Osama Hamdan to Al Jazeera Net: It is not possible to defeat a people who have stood steadfastly for 75 years in the face of occupation (Al Jazeera)
Beirut -
In an exclusive interview with Al Jazeera Net, Hamas leader Osama Hamdan said that Israel only wants to exchange prisoners, while the resistance wants to stop the aggression once and for all, withdraw from Gaza, bring in aid, rebuild and return the displaced to their homes, and that the prisoner exchange process comes within this context. .
Hamdan, who follows the details of the indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israel through mediating countries, led by Qatar and Egypt, revealed that until now, the negotiations are still taking place within the general framework.
He explained to Al Jazeera Net that there is no detailed discussion of names or even numbers, while the focus is on a general framework that is discussed until an agreement is reached on it.
He stressed that the negotiations are not required to implement what Israel wants, but rather to achieve an end to the Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people.
The Hamas leader said that US President Joe Biden is not a mediator, but rather a partner in the aggression and may have bet on the Israelis to eliminate the resistance, “but he failed.”
Hamdan also praised Hezbollah's resistance in southern Lebanon, stressing that the occupation is incapable of launching a widespread aggression against Lebanon.
Below is the full text of the interview:
The most prominent question today: Where have the negotiations reached regarding the exchange deal and truce with the Israeli occupation?
Talking about the issue of the exchange deal now is taking things in an inaccurate direction. For us, the talk is centered around stopping the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip, withdrawing Israeli forces, ending military operations and allowing the displaced to return to their homes, bringing in aid and rebuilding Gaza. The issue of prisoner exchange comes in this context and not It is the basic process.
Until this moment, the Israelis are still obstructing the negotiation process and trying to gain more time, and their philosophy throughout this path is to ensure the continuation of the aggression, and not stop it on the Gaza Strip.
What do the scenes of these negotiations reveal?
What are the files that constitute the node in reaching the deal?
Can it be overcome soon?
The basic complex is that Israel does not want to stop the aggression, but rather wants to be able to continue it at any time, and Israel is focusing in this direction.
As for us, we cannot and our people cannot accept the continuation of the Israeli aggression. Therefore, if Israel does not accept to stop the aggression, I do not think that there is a serious prospect of success in these negotiations.
Here comes the role of the mediators. The negotiation is not required to implement what Israel wants, but rather to end the Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people, allow the entry of relief to the Palestinians, end the siege, and launch the process of rebuilding the Gaza Strip. This is what is required and this is the normal situation that should occur. He is.
US President Joe Biden said that it is possible to reach a ceasefire in Gaza early next week. How realistic does this date seem?
Can the deal be completed in the coming days?
There is a question that sometimes arises about Biden’s ability to focus, but I think that this statement in itself is an attempt by the American administration to put pressure on the Palestinian side by saying that things are about to get close, so that it appears that the Palestinian side is the one obstructing, and this means that Biden is not a mediator, but rather a mediator. A partner in the aggression, and he is also a partner in trying to pressure the Israelis.
I believe that stopping the aggression does not need Monday or the following day, and if Biden decides publicly and through practice to stop supplying the Zionist entity with weapons, stop financing this war, and stop providing political cover for the Zionist entity to continue its aggression, the aggression will stop directly.
But the aggression continues because all these issues exist, and Biden speaks in a way of political hypocrisy in an attempt to serve his deteriorating electoral reality, but in practice he still stands by the occupation in all its aggression. In fact, he is a partner in this aggression.
How do you read the change in the American position, which moved from the goal of eliminating Hamas to moving at a rapid pace to achieve a deal and ceasefire in Gaza, and what has changed?
The change that occurred is that the Americans discovered that the Israelis were unable to achieve the goals of the aggression, and that the entire Israeli operation launched against the Gaza Strip left behind destruction and a crime of genocide, but it did not end the resistance in the Gaza Strip, and it will not end it, whether in Gaza or in Palestine.
The Palestinian people have been resistant for 75 years. At every stage, the Israeli says that he wants to eliminate the resistance, and that he is close to eliminating the resistance. He discovers that he has failed, and that the resistance is increasing and its base is expanding.
I believe that the American may have bet on the Israeli that he might succeed in eliminating the resistance, and today the American is discovering that the idea of eliminating the resistance is not achievable, because the resistance is not a specific group within the Palestinian people. The resistance is the entire Palestinian people, and that the anomaly and discordance of the Palestinian people is Which comes out of the circle of resistance and leaves it, but everyone who remains in the circle of resistance in practice is the true expression of the Palestinian people.
It is not possible to defeat a people who have endured 75 years in the face of occupation, and who still cling to their rights despite the killing, deportation, displacement and asylum, and who still see Palestine as their homeland, and that their cause is to liberate Palestine.
There is a leak of information saying that Hamas implicitly agreed not to rule the Gaza Strip after the war, and requested that aid be sent directly to the Palestinian people. Are these leaks accurate?
Here there are 3 points:
The first point relates to sending aid to the Palestinian people, and the movement’s policy has always been that whoever wants to provide aid to the Palestinian people should provide it directly.
