the American-Israeli project, and entered the political negotiation with a spirit and mentality of defeat. The result is agreements which can be at least described as opposite and contrary to lowest minimum of the national interests and rights of the Palestinian people.

Experience has proved that this mentality is not qualified and possesses a minor and instantaneous vision, not only of the dimensions and essence of the enemy project but also of the subjective capacities, as well.

Those who have adopted this option found themselves in a state of confrontation with reality substantiated through history, and comprehensive material facts, both at the level of the aims and interests of the continued Zionist occupation, or at the level of the effectiveness of the Palestinian people to continue to struggle and to hold fast at the lines of national duty. It is no more useful to be conditioned by the illusion that it is possible to jump over the reasons and huge contradictions of the struggle and consequently reach a resolution through negotiations, not about how to remove the causes of the struggle but about how to legalize the occupation and to make the victim willingly and officially accept it.

The crisis of those who support this option lies in that they are vulgarly violating one of the basis of the struggle, namely, that negotiations should be based upon the whole area of the struggle, including all the historical and material factors, reactions, developments, components.

Any underestimation or negligence of this or that factor would necessarily lead to much imbalance and more wrong political decisions.

There is no need here to remind them of the cost of this policy which has been being paid in the form of the blood, rights and interests of Palestinian people and the Arab nation.

2-The crisis of the opposition forces, which could not reign in the official Palestinian leadership, although seven years have passed since Oslo Accords were signed, is that these forces are still unable to reconstruct their opposition according to a new vision including the intellectual, political and organisational foundations of the performance in relation to the variables of the struggle. So, the opposition has remained fluctuating, disorganised and disunited, which badly affected its credibility and respect, and created a climate suitable for the Oslo team to achieve its political option without any serious resistance.

It is true that the crisis of the first team is based on the contradiction between its political option and performance with the interests and rights of the Palestinian people, whereas the second team, in spite of its adherence to those rights and interests, is still living its crisis. In principle, there is, no doubt, an essential difference, though the decisive criterion in the judgment and the most valuable one is the ability to manage the struggle against the enemy and its projects in such a way that would lead to protecting the national rights and interests of the Palestinian people against depletion, and to move forward to achieve them. Otherwise, everything will be limited to the arena of general slogans and rejectionism, which lead to no practical results.

What has been mentioned above suggests that the national democratic alternative must compulsorily acquire the conditions and requirements of its resurrection. We say “compulsorily” because in the light of the facts, data and governing determinants of the political vision mentioned above, we have become close to premises whose results should be formulated-namely the requirements, according to the standards of the framework of the struggle with its as much different and inclusive dimensions as possible, whose significant illustrative details should be reviewed rapidly.

We are in front of a framework governed by the current and historical contradictions, some of which are still in the womb of the future. This framework expresses the comprehensiveness and historicity of the struggle, which have been being managed by the other party as much smartly and powerfully as possible, availing itself of the latest achievements of mankind in science, technology and management at various levels. The material actualities of, and the proportions of power of the struggle are continuously changing while the historical roots are being preserved.

However, the framework of the struggle, besides the features of recession and withdrawals it carries in this stage, there are features of preparedness, aggravation and resistance both in the Palestinian and Arab arenas. This means that the current crisis the Palestinian national factions are living is temporary, because the Palestinian people, within the perspective of its consciousness of the nature of the struggle, and its national rights and interests is objectively renewing the struggle to defend its identity and existence as a people. As long as the struggle is open – ended as much as possible, any agreements that would jump over this reality would become closer to being comedy or tragedy, regardless of the difficulties and bitterness.

Such a situation like this necessarily means that a society, within the course of dynamic resistance, will create its own tools and powers which will be able to satisfy the subjective and objective demands of the struggle, but not the imagined nor the illusory ones which usually do not go beyond the dimensions of individuals or organizations that reduce the people to themselves, and reduce the struggle to their own minor views and projections. This makes them slaves of their low ceiling and renewed crisis.

