POLITICAL ISSUES
(Muslim Occupied Lands)
This book is issued by Hizb �ut- Tahrir Dar ul-Ummah for Printing, publication and distribution
P. O. Box 135190
Beirut � Lebanon
THIS IS A DRAFT COPY
Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Raheem
Introduction
This book covers seven issues of the most important occupied Muslim countries, as it is the case at the end of the first quarter of 1425 Hijri year, about the mid of 2004 CE, ie 1/3/1425 AH � 21/5/2004 Ac. These countries are: Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Cyprus, South of Sudan and Iraq. This is not a historical book about these countries, though it is not free of history. It is not also study of the geography of the mentioned countries, though it includes some of it. It is a reminder to Muslims that their countries are slashed from their sides, rather from their heart and centre. It is a reminder to Muslims that nations compete over them, not because they are few, rather because they were stricken by the wahan, which is love of the dunya and hate for akhirah. Otherwise, they count many. It is a reminder to them that they became underneath the nations, after they were at their head. They became at the margins of the world events after they used to kick off and direct the events. It is a message for them so that they remove away the darkness of the corrupt civilization of the West and its vile culture by the light of the shining and radiant civilization of Islam; for there would be no darkness wherever light exists.
***
Furthermore, this book is a cry sent to the hearing of Muslims that three arrows had caused the loss of their country: The first arrow, which had the greatest portion in this loss, is the treason of the Muslim rulers, beside their loyalty to the infidel imperialists. The second arrow is the silence of Muslims about accounting their rulers, challenging them and changing of them. The last arrow, whose portion in this loss is the least, is the arrow of the open infidel enemy.
***
It is moreover, a call and appeal to Muslims so that they listen to the call of appeal sent by women, old and children, regarding the violation of honour and sanctities and regarding the various atrocities committed in the prisons. It is a call to the blood so that it agitates in the veins, to the hearts so that they become full with rage; thus they become firmly resolved, have far-reaching aims, and their souls yearn to a dunya of honourable life, and an akhirah of everlasting bounty. It is a call to every one that has a heart or gives ear with full reflection so that he endeavours relentlessly to re-establish the Khilafah Rashidah, with keen resolution and strong will until Allah gives him victory or he perishes while working to achieve that. Any one that has such determination will succeed, by Allah�s leave.
It is also a call for appointing the Khaleefah Rashid (guided khaleefah), so that Muslims fight under his leadership, and he protects them. Thus, he would then rescues the land and people before the situation worsens and becomes beyond repair.
***
Finally: It is a loud cry from Muslim occupied lands to those who have heart: O Mu�tassim! O Khaleefah! But Allah is indeed All-Powerful and All Mighty.
THE FALESTEEN
Palestine started as a jewel in Muslims� history since Allah (swt) linked it with His Holy Mosque (in Makkah) with one bond, when He (swt) carried His Messenger (saw) by night from the Holy Mosque to Al-Masjid Al-Aqssaa. Allah (swt) says: �Glorified be He Who carried His servant by night from the Holy Mosque (al-masjid al-haraam) to the Far Distant Place of Worship (al-masjid al-aqssaa) the neighbourhood of which We have blessed. [TMQ 17: 1] Thus, He (swt) made it a blessed land. He (swt) had tightened Muslims� hearts to the capital of Palestine (bayt ul-maqdis) by making it their first qiblah (direction) of
prayer before He directed them to their second qiblah (al-ka�bah al-musharaffah), sixteen months after the hijrah. This took place before Palestine came under the authority of Islam, when it was conquered by the second khaleefah, Omer b. al- Khattab (r.a) on 15 AH. He received it from Safroonius, where Omer gave him his famous pledge (al-�uhdah al-Omeriyyah) that included as one of its statements: (Jews
must not live with them in it, meaning al-Quds), based on the Christians request there.
