Speech Announcing Resignation from the Palestinian Legislative Council
(September 6, 2003)
Peace be upon you,
I did not ask for a secret or confidential session, I asked for a closed
meeting to present the PLC with matters that I do not want to reach
to the media although I am sure that they will reach the media with
all details while we keep hearing every hour about official and unofficial
spokespersons launching statements without their names mentioned and
they request that their names are not to be mentioned.
At first, I extend my apologies to the PLC for the insult launched
to it because of my visit which led to the breaking of glass and to
attacking some members of the cabinet and the acts of riots that were
performed by some and caused other things, since my presence here caused
all this, I extend my apologies.
It is very regrettable to see that those who performed those acts did
them as part of incitement and pushed to do such attacks against us
in our capacity as a government - the government of Abu Mazen - and
in our capacity as normal people and unfortunately, they carried slogans
that talk about betrayal and collaboration and connection with the foreigner
and other slogans that they launched and incited for, but there were
slogans and chanting saying: Where are the prisoners? Why does the Wall
continue? Why settlements continue? And why and why as if the 100-day
old government is the party that brought all calamities to the Palestinian
people; they were instigating and many talked about the refugees and
the right of return and other slogans which are lies and fabrications
and aggression.
In addition to all this, the demonstrations were nothing but a call
for bloodshed and luckily we asked from the police not to interfere
because if they did, God only knows what would have happened; I really
would have preferred to be treated as ordinary guests to the PLC and
to be offered some dignity and protection.
Many talked about the loss of Palestinian constants; did this government
lose the Palestinian constants? Did it lose the state, the right of
return, Jerusalem, the settlements? Did it give up the rights and constants?
All these are illusions in the minds of those who launch such accusations.
There is also an issue that we must end for the last time which is
that we came to power with American-Israeli desire and will, such an
idea is also expressed by some of the PLC members. It seems that everybody
forgot that I was commissioned by the PLO Executive Committee unanimously
and by Fatah Central Committee unanimously and I was commisioend by
the Central Council unanimously and 51 votes of your respectful council
voted for me, so who is the American? Who are the Americans who brought
us to this government? Then they say: This government has no saying
even if it wants to resign because it is connected with the Americans.
This is shameful; this is the least one can say.
I presented to you a report on the achievements of this government
and I requested from my brothers the ministers to present their achievements.
There was no room to make all the achievements possible despite all
obstacles and despite the difficulties and despite all insults, I believe
they were humble achievements; I am not saying they are major achievements
but humble; this is what we could achieve.
They say in the media that either we take everything or we want nothing;
these are lies; we do not want anything beyond what you commissioned
us to perform and what was commissioned to us by the political leadership
nothing more.
Some look at this government as the scapegoat and want to put all the
blame on it. We will not be scapegoat to anyone and we will not allow
anyone to blame his mistakes or his aspirations or dreams on us; we
wont be scapegoat for anyone.
My relation with brother Abu Ammar is a historical one; this is not
the first time that we disagree and I hope it will be the last time,
but I don’t hate him and he doesn’t hate me. I do not know
if he hates me but I do not hate him, we lived together for 40 years
eating, drinking, struggling, bearing, and living with each other; we
are human beings and we are not copies of each other and we will never
be, he has his own opinions and positions that I respect and he has
own decisions that I respect but I am not a copy of him; therefore,
I know the limits of the relationship between me and him but it is not
a personal relationship at all; if we disagree, it is not regarding
a personal matter and the same applies when we agree on a matter; it
is never personal.
I am not the type who likes to have a certain circles of people around
me and I have never been a person who would cause or call for any split
or grouping; I was the first to fight the signs of split until this
very day and I am the sole person who still fight the split that took
place in 1982. I am part of the legitimacy. I am one of the founders
of this legitimacy and I cannot go astray and I cause make any split
and I will never stand against the legitimacy that Yasser Arafat represents.
If we disagree, all I do is to leave alone and if you do not know this,
I hope that you know it now.
Regarding the council, it has and owns its own decision; there are
18 persons who demanded to withdraw the vote of confidence from this
government; this is up to the council to decide and I respect and take
pride in this institution.
There are many things being said and not rumors but statements and
stories told deliberately and with determination; they say I took over
the Palestinian negotiations and that I monopolize them; these are lies,
all lies. The party in charge of the negotiations is the PLO from the
start until now. The PLO negotiates and decided and makes agreements
regardless of the levels. no one in the cabinet or the authority or
any other party can negotiate on behalf of the PLO. this is the business
of the PLO; we have been defending this since Oslo until now.