The objective nature of the struggle illustrates that the crisis of the Palestinian national movement, which is reflected through the continuity of the features of the struggle and the aggravations of contradictions with the enemy, is an expression of the incapacity of the subjective factors to enhance their vision political and intellectual performances to meet the requirements and conditions of the struggle. This demands, at least, that the latent capacities be emanated. This fact will naturally raise a controversy about the democratic national alternative.

“This is because an objectively very extensive area and a very objectively big role are waiting for a qualified subjective factor to fill in the huge emptiness in the arena of the social history of the Palestinian people in the current stage. It is a socially and historically determined role, namely to promote the historical opposition so that it changes from an objective stage into a historical struggle which is waiting a new vision to speak on behalf of it, and a hero to get engaged in, in accordance with the conditions mentioned above and extracted from the situation itself which determined the area, function, role besides the qualifications of the required new: vision and role.

“Here lies the status of the democratic option in the Palestinian arena and the historical role waiting it at this critical time which will decide more than a fateful issue. The role and status are related to the option, which possesses more than anything else, though relatively, factors and reasons enough to form a new start to open the road before the required steps, perform its historically required role, fill in the empty space which is still waiting its historical framework, and is capable of introducing the vision, assessing the instant, role, and status it is qualified to express.”

In the light of the precise meaning mentioned above, we can read the grand challenges and questions confronting the national democratic option, and conclude that we are in front of a deep and inclusive process requiring a serious dissociation with the currently dominant thinking, according to which the concept of a national democratic option is confined to some Palestinian democratic organisations. The problem with this thinking stems from the fact that it does not connect problems to their roots, but reproduces the crisis, because it is produced by the same mentality and political concepts which caused the crisis.

We have stated this because we believe that the concept of the “democratic national option”, and before it, the concept of “national unity” and “national dialogue”, as it has been revealed through this inclusive document, must go beyond the narrow and minor understanding which has created the crisis because it limited the problem within the level of organisational unity from above accompanied by some superior administrative features considered very necessary for it. The transcendence required should be toward an inclusive socio-historical option, which is qualitatively similar to the conditions and requirements of the struggle.

Bearing this understanding in mind, it becomes possible to review the experience of the democratic current in the Palestinian arena, and determine the roots of the shortcomings and failures which, essentially, are relevant to an accumulative recession and inability to do its role and function as a national democratic option representing socio-political and intellectual vision. It has dropped so low that it has become identical to its opposite counterpart, though it is supposed that the national democratic option has appeared as an objective response to confront it-we mean the pragmatic current or what has been customarily called the Palestinian right.

Thus, through a historical process, the rightist current has been able to dominate the Palestinian arena through its own vision, practice, criteria and behavior. This finally enabled it to contain the democratic current and to deal a strike at its role and function as a historical substitute.

The political discourse and propaganda of the democratic current do not change this concrete actuality because the results which have been achieved thirty years after the establishment of P.L.O. refer to a state of failure and inclusive crisis getting deeper and deeper in this current and dragging it lower and lower to a similar level of its original low opposite.

The cost of the failure of the democratic current to perform its role and function as a historical national democratic alternative to the Palestinian right goes beyond the boundaries of the this current, and finally befalls the Palestinian people who because of the failures and incapacity of the democratic current to perform its role and function as a historical substitute, had lost a factor to achieve the required balance in the political life. Thus it gave a chance to the mentality notorious for its unilateralism, domination and degradation of the standards of performance, besides the absence of the competitive, alternative observer......etc.

The danger of the problem we have just discussed cannot be limited within its consequences which have been accumulating up all through the previous years, because the actual state of some Palestinian democratic forces reveals that they have not realized how deep the tragedy is. Therefore, they would, at the internal and external levels, resort to the same values, traditions, practice, behavior and criteria to cover their accumulative crisis which might explode once and for all one day. Then, the losses will be multiplied. We wish that this would never happen, because there would then be national losses not only factional ones.