Palestine was a jewel in Muslims� history, before and after its conquest. It was a centre of power in Muslims� lands; whenever any aggression took place against it, this aggression would be challenged and destroyed, sooner or later. It was the graveyard of the crusaders and tartars, and it will be so as well to the Jews, the enemies of Allah, by His Will. There were decisive battles in Palestine against the crusaders and tartars, namely Hitteen (583AH- 1187AC), and Ayn Jaaloot (658AH- 1260AC). These will also be followed by other decisive battles against Jews, by the Will of Allah, so as to restore Palestine to the land of Islam, pure and complete. The issue of Palestine became internationally active in the modern age at the time of the Ottoman khaleefah, Abdul Hameed. This happened when the Jew political leaders endeavoured, in cooperation with the infidel states at that time, particularly Britain, have a foothold in Palestine. They tried to exploit the financial problem in the Ottoman Khilafah state; so Hertzil, the Jew leader at that time, 1901, offered to pay funds in the Khilafah state budget in return for that. Khaleefah Abdul Hameed rejected the meeting with him, and gave his well-known statement to sadr al-a�zam (his prime minister) so as to pass it to Hertzil as an answer to his offer: (Advise Dr. Hertzil that he does not take serious steps in this regard; for I cannot concede one inch of the land of Palestine�It is not my own property�It is rather the property of the Islamic ummah. My people have struggled for the sake of this land and watered with their blood�Let the Jews keep their millions�But if the Khilafah state was divided one day, then they can take Palestine for no price�However, while I am still alive, it would be easier for me to let the scissors work in my body than to see Palestine torn from the Khilafah state. This is a matter that I will not allow. I cannot
agree to slice our bodies while we are still alive). His expectation, may Allah have mercy on him, had been realized. So, after the destruction of the Khilafah, puppet rulers in Muslim lands helped the Jews to occupy Palestine, even to dominate over lands other than Palestine.
Ambitions of the infidels full of malice against Islam continued since the crusaders occupation of al-quds was terminated and liberated from their filth in 27th Rajab 583AH, 2/10/1187AC. They continued to carry their hatred against Muslims and their lands, particularly Palestine. So, when they entered Palestine in 11/12/1917 in World War I, the English commander of the allies� army, General Allenbe, said: (Now, the
crusader wars came to an end). Thus, he considered the Ottoman Khilafah continuation for the Muslims who defeated the crusaders before eight centuries. And the English-through their conquest of the Khilafah and occupation of Palestine- have brought the crusaders back to Muslims lands; and they thought they will remain there and never be defeated after that.
In the same year, in 2/11/1917, English gave a promise, which they named (Balfour), after the name of their foreign minister at that time. In that promise, Britain pledged to help Jews to occupy Palestine and create a state for them there. By the end of World War I and after the elimination of the Khilafah state, the victorious states formed (the League of Nations), which in turn forced British mandatory authority over Palestine in 1922 so that Britain realizes Balfour promise to Jews. Britain started to take measures that help Jews to immigrate to Palestine from every corner in the world; it started to train them and provide them with weapons. The United Nations organisation was created after World War II, where resolution number 181 was issued by the General Assembly of the UN in 29/10/1947. This resolution divided Palestine between its people and those who aggressed on it. Britain paved the way completely and then decided to hand over most of Palestine to the Jews and to establish a state for them. It generated a play for achieving that; where it created a formal war between the puppet Arab rulers, who were then seven, and the Jews, under the pretext of preventing the Jews from establishing their state. This meant to show at the end of the war that the Jews have defeated the seven Arab armies. Thus they gave to the Jews, stricken with humiliation and wretchedness, a glory of power and bravery, which never suited them. Palestine was rather given as a grant by the retreating agents, so that the Jews can declare after that they resisted a war waged by seven armies. It is the war that they called Independence war. Finally a state for them was declared in 15/5/1948.
The infidel states then accelerated their recognition of this ugly state. The major powers at that time, namely America, Russia, Britain and France competed with each regarding recognition. Later on the infidel, colonialist and influential states in the region, particularly Britain and America competed in drawing plans for the issue of Palestine, which they called later on (the crisis of the Middle East). All of these plans
were laid down to serve the interests of these states through embracing the Jewish state and giving it a weight more than the weight of all other states in the region. The infidel west has achieved many goals
through their embrace of the Jewish state and planting it as a poisonous dagger in the heart of Muslim lands. These are some of these goals:
1) They created an alien body between the Muslims in the region, which hinders their continuity and distances their unity.
2) They preoccupied the region with struggle with Jews and made them forget their original struggle with the infidel west, which destroyed the Khilafah. Before Jews were helped to have a state in Palestine, struggle was between Muslims and the west. After Jews� occupation of Palestine, struggle was focused on this usurping entity, and it diminished with those who created this entity.