When I went to sign the agreement, I went because our Foreign Minister
and the Head of the PLO Political Department refused to go and refused
to accept and did not recognize Oslo. He was the person supposed to
sign because he is the Head of the Political Department and he is the
Foreign Minister but he refused and he stayed away and sat far refusing
the agreements from the start and said that the agreements do not match
with his ideas. I do not want to say more than this.
When we formed the government, I handed the negotiations department
to Brother Saeb Erekat and he became the head of the negotiations department
after me since I was the Secretary of the PLO Executive Committee. He
assumed the post and became an observer member in the Executive Committee
in order to separate between the negotiations and the authority because
the authority does not negotiate.. members in the authority can be members
in the negotiations committee but there is a higher committee responsible
for the start and end of negotiations and there is an executive committee
which decides with the decision of all its members.
All matters going on in the negotiations are done upon orders from
Yasser Arafat. no single word or letter or issue raised or agreed upon
unless there is approval from him; therefore, the negotiations is not
our affair and is not the affair of the government; it is the affair
of the PLO that draws up the policies while the negotiations committee
executes those policies.
Some say that we exclude the PLO and that we want to destroy it and
that we want to surpass it. This is ridiculous and the proof is that
the PLO Executive Committee meets with full quorum and over and above
here in the homeland and the Central Council convenes here with full
quorum inside the homeland and the PNC met in 1996 with its quorum -
more than two thirds - also in the homeland. Therefore, the PLO is here
in the homeland and one or two persons absent does not really matter
that much and does not really mean that this might strike the legitimacy
of the PLO. No, the PLO exists here and the proof is that since the
authority entered here, the PLO convenes on a regular basis and some
times irregularly in the homeland. The PLO exists and assumes its responsibilities
and when Abu Ammar decided to form a new government and a new PM, he
summoned the Central Council and the Central Council came here and gave
its position and viewpoint away from the pressure and will of the Americans.
There is a problem that we face based on this, since we entered the
homeland, who represents us? Is it the Planning Minister then or is
it the Foreign Minister brother Abul Lutof (Farouq Qaddumi) and the
matter was settled in one time in 1996 when it was said: the Palestinian
delegation is headed by Abu Ammar and the delegation of the Presidency
consists of Abul Lutof, Abu Mazen, Yasser Abed Rabbo and Suleiman Najjab
and others, and the delegation of the Foreign Affairs is Nabil Shaath;
after that the matter was left unsettled and embarrassing and the most
embarrassed was Abu Ammar because the complaints were coming to him
from all the people; they told him: We have at the official meeting
table two foreign ministers and we have two badges (identification cards)
and two seats and two cars and two suites are required because we have
more than one head of the delegation; in addition to that, we have two
contradicting political speeches; so who represents the PLO? Who speaks
on your behalf? Who represents your politics? Abu Ammar was always complaining
and saying: This is a scandal.. this is a scandal; how can we handle
this situation? Finally, we reached to a point where the matter has
to be dealt with in its proper place since the PLO Executive Committee
is the party that gave the decision and it is the party that must decide
on this matter because this is dualism in speech and position and seat
and this cannot go on like this.
Abu Ammar called for the convening of the PLO Executive Committee more
than one year ago and presented the matter to it and the following proposals
were made: either brother Abul Lutof is Foreign Minister or Nabil Shaath
a state minister or to have Farouq Qaddumi as Foreign Minister or Nabil
Shaath as Foreign Minister or to have them share the responsibilities.
After a long discussion, it was agreed to divide the jurisdictions between
them and the members started to discuss the jurisdictions and it was
said: regarding the Arab League Council and its institutions, Nabil
Shaath will represent us there and regarding all matters dealing with
Europe. As for Qaddumi, he will represent us at the Islamic Conference
and the Non-Aligned Countries Conference and the UN and the African
Summit, meaning that that duties were restricted between the two and
the letter was written to be informed to Abul Lutof and to settle the
matter which Abu Ammar used to described as shameful and a scandal.
It was also said in the session, and all members who were present in
that session are still alive, to brother Yasser Abed Rabbo: Yasser go
and inform Abul Lutof about this letter; I don’t know if brother
Yasser did go and informed him the message.