The most remarkable example of this reality is represented by the mentality and policy used by these forces to administer the struggle at the external level, namely against the Palestinian right and its political options. Through out the hot debate and arguments over the Oslo option, concepts have become interwoven, intellectual chaos prevailed and it was necessary to combine the concept of opposing the Oslo Accords with the concept of the national democratic alternative. Borders and boundaries got lost, so that it appeared that an opposition to Oslo equals the establishment of the alternative.

The result of this confusion and interlacing is the degradation of the concept of the national democratic alternative from being an inclusive socio-political and intellectual process an option confronting an opposite socio–political and intellectual process which has led to a national defeat, to a merely a political practice centered only on the opposition to the Oslo Agreements. Consequently, the concept of the alternative dropped to the level of current politics without any determinant because the national democratic option is basically an option and a socio-political historical and inclusive reaction to confront the requirements of an all-embracing struggle.

This means that it is a continuous historical option, which is previous to Oslo. Had it come into existence proportionately and at the right time, the Oslo Accords wouldn’t have happened. As an option, it goes beyond Oslo toward the future in relation to the conditions of the struggle against the Zionist project which was previous to Oslo and will follow it, and the conditions of a social democratic resurrection of the Palestinian people. “It is a dynamic inclusive historical, current and futuristic process at the same time, taking the form of compiled and intermingled processes of growth depending on an inclusive sociopolitical vision, in conformity with the actualities and conditions of the struggle against the Zionist project.”

The national alternative is a historical project for the future, based on an inclusive self-conception as a vision, structure, practice at all levels, and moves according to the determinants of the strategic struggle. At the same time, it envisages the situation along with its law-governed determinants. According to what has been said, the talk about the national democratic option would lose it logic and scientific essence when it is so hackneyed that it becomes a perspective through which one might look at the Oslo tragedy and deal with it as though it were a final result or the sole possibility for the mobility of Zionist-Palestinian conflict, and consequently use it as a starting point for any new mission.

The question usually raised by the followers of the Oslo option is what is the alternative? Such a question really aims at embarrassing everyone and oblige them through the pressure of inability to surrender to the rules and dynamics of Oslo.

The answer to the question raised by this group should be practical, that is a practical alternative vision, policy, thinking and practice which are more persuasive, advanced and productive when compared to the Oslo option.

The required alternative should not come from Oslo. Otherwise it would exhaust the Palestinian national struggle through very dangerous socio-political dynamics, because of the constraints and domination Israel imposed through the signed agreements and the material and field consequences it has imposed. Thus, Israel was able to consolidate its interests as terms of reference to enable it to manipulate the conditions of its superiority to strengthen its achievements, on one hand, and to obstruct the road of any Palestinian national awakening, on the other. This does not mean to close our eyes to new changes which should be positioned accurately and proportionally in the arena of the inclusive struggle.

On the basis of what has been mentioned, the concept of the national democratic alternative means to view the real situation, variables and dynamics, and to take them always into consideration for the purpose of employing them to serve the inclusive vision of the national, liberational social and democratic struggle. This means that the idea of dissociation with Oslo as a method and an option and to deal with it as a fact has become clear.

Thus, the equation will be balanced, because the option gets materialized as a socio-political, economic, cultural and struggle process which is opposite to the enemy project, and the minor everyday thinking of the Palestinian right. This process, has its historical depth, field activity and stimulating dynamism and is built on the basis of the association of the national aims of the Palestinian people as a governing criterion, and socio-political activity which inevitably must contain the new variables and get them exploited to serve the historical engagement.

Such a process is conditional upon the ensuring of systemic vision of the struggle which is a capable of attaining the required balance at each stage, and at every level of the struggle, so that there might be an association between the strategic and tactic bases and dimensions of the struggle, history, present, and future, defensive and offensive, the current and long-term policies, the Palestinian people as a unified collectivity on one hand, and Palestinian people with its diversity of peculiarities. What is accepted as correct in the relation between the general and particular is viewed as a basis of the debate between the patriotic and the national.