3) They got rid of the Jews problems in their own country, because Jews are distinguished for their corruption and perversion wherever they settled down. The American president, Benjamin Franklin, had taken notice of this matter when he gave a word in the foundation conference of the American constitution, in 1789, as advice for the American people. He said: (There is a great danger that threats the United States of America, which is the threat of Jews. Wherever they settled down they degrade the ethical standard and decrease the standard of trading trust� .They suck blood and blackmail wealth� I warn you gentlemen that if you did not drive away the Jews completely, then your children and grandchildren would curse you when you are in your graves..). Thus the infidel west created this cancer body in the Muslim lands. After that, there was a violent international struggle over Palestine, between the states of the infidel west, particularly America, Britain and then Europe. This struggle extended from Palestine to include the whole region. This is because Palestine remained alive in the hearts of Muslims, and a centre of influence in the neighbouring Arabic countries. Rather, struggle expanded to reach the remaining Muslim lands.
After the division resolution of 1947and establishing in 1948 the Jewish entity that occupied Palestine, the international resolutions continued with common criteria in all of them, which is the preservation of the Jewish entity and providing it with all means of power. This is regarding the Jewish side. As regarding the Arabs side, the resolutions came as human solution for the issue of the refugees, where they
have to live, and their relationships with the countries they emigrated to. All of the resolutions set out of these two factors: the Jewish entity is an accomplished fact that cannot be touched; rather, every effort should be done to have Arab rulers recognition in it, and the human rights of Palestinians through solving the refugees issue, their settlement in the remaining part of Palestine or the Arab countries and
their relationships with them.
If the 29/11/1947 resolution of division was the legal basis for the Jewish state, then its acceptance as a member in the United Nations in 28/3/1948 was the international legal authentication of the Jewish state.
Britain, which is known of its wicked political cunning, viewed the necessity of creating a secular and democratic state over all of Palestine, ie in Palestine occupied in 1948 and that which remained of it, namely the West Bank that was annexed to Jordan, and Gaza strip that was under the Egyptian administration. It wanted all of these parts to be one Palestinian state, based on democratic basis, similar to Lebanon. Thus, the authority in whole Palestine would be to the Jews, who would associate with them some Muslim and Christian ministers. This state that would be actually governed by the Jews becomes a member in the Arab
league, and thus becomes accepted by the region. The English considered this solution a guarantor for keeping Jews as effective factor in the region. However, if they were separated in one state for them only, then they will remain viewed by Muslims as enemy, and they will be destroyed as it happened with crusaders, sooner or later. Many of the Jew politicians were convinced of this view and they strived for it. Britain used to pave the way for this solution by concluding peace between Jews and Arab rulers in the region, who were mostly her agents. Then after concluding peace, the issue will be sorted out according to the mentioned plan.
However, the diplomatic representatives of America in the Middle East met together in Istanbul in 1950 under the chairmanship of George Maggie, who was then the foreign minister deputy for the Middle East affairs. After that meeting, America decided to use all of her weight in the region, and to address the hot issues, in separate of Britain and instead of her. These are some of the decisions taken in that meeting: (To encourage the United Nations for implementing the division of Palestine into two states, one is an Arab and the second is Jewish; and solving the issue of refugees). America started the course in this plan by
convincing the Jew politicians that having a Jewish state is better for their survival in Palestine than to be integrated with others and thus disseminated in them, which finally brings Arabs authority in Palestine. However, the political influence of Britain on the first Jew politicians such as Ben Gourion, and the ambition of these Jews to dominate over whole of Palestine did not help America, at the beginning, to proceed effectively in her plan.