We do what we can to support the Palestinian people, but everyone is called to provide assistance to the Palestinian people, and we do not consider ourselves concerned with control or hegemony in the issue of supporting the Palestinian people. This is a right and a duty that should be done.
The second point relates to the governance framework, not in Gaza, but rather to leadership at the Palestinian national level. We have always said that in the leadership of the Palestinian people there is a national program and decision, a popular decision, and the program must respect the will of the Palestinian people, and for that to be effective the people must elect them. The Palestinian leadership.
Therefore, Hamas never had a problem with whether or not it was in leadership. The problem or issue was always that the Palestinian people must choose and elect their leadership.
If I want to return to the question (the third point), we did not make a commitment to this or that. We said clearly that we support the choice of the Palestinian people, and therefore we discussed and are discussing with the Palestinian factions and presented an idea to them, and many of them responded to it and we hope that everyone will respond to it, which is that it should be There is a government that is formed by decision of the factions and with their authority, and its mission is to work for the relief of Gaza, rebuild it, and defend Jerusalem. Its second basic mission is also to arrange general Palestinian elections, in which the Palestinian people elect their representatives in the National Council, the Legislative Council, and in the Palestinian presidency.
Regarding the release of prisoners with high sentences, the occupation stipulated that they be deported outside Palestine. Can this condition be discussed or accepted by Hamas?
Are there exceptions placed by the occupation on certain names?
Until now, we are still talking in the general framework. There has been no detailed discussion about names or even numbers. There is a general framework that is being discussed until an agreement is reached on it, then we can move on to the details.
Therefore, the issue of deportation, names, and all these issues is too early to talk about now.
What the Israelis, perhaps the Americans, or some parties are spreading is an attempt to impose a mental image, as if the issue is only the issue of prisoners, while we affirm as a movement that the main issue is stopping the aggression, providing relief to the Palestinian people, returning the displaced to their homes, and rebuilding Gaza, and exchange is part of this and not all of it. The process we seek to achieve.
The occupation described Hamas's demands as unrealistic. What demands does the occupation refuse to respond to?
To what extent is the movement prepared to negotiate and respond to Israeli intransigence?
If we come to reality, it is for the occupation to end, for Israel to disappear, and for the Palestinian people to regain their land and homeland. What is not reality is what the occupation wants, which is to remain in place and free to attack the Palestinian people, and to remain able to kill the Palestinians and expel them from their homes at any time and in any way. He wanted.
In these negotiations, the Israelis want to continue the aggression, and they also want to recover the prisoners of war from their soldiers held by the resistance. The realistic issue that we have raised is stopping the aggression, which will lead to the completion of the prisoner exchange, the introduction of aid, and the reconstruction of Gaza.
I believe that what Hamas presented was very realistic and logical, but the Israeli, who enjoys a partnership from the Americans in his aggression, believes that this partnership can serve the continuation of the aggression.
Do you think that the occupation is serious about carrying out a military operation in Rafah in light of the density of displaced people in the region, despite the warnings of the United States, the West, and some Arab countries?
Or is this out of pressure on the resistance?
The Israelis have not hidden for a moment since the start of the aggression that it is comprehensive, and all the statements of the leaders of the Zionist entity, starting from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu all the way to the Minister of War and the army commanders, talk about that, and what we are doing today in the negotiations is trying to prevent the aggression against Rafah.
The Israelis want this aggression and are preparing for it, and we are trying to precede this aggression by reaching a ceasefire agreement, but the Israeli intention is clear and declared, and our intention is also clear and declared, that we want to stop this aggression.
As for Rafah, it is full of displaced people, and the Israelis did not care about the killing or destruction.
Until now, we are talking about about 120 thousand martyrs, missing persons and wounded. If the Israelis had cared about civilians, we might have found that the picture was different.
In what context does the resignation of the Shtayyeh government come?
How do you expect the composition and program of the next government?
I believe that this resignation may have come at an inappropriate time, because it came in light of talk about a renewed authority, and I hope that this is not in response to American demands, while I stress that the Palestinian demand is to form a government agreed upon by the Palestinian factions, and whose mission will be to deal with Gaza relief and reconstruction. Preparing for the general Palestinian national elections.
What do you expect from the meeting of the Palestinian factions in Moscow, and what is the validity of discussing the formation of a unity government?
Are the current conditions prepared to achieve this goal?
Talking about the Moscow meeting must pay attention to two issues:
First, we do not want to raise hopes too much about the possible outcomes of this meeting, as it is like all Palestinian national meetings, if no goal is achieved, this does not mean that it is the end.
Secondly, in our opinion, this meeting should be discussed realistically, meaning that it should focus on the current Palestinian reality that there is Israeli aggression against Gaza, the West Bank, and Jerusalem.
In light of the Israeli aggression on Gaza, which is the clearest picture, we must not forget that the Israelis have assassinated nearly 400 Palestinian resistance fighters and persecutors during these five months in the West Bank, and there are also a number of martyrs, perhaps close to half of this number, and there are also thousands of prisoners. The Palestinians may have exceeded 6,000 prisoners.