The crystallization of the national democratic alternative according to these regulators guarantees an opportunity to deal with the variable actuality. This will include an ability to bridge the distance between the elements of the struggle, its various discordant and concordant elements simultaneously. Through this way, it is possible to get rid of the system of destructive dissociation, whether that takes the form of an attachment to the past and the general, or to sink down in the politics of the current and partial reality which cannot see from reality except the loose junctions. This makes it necessary for the force which believes it is the carrier of the alternative project to bear serious responsibilities where it will be of no use to preserve the mentality of reference or to charge others with the responsibility.

The circumstances are objectively suitable, to set up the national democratic alternative which is a capable of holding fast and doing the historical national duties imposed by the struggle. Now that the questions have been raised, and it is out of question to send them back to the bugling long-necked bottle. The practice and performances of the democratic forces, as it is apparent, have not yet been so enhanced as to meet the requirements of the stage, regardless of the exerted efforts and the wishful thinking.

It is necessary in such a situation to improve the imbalance which has characterized the performance of these forces and to enhance their roles from that related to the opposition to the role of the leverage and carrier of national democratic alternative project which is considered a national liberational, social, democratic project, which is positive both in essence and appearance. This is the way to walk out of the crisis which made the alternative project identical with the concept of opposition and reaction to the initiatives and policies of other parties.

To overcome the crisis the Palestinian democratic forces has been experiencing, it is necessary for these forces to prove themselves capable of self-construction, in accordance with the requirements of the national democratic alternative, and to move the process from the narrow factional level to the inclusively national one, and from the organisational limited level to the level of understanding it as a process of construction, through which the democratic forces, or the democratic current, are able to move from the level of limited action by some political and social forces and personalities, to the level of an inclusive democratic state including all the Palestinian people. Without such a process, it will be impossible to interpret the concept of the national democratic alternative.

Through this way, it will be possible to decide on the regulators of the national democratic option, that is to meet the demands and conditions of the struggle against the Zionist project, on one hand, and the conditions of social democratic construction, besides combating the politics of sociopolitical depletion practiced by the Palestinian Authority Oslo team, on the other. Thus we will be in front of a national social democratic awakening and open-ended state to the almost extent. Also, we can assume control of the condition of managing the struggle in accordance with a vision enabling us to manipulate the powers and capacities of the people at as much high level as possible and to manage the struggle in a way helping the process to escape from being controlled by the enemy, and to relieve it from the constraints of actions and reactions.

Unless the socio-historical process were dealt with in conformity with its conditions and regulators, the democratic forces would remain captured by their incapacity, hanging around the tail of the socio-political movement of the Palestinian people who will continue the hunt for protagonist capable of doing his objective and historical job. The democratic forces are required to the recover from their crisis and incapacity. To get this done, it will be necessary to enhance its role and function and raise them to a level suitable for the demands of a national democratic alternative which will be materialized as a socio-political, intellectual, practical and inclusive project, besides possessing a program containing the conditions and qualifications of the national democratic alternative.

Only through this, it will be possible to avoid being trapped by the defeatist thinking which avails itself of the absence or incapacity of the national democratic alternative to justify its inefficiency, philosophy and performance through claiming that the proposals of the national democratic alternative, representing a socio-political, organisational and intellectual vision will strip the other party of its most important cards it possesses, namely “no peace.....no war option” and the absence of a pure alternative. This does not necessarily mean that new powers are holders of the sociopolitical and intellectual initiative in the administration of the struggle and the command of its historical processes, which will really mean that a movement into a qualitatively new era characterized by awakening and positive significations.

Being a conflict between two visions does not rule out the possibility of interlacing, because the historical process through out the era is interlaced, including interactions and transformations which remain tightly attracted to the criteria and standard of the main confrontation against the occupation.

Thus, the process should not forcibly go beyond its realistic and historical conditions. Otherwise, it will become something similar to an internal socio-political massacre. That is why we insist that it should be understood as a historical process, which should be managed and directed by the democratic forces, on the basis of the role and function which govern the option of the national democratic alternative, nationally and socially.