In 1959, at the end of Eisenhower administration, America forcefully adopted its plan with some detail. This can be summed in creating an entity for the Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza strip, making al-Quds international and solving the problem of the Palestinian refugees by returning a small part of them to the occupied Palestine under the authority of Israel and giving compensation for their majority beside their settlement outside Palestine. Abdul Nasser, the main American agent in the region was delegated to implement this plan. It was also delegated to the other American agent in Iraq, Addul Karim Qasim who called for
creating the Palestinian republic and arming the people of Palestine to deliver their land. They made contact with the High Palestinian Commission and embraced it. King Sa� ud, who was also an American agent, was charged to make contact with king Hussein and impose pressure on him to proceed in this plan. The media started to call to this plan in a noticeable way. However, king Hussein did not accept the plan and opposed it based on recommendation from the English. America started to exercise pressure on Jordan. The Arab League called then for a meeting in Shtura, in Lebanon, in 1960, where, under great pressure, the Jordanian Prime Minister, Hazza� al-Majali, agreed to the American plan. This means he agreed upon creating a Palestinian entity in the West Bank. However, the agreement of Hazza� al-Majali did not materialize because he was murdered after that. When Kennedy came to power in 1961 , he sent his well-known letters to king Sa� ud of Saudi Arabia, Abdul Nasser, the Egyptian president, Abdul Karim Qasim, the Iraqi president, Hussein, king of Jordan and Fuad Shihab, the Lebanese president. America undertook to finance the refugees� issue and solve the issue of river Jordan waters. An Arab summit was then held in Cairo in 10/6/1961. This summit increased pressure on Jordan to make it accept the view of a Palestinian state. On the evening of the summit day, the American Ambassador in Amman held a meeting with Bahjat Talhooni, the Jordanian Prime Minister to make him agree to the Palestinian entity. But king Hussein called upon Talhooni and threatened him, and thus he again foiled the American plan and frustrated the summit.
Thus, the American attempts continued for creating a Palestinian entity in West Bank and Gaza strip, besides establishing an international entity in al-Quds. All of these attempts failed because they were rejected by the English and king Hussein. This is because their plan was to establish one secular state in Palestine dominated by the Jews, which will enter into distinct relations with Jordan. After that the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) was created under the chairmanship of Ahmad Shuqairi and by the support of Jamal Abdul Nasser in the Arab Summit that was held in 1964. The aim of the PLO was to try to separate the West Bank from Jordan and create in it an independent Palestinian entity, besides an international entity in al-Quds and Bethlehem.
The British answer to these American plans and attempts came in 1964 and 1965, at the hands of the Tunisian president, Al-Habib Burqeebah, the old English agent. He called to create one secular entity in whole Palestine, which is based on sectarian balance, where the Jews naturally represent the majority in it. The Arab states were divided between these two plans: the American plan that calls to create Palestinian entity separate from Jordan and Israel, and the British plan-Burqaibah project-that calls for one secular entity, which depends on sectarian balance, on the model of Lebanese entity.
Tthe Egyptian role, which represents the American policy in the Middle East, increased due to the rise of Abdul Nasser� s influence, such that the English and their agents took the defence position. The Arab masses rejected the plan of Burqaibah, besides Nasser� s campaign intensified against king Hussein and the British policies in the Middle East. This pushed Britain to arrange an Arab Israeli war in the region, where king Hussein would concede West Bank to the Jews so as to escape the pressure imposed upon him for establishing a Palestinian state on it. Thus, king Hussein provoked Abdul Nasser so as to associate him in the war and implicate him in it, because he was not prepared to engage in any war with Israel. King Hussein intended to give Nasser a great blow so as to reduce the American pressure imposed on him, which is represented in the rising power and popularity of Nasser. Some military operations were carried out against Israel before the war so that Israel takes these as a ploy to enter war. He provoked Nasser, who did not
expect the size of the Israeli military attack against Egypt. So he closed Teeran straits before the Israeli shipping in the Red Sea and expelled the International Forces. Israel used this as an excuse and thus waged an extensive war against Egypt, Jordan and Syria in June 1967. It resulted in the fall of West Bank, Golan Heights, Gaza strip and Sinai in the hands of the Jewish entity within six days. The Jew leaders presented themselves as victorious over three Arab armies, and ultimately showed Israel, in their view, as invincible. However, they are well aware that their victory was not due to their power; it was rather due to the
defeatism and conspiracy of Arab rulers. This is clear in the lack of preparation for war by the Egyptian regime, the withdrawal of the Jordanian regime from the West Bank and its surrender to Jews, and the announcement made by the Syrian regime of the fall of Qunaitrah, which was behind the Syrian army lines that was still fighting in Golan; this led to its confusion and withdrawal. This forged war was considered a great turning point in the Arab-Israeli struggle in the region and in the initiatives afterwards for its solution. The talk before the war was about creating a Palestinian entity and an international Quds, but after it talk became about removing the effects of aggression. Matters froze up, and Israel managed to swallow West Bank, Gaza and Golan. Thus talks focused on the withdrawal of Israel from the territories occupied in 1967.