When I formed the government, It was said: what is the post of Nabil
Shaath? I set the following position: Minister for Foreign Affairs.
Nabil Shaath went to Abu Ammar who said: This is wrong.. it should be
Foreign Minister why the "Affairs"? Nabil came back to me
and said that Abu Ammar wants that I take the post of Foreign Minister;
I said then: Why not.. Foreign Minister or Minister for Foreign Affairs,
it is all the same. In the Central Committee meeting as far as I remember,
they said: No, Minister for Foreign Affairs. Abu Ammar said: Minister
for Foreign Affairs. I said: I do not mind. I am responsible for every
word I say here and you can talk to me about these things even after
10 years.
Therefore, it came in the list of the cabinet as Minister for Foreign
Affairs, then I want to Abu Ammar and I asked him: Did you inform Abul
Lutof about this? And I repeated the question once again and he said:
Yes. I told him: then, I will inform the Arab League that Nabil Shaath
represents and I sent a letter to this effect and the storm came then
from Tunis and other places. Why this? We said that according to the
decision of the terms of reference which is the PLO Executive Committee
and Abu Ammar informed me that he conveyed the message to those concerned
and now we had to implement it. I met with Amro Musa and he told me:
I am in a puzzle; who is the representative? I told him the whole story,
but, and Amro Musa is still alive, if you receive anything different
in writing from Abu Ammar, he is the President of the Authority and
his decision is effective, and till now the problem still exists because
it is not known who is following up the Foreign Ministry and the sole
victim of all this is our diplomacy and our ambassadors and embassies
abroad since we cannot do anything and our brother Abul Lutof is doing
nothing about it and our brother Abu Ammar is doing nothing since he
is the person in charge of the embassies and he is doing nothing and
Nabil Shaath is doing nothing and we have 89 embassies spread all over
the world while Jordan has only 45 embassies.
Recently, bother Abul Lutof announced that he formed his delegation
consisting of several members, including Nabil Shaath, the state minister
for Foreign Affairs. This issue affects the whole Palestinian diplomacy
and has not been solved yet and this is exactly what happened.
Financial issues:
We tried to take some financial decisions, some of
the decisions were implemented, and other decisions were not implemented.
Some passed peacefully and easily and others with many obstacles; we
said the law of retirement or the retirement decision must be implemented
and a storm hit us.. "has the phase of national liberation ended?"
"America wants to get rid of the PLO" although in all countries
there are retirement laws. The decision might be incomplete and might
need amendment but it does not that we get insulted just because we
want to implement it, such as saying, "America hopes to get rid
of the strugglers"!! in all countries, there is the system of retirement,
till when we will have the grandfather, his son, and his grandson in
the ministry at the same time while we have 18,000 graduates and despite
this nothing changes because we cant be traitors and we cant get rid
of the strugglers. The matter was presented to the Executive Committee
and I do not know what the Executive Committee has to do with this matter,
but it is the higher command and it said: this decision will be halted.
By the way, there is not only the Executive Committee but there is also
the unified Palestinian leadership and with all frankness, I do not
object against the formula but on the implementation. This is not a
unified Palestinian leadership and I do not want to get into details
of who attend and who represent and who sit on the table to decide the
destiny of the Palestinian people.
Before that, we issued a decision on the cuts which used to be deducted
from the salaries of the employees and which reached to 15% in some
cases. Personally, I do not know where those deductions go. Despite
this, and this is not important, what is important is that this action
harmed the employees who reached 150,000 and some financial capabilities
were provided so that those deductions would stop but some protested
and said: You are striking the Intifada; what is the relation between
the Intifada and the deductions? Why do we always look for a "national
reason" to strike any procedure and to strike against any decision?
Despite this, the decision was passed, in addition to the monopolies
and petroleum and companies and tobacco and others. Why those monopolies?
And for whose interests? When they were canceled, people felt relief,
especially in the field of petroleum which was cheated upon an official
decision, and the result was like I said in my report, the difference
was vast between the income in May and in July, meaning between the
last month the commission was there and the first month in which the
Finance Ministry assumed control over the finances of this commission.
The difference reached 6 million US dollars per month, which meant $72
million per year which were stolen.