Paralleled with the democratic alternative, P.F.L.P. should always take the initiative and play a pioneering role in creating a framework for the democratic forces within an accumulative context to crystallize the democratic pole, as a carrier of the national democratic alternative in the historical as well as the strategic sense.

Eighthly: The Political Islamic Forces

In the document of the First National Conference the P.F.L.P. has clarified the features of its position in respect of the political Islamic forces. Such a vision is still preserving its correctness, because the political Islamic forces constitute a natural component of the Palestinian national movement, regardless of any other peculiarity they have.

The role and activity of these forces have been growing ever since the grand Intifada in Palestine late 1987; also their role and political influence in the struggle have been growing among the Palestinian people.

What the P.F.L.P. really wants to emphasize in this respect is that it views these forces as one of the circles of national action and interaction on the basis of unity and conflict, the law that must regulate the relations among the national forces of the Palestinian people. This should mean unity as regards the position and programs responding to the aims of national struggle and strengthens the unity on the basis of the national program. The conflict here is governed by practice and democratic values, so that it might be possible to regulate the equations of the more extensive struggle against the occupation, and the programs to wipe out the national Palestinian problem.

Here it is impermissible to put a sign of equality between the political Islamic forces-: the forces, parties and organisations with their own positions and definite performances, and Islam as a religion, doctrine and intellectual civilization space of the Palestinian people and the Arab nation.

Within this meaning we represent a part of this space where the Islamic culture and heritage have become an organic component of our cultural peculiarities. We are required to deal with the controversies related to this culture for the purpose of using as a firm ground to stand on, to develop and manipulate in our national struggle and cultural development.

The relations with the political Islamic forces are dynamic and dialectical according to the contradictions with socio-political situation. However, the characteristic of these relations in this stage is that there are intersections at the highest point of the political levels because together with the political Islamic forces we are in the opposition of and confrontation to the American-Israeli settlement programs which aim at devastating the constants and rights of the Palestinian people, besides some minor differences and distinctions as regards position and vision.

At the social level, however, differences are more common, either at the level of understanding democracy as values, criteria, mechanisms and practices to build the social institutions, or in respect of major social problems such as freedom of women, belief, expression, jurisprudence, cultural innovation and the problems of social and economic justice of various manifestations.

In the light of what has been said, the relations with Islamic forces are based on mutual respect, mobilization of forces and capacities to face the main contradiction, namely, the confrontation with the enemy and the strata allying with it, on one hand, and the democratic struggle as regards the social and cultural contradictions, and the consequent programs, practices and values, on the other.

These facts demand that dialogue with these forces be enhanced continuously, that relations be pushed forward toward national coalition if possible so that it might not remain subject to arbitrariness, improvisation and reactions. This bestows upon the relations a practical, political and long-term nature, and saves it being influenced by hegemony, narrow-minded factional manipulation. Such a relation is consistent with the national interests and responds to the challenges and the problems of the stage.

These realization and vision are not contradictory to the P.F.L.P’s option to establish a national democratic alternative and to strengthen the democratic forces as a strategic option in the national and social struggle.

It is the contrary, because clarity and openness in the relations with the different forces in the Palestinian arena including the political Islamic forces are among the continuous requirements according to which the democratic forces should behave, and creatively respond to the problem and controversies. Otherwise coalition policies will be deprived of their elements of success and influence.

Conclusion

This document, which is a part of comprehensive reports presented to the Sixth National Conference and the grass root conferences prior to that, reflects clearly the P.F.L.P. reading of the Palestinian political situation, without ignoring the significations and meanings of the situation at both the Arab and international levels, which include very important and valuable facts, covered by documents issued by P.F.L.P. and its central bodies in time. (at the time the event happened).

P.F.L.P. does not view this report as a traditional political one, but rather a deep political vision which clarifies the features of the crisis and how to get out of it. All this is conditioned by a tight relation between theory and practice.