Resolution number 242, known for play and manoeuvre in its wording was issued by the Security Council. It called upon Israel to withdraw from (territories) it occupied during the war. America started to concentrate on solving the relationship between Israel and Egypt, which is considered more urgent in her view. The Palestinian file was thus left aside, and America started to prepare for a new war to move the peace process and to cement her influence, which was shaken in her main basis in the region, namely Egypt, which received fatal blows in the war and it lost Sinai. It was only after few years that America managed to ignite a limited war between Egypt and Syria on one side and Israel on the other. War of October 1973 was a tactical war that led to signing Camp David treaty between Egypt and Israel in
17/9/1978. This came after an introduction represented in the visit of the Egyptian president, Anwar Sadat to occupied Quds and delivering a speech in the Israeli Knesset in 1977.
After Egypt had signed Camp David treaty, Israel withdrew from Sinai and returned it back to Egypt; on condition it is stripped of weapons and has multi national forces under American leadership, so as to guarantee removal of Egypt from the battle. Thus, Israel was contained from the southern side, and on the other side, confidence was restored in her agent, Anwar Sadat, ruler of Egypt, who had lost his popularity before the Egyptian people. After peace with Egypt was concluded, the American weight increased in the region, and her activity moved to the Northern front. America advised Israel to subdue Lebanon and throw PLO out of it. Thus, 1982 war took place, where Israel invaded Lebanon and forced Arafat to leave Lebanon to Tunisia, under the Israeli military pressure and the American diplomatic pressure. Before his departure, a delegate from the American Congress came to Beirut and divested from him an explicit recognition of the Jewish entity so that this becomes introduction to concluding peace with the Jews. In 25/7/1982 Arafat signed what was known as Makloski document, in which Arafat said: (The PLO recognizes the right of existence to Israel). The American Congress member, Makloski read the document before the journalists in presence of Arafat. He sad: (Yaser Arafat signed today on a written document, in his capacity as PLO chairman. The document states that PLO accepts all UN resolutions regarding the Palestinian
issue). By Arafat signature on this document, he would have given up the English view regarding the one secular state that is built on sectarian balance in Palestine. He would then have made the first step towards the American plan that calls to creating a Palestinian state alongside the state of Israel.
The second step came in the National Palestinian Assembly held in Algeria in October 1988 and also before the UN meeting in Geneva in December 1988. Arafat gave speech in the two meetings that the idea of one Palestinian state on the land of whole historical Palestine has finished and that dream came to an end. He said he accepts creating a Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967; and he declared the creation of the Palestinian state on paper. King Hussein was obliged in the same year, in July 1988 to agree to the administrative and legal separation between Jordan and the West Bank, which was
a sign of his acceptance to the creation of a Palestinian state on it. Britain and Europe have agreed as well on the idea of creating a Palestinian state. Thus, the American plan got the upper hand over the British plan, whose mention dwindled and its influence weakened, except some heresy from Qaddafi, the ruler of Libya. He started at the beginning of the 21st century to talk about the old English plan as solution to the Palestinian issue, which is one state in Palestine for the Arabs and Jews. He, however added to it a new flavour by deriving a new name to this state, which is Isratin, ie it is derived from Israel and Filistin. Nobody
took notice of his two novelties: the novelty of the name and the novelty of reviving the British plan after its death. After the second Gulf war, America gathered all the sides in Madrid Peace Conference in 1991, and forced them to follow courses in accordance with the American solution. However, Britain undertook its last attempt to obstruct the American plans, in coordination with the leaders of Labour ruling party in Israel, namely Rabin and Perez. It managed to conclude Oslo accord in 1993 between PLO and Israel. This accord was an attempt from Britain and Europe to bypass the idea of Madrid conference, which America put as a basis for the solution after the second Gulf war in cooperation with the leaders of the Jewish entity and the leaders of PLO. Arafat came to the West Bank and Gaza, based on this accord, and he was allowed to establish a Palestinian authority that has no real sovereignty that was rather to Israel. However, America managed to change this accord into time-consuming and complicated negotiations, controlled by America so as to guarantee there is no any solution except in accordance with the American standards.
On the other side, a meeting was held in Washington in 25/7/1994 between Hussein, king of Jordan and Rabin, the prime minister of Israel under the auspices of Clinton, the USA president. The meeting was concluded by Washington declaration that terminates the state of war between Israel and Jordan. Later on, Wadi Arabah agreement was signed, which officially finished the state of war between the two states.