Civil servants get their salaries from the banks and the Finance Ministry
proposed that salaries for all are received through the banks for all
civil and military personnel, they launched against us a vicious attack:
"How can we reveal the names of thesecurity men to the banks";
in fact, all names of security men were handed to the Israeli side upon
an official order and was handed by brother Saeb Erekat. When we entered
the homeland, every person who entered, whether civilian or military,
was to be known, in addition to the rifle and the bullets; all were
registered. The Israelis and Americans have all information. Now, when
we ask to place the salaries in banks, they say, "No it is prohibited;
this is not a national action". The Police, the preventive security,
and the intelligence in the Interior Ministry accepted to have the salaries
of their men in banks while the rest of the security services remained
getting the salaries in the bag, why? All we wanted was to organize
this so that every person will receive his salary with respect from
the bank and to have a checque book and an account in the bank in order
to give them a chance to deal with banks and get loans, but the bag!!
One of them told me: The US navy receives by the bag! Unfortunately,
this is a silly excuse and a cover up for theft. Till now the issue
has not been solved. Why? The result is that those who benefit move
here and two demonstrations were organized against the Finance Ministry
and the Ministry is broken into and its contents and properties stolen
in Gaza; I don’t want to say where they came from or who pushed
them to such an action. If they do not like a decision, they go armed
to prevent the decision by force. Salam Fayyad was very sad when he
was attacked because they said two words. He said: They could have used
any term, but to say that I am a spy or traitor, I would have accepted
other accusations but I am no spy or traitor or collaborator.
The Basic Law:
I do not want to explain to you the Basic Law since
you set up this law and I am fully committed to it in text and spirit
and if disagreements took place, I want the council to solve them. I
have said this to you on more than one occasion; I want you to tell
me where are we? What do we have and is required from us? What are our
jurisdictions and what are not our jurisdictions? We want to know. But
every day I get a decision from Abu Ammar and I really don’t know;
the embassies are not our jurisdictions, so what is the job of the Foreign
Minister? We don’t know, and the governors are not part of our
jurisdictions, then what is the job of the Ministry of Interior? The
airport is not our jurisdiction; the seaport belongs to the PLO and
the PECDAR to the PLO and the Diwan of Personnel belongs to the PLO;
this means that any minister has no authority over any employee who
comes or leaves or who is appointed or who is promoted; he has no right
to say anything in this; everything comes from the presidency; I don’t
know of any country where ministries and ministers are not responsible
for their employees; I know that the minister can have jurisdictions
less than an undersecretary or assistant undersecretary who cannot appoint
or replace unless there is a decision but to have general directors
“B” and “C” appointed in his ministry from outside
the jurisdictions of his ministry?? How and why??
In the last meeting of the Cabinet, a decision was taken to appoint
Sakher Bseiso instead of Abu Sharia; it is a decision regardless whether
it is correct or wrong, but to stop the implementation of the decision
by force? The Brigades of Abu Sharia cannot barge in and occupy and
stop and strike and order that Abu Sharia be seated in the Diwan by
force.. how can this happen? I assume that the decision is incorrect
but this is not the way to handle matters. When we took the decision,
I sent a delegation of three persons to the President consisting of
Yasser Abed Rabbo, Azzam al-Ahmad and Nabil Amro and I sent him a letter
(Brother President, we took decisions first in the Diwan of Personnel
and second on appointing State Minister Abdul Fattah Hamayel as Minister
of Youth and Sports and we seek your blessing) he wrote to us: this
is none of your business; this is the business of the PLO and a decision
from the President; there are even incitement against Hamayel and he
was prevented from performing his duties; normally he was not authorized
to enter the ministry before he gets the confidence of the PLC or at
least this is how I understand it.
The TV and Information
Minister:
I understand that the TV belongs to the government
and I understand that I am the PM and I also understand that the first
media side to cover our news and conferences and meetings are our media
apparatuses.. when I met Colin Powell, the Palestinian TV came and got
exclusive rights to transmit the press conference .. all news agencies
and TV Channels broadcast it except our TV, and days pass by, the speech
that I delivered in front of you was transmitted live by 3 or more TV
stations but not our TV. I say the TV stations transmitted it live and
I asked the Minister of Information – and I seldom watch or follow
up mass media, and he said that there are instructions from “me”
(and he means the President) to broadcast and show cartoon films during
the delivering of the speech!!!
Many say that I want to place the security services
under my control and to take them away from the control of brother Abu
Ammar; these are lies and this never happened; I don’t want the
security services under my control and there is a long story behind
this. The Basic Law says: the internal security services are under the
control of the Cabinet or Minister of Interior and I believe that this
is clear.