Meaning that the aggression in the West Bank is ongoing, perhaps not in the form we see in Gaza, but it is also an aggression that includes the entire West Bank, including areas classified as “A” in which the Palestinian National Authority and its security services control, and Jerusalem is also witnessing an ongoing aggression.
This meeting is required to focus on ending the Israeli aggression.
In this sense, any arrangements based on this idea are headed in the right direction.
Any discussion or dialogue in other directions, I believe, will be an expression of a lack of sense of responsibility towards the people and the Palestinian cause.
What are the real goals behind some countries suspending their financial aid to UNRWA?
It is no secret that there has been an American-Israeli program, for years, aimed at liquidating UNRWA as a legal witness to the refugee issue.
Now, the Americans believe, in agreement with the Israelis, that it is a good and favorable opportunity to close this file and end UNRWA, by liquidating its financial situation.
Unfortunately, there are countries - without any logic - that responded to American pressures. It is understood that the Americans are fighting UNRWA, but for many countries to respond to American pressures and conditions (this) confirms that the path that America and Israel want is to liquidate UNRWA as part of the Palestinian refugee process.
In any case, I believe that if the Americans want to liquidate UNRWA, what is required nationally is that there be forms and patterns of Palestinian national action on the level of the refugee issue, and that it preserve this issue and perhaps strengthen efforts in this regard, in a better way than it was.
Where is the battle on the northern front with Hezbollah going, especially after the recent escalation in the bombing of Baalbek?
I believe that the northern Palestinian front and the southern Lebanese front played an important role in supporting and assisting the resistance, and Hezbollah provided martyrs, sacrifices, and wounded, which confirms the importance of this front, and the danger of the Zionist entity at the same time, to Lebanon and not to the resistance alone.
I believe that the Israeli was frank that he wanted to continue the aggression against Lebanon, but at the same time, he was unable to do so. The exhaustion that the occupation army is suffering from, which drives it to request a temporary truce in Gaza, clearly means that it is unable to launch a broad aggression against Lebanon, and it is fully aware The results will be disastrous for him and for the Zionist entity.
In any case, everyone must understand that the resistance - whether in Palestine or Lebanon - does not invite war. It is a natural reaction to the occupation. If the occupation is removed, the matter will end. Therefore, people must not stop when asking what the resistance will do. Rather, everyone must stop. When the most important question is how to end the occupation?
Because that is what will bring reassurance and stability to the region.
How do you see the impact of the Ansar Allah group in Yemen opening a front in the Red Sea on the war in Gaza, in light of the American mobilization and some European countries to confront Houthi operations in one of the most important water straits?
I believe that what the brothers in Yemen, in (the Ansar Allah group), did, was an influential and important effort in the confrontation with the Zionist entity, as they presented a clear title in this battle, which is that there is a Zionist siege on Gaza that must stop, otherwise the ships will not be allowed Which is heading to the Zionist entity in transit.
The American administration attempted to exaggerate the issue in the context of incitement against Yemen and “Ansar Allah,” and I believe it failed in that, because it only intervened in the battle of aggression with Britain only.
What the brothers in the “Ansar Allah group” do is important, and if it were not for its influence and importance, we would not have witnessed an American reaction such as the aggression targeting civilians in Yemen. The bombing of Sana’a or Hodeidah as densely populated cities expresses the same Israeli mentality in the aggression against civilians in Gaza to put pressure on the leadership. Political.
How do you read the Israeli War Council’s cancellation of Ben Gvir’s decision to restrict Palestinians’ access to Al-Aqsa Mosque during Ramadan?
I believe that there is an agreement within the occupation government to get rid of the Palestinian people, but the disagreement lies in the mechanisms and progression of that and the arrangements. There is a team in the government that believes that provoking the Palestinians in the territories occupied in 1948 may not serve the entire project, so it is trying to postpone it, had it not been for the occupation’s realization that this It will cause problems if he cancels this decision.
If the Palestinians move in defense of their rights, they constitute a real state of pressure on the occupation, and are capable of achieving an achievement in confronting it, no matter how loud the voices say that there is no point in resistance, confrontation, or defending rights. What achieves national demands and goals is for the occupation to realize that the price Its survival is expensive, and very expensive, with all possible forms of resistance.
What is your message today to the Palestinian people in Gaza?
The most important message is that the Palestinian people in Gaza have performed - I do not say their role - but rather the greatest form of steadfastness and sacrifice possible in Palestinian national history and in the history of the issue, and our responsibility, and what we are working on, is to stop the aggression, end the suffering, and stabilize our people, through urgent relief, the return of the displaced, and reconstruction. Gaza strip.
If the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip does not stop, the resistance will remain committed to confronting this aggression until this cessation is fully achieved, and the Palestinian people can live their lives away from the direct daily threat from the Israeli occupation forces.
Source: Al Jazeera