Then the second Oslo accord, known as (Gaza �Jericho) came in 4/5/1994, followed by Wye River agreement in 23/10/1998, which both did not live, rather died before being born. Clinton administration tried to conclude a comprehensive peace agreement between Arafat and Barak in 2000 in Camp David. This agreement was known as Camp David 2. Clinton intended to end his authority by completing this agreement. However, the public opinion in Israel and the public opinion amongst Palestinians were not ready to accept such comprehensive peace agreement. Therefore, the Aqsa uprising broke out in September 2000, and Israel started to commit daily massacres against the people of Palestine to impose on them surrender and concession of the remaining basics they stick to. Camp David 2 expired by the departure of Clinton at the end of his second term and the advent of Bush, the son, to power at the beginning of 2001.
Bush administration hesitates in interfering in the Palestinian issue Since the start of Bush presidency, his administration did not give the same attention, which the previous USA administrations gave. Concern for the whole Israeli-Palestinian conflict took a slow departure. In February 2001, Bush administration abandoned Clinton� s proposals and gave up mediation between Palestinians and Israelis. In February 2001, the spokesman of the state department, Richard Powcher said to the media correspondents: (The views and proposals that were discussed in the last few months were the proposals and views of president
Clinton. Therefore, they are no more presidential proposals or the proposals of the USA after he left presidency). America gave Israel a free hand in killing, assassination and harassing the people of Palestine, whether those living in the areas subject to the Palestinian Authority or those living outside that. Bush started to send his people to the region in trips most of which are for public relations. In this process Mitchell report came, followed by the temporary ceasefire guaranteed by George Tenet. The matters continued through successive visitors till the events of 11/9/2001. Events of 11 September put the Palestinian issue in the rear shelves The 11 September attacks created priorities other than the Israeli-Palestinian struggle. This struggle became of low priority in the sight of Bush administration, where America prepared to wage new war on the Islamic world under the pretext of fighting terrorism. Israel used this opportunity, ie fighting against terrorism, to reoccupy the areas, which were put under the PA administrative authority, such as
Jericho, Jenin, city of Gaza and Arrabah; and it used excessive violence against the Palestinians. Israel used the tanks, helicopters and Israeli fighters for imposing its authority over these cities. The size of the barbaric crimes committed by Sharon became quite obvious; so America feared this might have effect on her preparations for aggression against Muslims (Afghanistan and then Iraq).
Therefore, it wanted to calm down the situations, thus she showed again her interest in the region. She declared in October 2001 that which she called (Initiative of New Middle East). It aimed from that to win the support of the Arabs to America� s war against terrorism. Israel describes the Palestinian resistance with terrorism Israel started to consider the Israeli-Palestinian struggle as struggle between Israel
and terrorism. This is what Sharon said before the Knesset: �We must remember that Arafat is the one who gave legitimacy for hijacking aeroplanes before some decades�. Israel was not alone in using the statement of (war against terrorism) for attacking Muslims. Rather, India and Russia did the same and they described the Muslims who fight for their independence as terrorists. As for Israel, it started to
focus in the media, particularly for the American public opinion, that there is no difference between the qaa� idah and Palestinian resistance groups. Based on that, Israel waged a malicious war against the Palestinian resistance groups, and even against the Palestinian police who used to help the resistance. In 13 February 2002, The Israeli army carried out harsh military operation in Gaza strip. Ifraym Sene, an Israeli minister said the soldiers will remain in the Palestinian areas in Gaza for some days till they find the factories that make rockets, and the military forces will wage more attacks and for longer periods if shooting rockets continued. The matter that distinguished the year of 2000 is the nature of Israeli violence and the siege imposed on the Palestinian lands under the name of fight against the Palestinian terrorism, in imitation to the American war declared against terrorism. That year was also distinguished with the open demand by America from the Palestinian Authority to find an alternative Palestinian leadership, which is closer
to America and farther from Europe and Britain. This is because America noticed that the Palestinian leadership, particularly Arafat, started to evade compliance with America the way she likes, and that he resumed his original contact with Europe, particularly Britain. This annoyed America, which planned to rectify the situation so that the whole Palestinian Authority becomes cut off from Europe and tied to her only. This appeared clear in the statements issued by America and those issued by Europe, particularly Britain.