The roadmap says: all security services are under
the control of the PM, but I didn’t even ask for the unification
of the services; when I was asked, I said the unification of the efforts
of all security services and not unify all security services; thus,
what we demanded was coordination and nothing more between the security
services, and when the Americans used to tell us the unity of the services,
we used to tell them we don’t want this.
Here, I would like to say: It was not me who agreed to the roadmap
and it was not my government which accepted the roadmap, it was accepted
on December 20, 2002, and the first to launch statements was brother
Saeb Erekat in the name of the PNA and the former cabinet on the acceptance
of the roadmap as is and the roadmap talks about the unification of
the security services but we overcome this obstacle; the roadmap talks
about striking and uprooting the factions and we overcome this obstacle
too because we will not fall into this trap; we don’t want a civil
war and we cant unify the services because brother Abu Ammar is placing
under his control three quarters of the security services and refuses
any kind of coordination between them with the rest of the apparatuses.
After this came the meeting of the Palestinian leadership, which I
mentioned and I started to feel there was unprecedented incitement and
the meeting moved into the meeting of the Central Committee and there
I heard all kinds of accusations, the least was that how could the government
accept to keep brother Abu Ammar under siege? We had only two months
of work and Abu Ammar has been under siege for two years and we did
try all international circles and arenas and all institutions and all
figures and we approached everyone unless they are demanding from me
other means; I felt then that the party that I belong to and which gave
me the commissioning is the party that is inciting against me; this
party was also talking about the negotiations and criticize monopolizing
them and that we had no strategy and that there were ministers who were
thieves.
In response to this, I wrote 4 letters; in the first
letter I said for the thousand times that the negotiations are not our
jurisdictions and not my responsibility but the responsibility of the
PLO and that I am a member in the Negotiations Committee because I am
the Secretary of the PLO; the second letter was that the accusations
from the Central Committee, or from some members so that I wont be unfair
with anyone, against the minister, I hope that you bring to me the evidence
and then I will transfer those accused to the attorney general immediately
and I already told you this that any corruption you hear about, please
write to me about it and I will immediately send it to the attorney
general and I believe that I will not retreat on this issue.
The third letter: the Central Committee said: We want
to set up a strategy for you and you have to implement it. I say: place
whatever you want in terms of political and nonpolitical strategy and
I ready. If I can implement it, I will implement this policy and if
I cant, let someone else implement it because this is a decision from
the leadership. Any person who can perform those tasks, let him come
to implement them.
The fourth letter: I submit my resignation from the
Central Committee because this committee, which commissioned me, is
the same party which is stabbing me from the back and I am not accusing
all members of the committee.
The good people of virtue who care for the public interest and unity
and love between us tried to bridge those disagreements and 4 points
were reviewed: the first point is that the negotiations committee consist
of the following names and this was a decision from Abu Ammar; 9 names
and if Abu Ammar wants to reduce the number or increase it, I have no
objection and I never had any objection or veto against anyone to be
in committees decided by brother Abu Ammar; Akram Haniyye wrote the
list and Abu Ammar agreed to the list and it was shown to brother Abu
Ala’ and brother Ghassan Shak’a and brother Saeb Erekat.
The second point was the security council or the security committee
consist of Abu Ammar and Abu Mazen and Mohammed Dahlan and Amin al-Hindi
and Haj Ismail and al-Majaydeh; I have no objection against any of the
names and no objection against the formula.
The third point is that when disagreements arise on the implementation
of the Basic Law, this committee will take the responsibility of solving
the disagreements (referring to the four names mentioned above).
The fourth point is the story of Fatah Central Committee and my resignation
from it and my insistence on the resignation.
I don’t know why each time the issue of the negotiations keeps
being raised. I have never had any objection on the negotiations committee
because it is not my business; it is the business of Abu Ammar and the
PLO, and therefore, it is to my best interest to have separation between
the negotiations committee and the government with its tasks limited
to the running of affairs of the daily life of citizens but does not
exercise politics or negotiations. But, if the need arises to need anyone
with potentials and capacities, whether from the cabinet or from outside
the cabinet, we welcome this because we are in need of all potentials
to be present in this committee and you always objected against the
presence of Abu Ala’ in the negotiations committee. I tell you
that the negotiations need as a necessity to have Abu Ala’ to be
present; you object and others object; this is your right but this is
the negotiations committee as Abu Ammar and I see it. As for the security,
I did not object to any name, regardless of the name, 5 or 6 I don’t
mind. The issue of the Quartet Committee is not a problem. As for the
issue of the Central Committee, I don’t want to return to the Central
Committee and this is a personal decision. I am not attacking anyone
and I don’t see myself better than anyone and I am not trying to
be unfair to anyone. I came to the cabinet upon a commissioning from
the Central Committee and if the Central Committee decides to withdraw
this commissioning, the government will fall. This is correct and a
right, for example, the committee can say: Since you boycott the committee
and since you don’t want it, the committee will end its backing
to you and your government and this is their right and I heard this
from brother Sakher Habash and I respect his opinions and he opposes
me on many matters but I respect his opinion and he doesn’t have
to agree with me on all things.