In 18 June 2002, the National Security Advisor of the USA, Condaliza Rice said in an interview published in San Jose Mercury News: �Sincerely, the Palestinian Authority that is corrupt and colluding with violence, is not the basis that allows progress towards the Palestinian state�. One week after that, president Bush called for the removal of Arafat. However, statements given by Europe, particularly Britain were different in content. During the eight industrial countries, G8 in 26/6/2002, the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair said, insisting � the matter returns to Palestinians regarding the selection of their leaders� . Jack Straw, the British Foreign Minister was more explicit where he said: �We deal with the leaders who were elected; and in case of the totalitarian regimes, we deal with leaders who were not elected. If president Arafat were elected by the Palestinian Authority we would deal with him� . Yaser Arafat responded to the American statements, so he dismissed some security officials and made some other changes.
But this was not enough for the Americans who consider Arafat more favourite to the British and Europeans.
Struggle continued till 25/9/2002 when Tony Blair tried again to breathe life into the peace process. He said: �We are in need for a new conference regarding peace process in the Middle East, which is built on twofold principle that stipulates Israel, which is secure, and a realistic Palestinian state� . After that, in October 2002, Tony Blair started to allude to the double standard American policy towards Israel, Palestine and Iraq. He said in the Labour party conference in Blackpool: �What happens now in the Middle East is horrible and wrong. Palestinians live under humiliating, disgraceful and desperate conditions, and the Israelis are savagely killed. I agree that UN resolutions must be implemented here exactly as in Iraq. But they must be implemented not only on Israel, rather on all the parties� . This pushed America to verbally stimulate Bush thoughts under the name of the Road Map, which came in his speech in 24/6/2002 regarding the creation of a Palestinian state under certain conditions alongside Israel. This was followed by
frequent visits of official Americans to the region. The visit of the general delegate, Anthony Zany, and that of the vice president, Dick Cheney came in this process. However, Israel continued to justify its barbaric policies in the occupied territories, considering the Palestinian resistance equivalent to terrorism. America gave a blind eye regarding the crimes committed by Sharon, for they came under the same pretext Bush used to call (war against terrorism), and his statement (you are either with me or with terrorism). Therefore, Israel exploited this excuse and went to the extreme in its barbaric crimes against the towns,
villages and refugee camps. Arrogance of Israel became quite conspicuous in a provocative way, considering itself joining America in her (war against terrorism). As regards the factors that made the Jewish entity exaggerate in its crimes under the pretext of fighting against terrorism, without taking any account of any challenge, they are:
Firstly: It is the wide support to the entity from the New Conservatives in Bush administration. Since Bush reached power and the New Conservatives joined his administration, some of them like Douglass Faith and Richard Pearl started to draw the political plans to the Likud. They laid down a political paper called: (A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm in 1996). The paper advised the Prime Minister at the time, Netanyahu to � to make a new start in the peace process� . It meant cancellation of the terms of Oslo accords of 1993, and restoring the right of Israel in the land by rejecting the principle of land in return of peace� . The paper called Israel also to reoccupy the Palestinian territories and search for a substitute to Arafat, besides developing a new stronger relationship with the USA based on self-sufficiency and mutual interest. It seems Ihud Barak and Sharon used this political paper as a real road map for Israel. Later on, Eliot Abrahams, the head of Middle East Section in the (American) National Security Council, was charged with preparing the Road Map. Eliot has also played a great role in pushing Bush to accept Sharon plan of withdrawal. During some weeks of diplomacy, Condaliza Rice and Eliot played an effective role in supporting the view of Sharon for strengthening the future of the Jewish state.
Secondly: It is the PLO and Palestinian Authority mentality of concession. Jews have noticed they gained new concessions through their escalating crimes. The PLO conceded Palestine of 1948 and demanded of that of 1967. Then it demanded of the majority rather than all of Palestine of 1967. Thus it continued in giving concessions, to the point that which it considers nonnegotiable today changes tomorrow. The rerun of refugees (to their lands) that was considered red lines, not one red line, PA started to draw back from it indirectly, then explicitly. In 1/12/2003 the PA, shyly but publicly signed Geneva document. Abu Ammar sent to Geneva his security adviser Jibreel Rajjoob and state minister Qaddorah Faris together with a word given in the name of Abu Ammar, the head of the PA and chairman of the PLO, in the conference held for taking signatures on the document. This means the PLO officially accepted Geneva document. Thus, the refugees� right of return did not become nonnegotiable, and not a red line; it rather changed into yellow or green.