Days passes and the negotiations committee was formed but not in the
form that was posed and I didn’t object; the security council have
never convened and I sent letters to the Quartet Committee and the Committee
has not responded so far.
Jerusalem incident:
We reached a truce to protect ourselves from a civil
war because the alternative is that the authority has to strike; I don’t
want to strike. We made this truce with all the factions and for the
first time in the history of the Palestinian people and we said this
is the truce and we want to implement it and it was implemented but
Israel kept violating it, just like it did in Nablus and other places.
I maintained my relation with Hamas and Jihad and the rest of the factions,
especially in Gaza, because I used to consider that the relationship
of the government with the factions is not a relationship of a truce,
it is a relation of a Palestinian society with its entire spectrum and
all its social and political doctrines and norms. We want everybody
in the context of this society.. Islamists, atheists or nationalists
or others; we are a society created by God, so we must find a formula
that gathers and unites these people and this is why the meetings continued
and they were not for the sake of the truce, but we used to say: come
brothers let us think how we can live in one society with multi ideas
and approaches and trends; we actually started listening and listening
and we found interaction and response from Hamas and Jihad that we must
find a way and this was the best way for us and is still the best for
any one who wants to come and govern or be in the government; this is
the safest way to protect our unity and protect our people from internal
fighting; and the truce came which was rejected by the Israelis and
the Americans and then it was imposed on them and they were told that
there is no other solution although the roadmap, which we accepted,
it says that the terrorist factions must be struck and uprooted and
we overcome this or we tried to overcome this tragedy in which we could
have put ourselves in if we listened to them.
I was in Gaza in a meeting with Jihad Movement and we started talking
and brother Ziad Abu Amro was with me and we were talking about society
issues; they have societal demands that we must talk about in conclusion
of the previous sessions and we started to talk for about half an hour
or so when the surprise came which was the big operation in Jerusalem.
There was confusion and I called on the cabinet to Gaza and the cabinet
listened to the latest developments and we agreed on 3 points:
First: either this government takes cover from the political leadership
and that it is not a puppet or settlement plantation, according to Maher
Masri.. are we a government or opposition; if this government is the
result of the institutions; let them give it the political covering.
Second: there must be a coordination formula between the security services
so that they can face on the ground if something happens because it
is illogical that the security services do not agree on anything and
I called on the security services to remain alert so that we can protect
the situation and they said: we cant. Third: there must be measures
on the ground.. measures of an authority that affirms its presence on
the ground.
These three points were mere recommendations to the Palestinian leadership
convening in Ramallah where the person who can arrive can convey those
recommendations to the leadership, and a meeting was held and I sat
with some brothers and long discussion took place and we agreed that
we need to give political back up to the government and a statement
was issued by the leadership but this is one of many statements that
are issued and which sometimes mean nothing.
The issue continued and Osama al-Baz came and talked to us and he said
that something has to be done regarding the security services because
there are many commitments and nothing is happening and now how can
we handle the issue of security; the Central Committee convened and
two proposals were presented: the first from Nabil Shaath in person
that brother Abu Ammar appoint brother Nasr Yousef as his deputy in
the national security, and that he can coordinate with the rest of the
services and I believe that this proposal did not get general approval,
so for the second proposal, it was to appoint Yousef Nasr as Interior
Minister to be in charge of the national security and they told him
to go to Abu Mazen and inform him. Minister Nabil Shaath came to me
carrying the two proposals and I answered him with one sentence "both
are good; both proposals are acceptable". He asked: No discussion.
I said yes, no discussion, if they agree to this, this is good, so he
returned to Abu Ammar and called me on the phone after 15 minutes saying
that Abu Ammar refused and said: I don’t want preconditions from
Abu Mazen. I started wondering if I was the person setting preconditions?
I just said one sentence and that both proposals are acceptable. And
the result was that the decision was discussed in the PLO Executive
Committee and in the Central Committee then the proposal was changed
to appoint Nasr Yousef as Minister of Interior only without national
security, and I was not present in those meetings or sessions but I
was told that they did not reach any decision.
Matters started moving where 4 brothers wrote six proposals to end
the problem; they were Akram Haniyye and Nabil Amro and Ahmad Abdul
Rahman and Hakam Bal'awi. As for the six points, they were 1- the negotiations
committee and I asked if this was ever a problem or point of dispute?
2- a reduced security council, we also agreed on this that this is not
my problem or cause and this was not my business; 3- appointing a PM;
4- the administrative issues will not be touched unless in consultation
between the President and the PM and these are issues pertaining to
the Basic Law; 5- monthly joint meetings between the Palestinian leadership
and the government when there is a need for that; 6- my attendance at
the Central Committee and a reconciliation between me and Hani Al-Hasan
because this is one of the problems that must be solved.
Of course, these matters were discussed and everyone talked and expressed
his ideas but no results were reached.
The real problem my brothers is that we face Israeli rejection to any
of the requests that we used to ask and which I explained to you and
which we convinced the Americans about and which were mentioned by John
Wolf and which were simple matters, even the prisoners, had they given
us the convicted prisoners and had they stopped the wall on our land
and lifted the siege.. but they offered nothing and every time they
say they want the government of Abu Mazen; I am not an employee working
for them or for others; if you want this government, help it, and this
is proof that they don’t want this government.
The Americans talk day and night about supporting Abu Mazen and giving
him support; we do not accept or allow; either they help.. but nothing.
It seems my brothers that my style and method of work is not satisfactory
and my plan is not getting the approval, maybe because this is me. I
am not accepted. Israel says he is good and strikes us; Hamas says this
man is honest with us and strikes us; the Palestinian leadership sends
clubs and sticks to be beaten with them at the doors and gates of the
Palestinian legitimacy.. I am not demanding anything; I do not want
anything; the person who says that I want either everything or nothing
is lying; I never said this and I always used to ridicule the person
who would say this; in fact, the person who says this does know nothing.
Unfortunately, the Arab and Palestinian satellite channels contributed
in the misinformation and misleading; I have seen several episodes where
they exploited us and spread poisons against us against ourselves; every
person comes to those channels and starts issuing statements and positions;
they cover hours and hours with advertisements and we publish the dirtiest
laundry at their channels; there is no doubt that the satellite channels
abused our conscience and souls and cause.
Finally, let me tell you a story; the story goes like this.. one day,
Abu Ammar was under the siege and the siege started to get tighter and
tighter and I was asked by Hani al-Hasan to talk to anyone so I spoke
with Minister of Defense then Benjamin Ben Eliezer and told him: what
is happening; I want to go and see him (Abu Ammar), and he said: I will
get back to you. The brothers in the Muqata' used to call me by phone
every half hour wondering and asking about the developments… I
used to answer and tell them to wait and I would say: How would I come
out? I cannot leave my home; Ben Eliezer was late in replying and I
thought to myself that the best thing is to ask to be allowed to go
and see my brothers who live together to hold consultation with them
before going to Abu Ammar. So, I went to the building where the brothers
were staying and I found there 10 persons who were either members of
Central Committee and Revolutionary Council and other brothers.. I said
my brothers "I am asked to go and see Abu Ammar so please advise
me what to say so that you will not then come and say that I went and
came back alone; what do you want me to say?" so I started to hear
and listen to proposals and after a discussion, specific proposals were
set; I was not allowed to go and see Abu Ammar, so I sent the proposals
to him by fax and told him that the brothers suggest the following matters
(1, 2, 3 and so on) and we are waiting for your answer, and in case
I am not allowed to come and see you, we are waiting for your answer
by fax, and the answer came from the Muqata': the slogan of the "Building
of Shame" and it was launched by Hani al-Hasan in person and said
that what happened in the building was a conspiracy to topple Abu Ammar,
so that you will remember only, armed men came and opened fire towards
the home of Nabil Amro since he was the person who announced the proposals
and since he was "one of the conspirers to topple the Palestinian
ruling system"!!! …and history repeats itself…
Today I sent the letter of the resignation of the government to brother
Abu Ammar
Peace be upon you
Sources: JMCC |