There is a third factor added to these two factors, which are the unlimited support to the Jewish state by the new Conservatives in the American administration and the continuous concessions given by the PLO and consequently by the PA. It is the disgraceful and shameful position taken by the Arab rulers. Egypt and Jordan have official agreements with Jews, besides open embassies with them. They have
mutual visits and normal rather distinguished relations. There are other Arab states that have open roads to Jews under different names such as trading office, human office, economic or sports conferences, etc, like Qatar, Morocco and Oman. The country of least naturalization with the Jewish state is that which recognizes it practically but without an official announcement, so it negotiates with it and recognizes its entity. This means there is no any Arab country that considers Israel as an illegal entity that must be destroyed because of its occupation of Palestine and its various crimes that reached humans, trees and houses, and that we are in a real state of war with Jews till its occupying entity is eliminated and Palestine returns to Islam lands. Therefore, the Arab states, since the first summit they held in Cairo till the last one in Tunisia, they do not scratch rather than upset an enemy. The Saudi initiative in Beirut Summit recognized the Jewish entity and wasted Palestine, exactly the same as any other initiative presented by America or Europe for the support of Jews. Arab states are not against the Jewish state, and nor they are neutral. The rather effectively contribute in proposing initiatives for the interest of Jews there. They even help to rescue the Jewish state when it falls in any predicament. The shuttle visits of the head of Egyptian Intelligents (mukhabarat), Omer Sulaiman to the Jewish enemy give witness to that.
Due to these factors, Jews persisted in their crimes in Palestine. However, because America planned aggression against Iraq and waited the right occasion, she found it necessary to prepare the atmosphere for improving her image internationally and regionally so as to cover up her crimes in the (planned) attack against Iraq. Within this context, the speech of Bush in 24/6/2002 came to present some ideas about
the solution of the Middle East crisis through creating a state for the Palestinians, within certain conditions, alongside Israel. His ideas came under the name of the (Road Map). The media, particularly the American, continued to speak about the ideas of Bush in his Road Map, and that he is interested of the Middle East issue. Media reports about these ideas remained till Bush declared that the main stage of
his attack against Iraq, which started in 19/3/2003, has ended in 30/4/2003. In that same date he officially announced about his Map in its final form, and handed it over in that date to the PA prime minister, Abu Mazin, and Israel� s prime minister, Sharon.
On examining the objective of announcing the Road Map, we find the following aims:
Firstly: In reality, it was to pave the way before the attack against Iraq more than being a map to pave the way for solving the Palestinian issue. This is because the speech of Bush in 24/6/2002 that contained this map came in the period of preparation of war against Iraq. The talk about this map continued till the start of attack against Iraq in 19/3/2003. The American administration envoys continued talking in their trips to the region about Bush thoughts for solving the Palestinian issue through creating two neighbouring states in Palestine. This created a general atmosphere that the American administration thinks of imposing some kinds of pressure on the Jews so as to accept the existence of a state to the Palestinians beside them. The American administration expected the atmospheres resulting from this initiative would reduce the consequences of her aggression against Iraq. Secondly: The agents of America became in an uncomfortable position. This is because America, which they support, commits an open and gross aggression
against Iraq. The people knew them as agents to America, so they fell into a critical situation before the people. Therefore, America wanted to provide them with a gossip so as to propagate (the justice of America in the region) by saying: Look at America, where at the time she wages war against Iraq it imposes pressure on the Jews to accept a state for the people of Palestine.
Thirdly: Europe used to speak a lot about a solution for the crisis of the Middle east (Palestine and Israel), and that it is more urgent to solve this problem than to create a new crisis in Iraq. Thus, America wanted to prevent Europe from continuing the talk about finding a solution to the crisis of the Middle East by answering them that the Road Map is the solution for this crisis, and it is ready. America succeeded in this manner to a certain extent. This is because the PA and Arab rulers considered the Road Map as a victory, despite its iniquity, for it alluded to a state. However, the points that came in the stages of the Road Map
make this state a name without substance.
As for Europe, it grabbed the plan, which thus became an international map for the four great parties: America, Europe, Russia and UN. Meetings were repeated for its study, and the envoys started their trips between the PA, Europe, UN and America. Despite all of that, America was not serious concerning its implementation. She was completely busy with her aggression against the official regime in Iraq, and
with the predicament, which the heroic resistance in Iraq put her in. So, America was preoccupied with a subject, which is more important to her than the Road map. Therefore, she left the verbal discussion interact in the region about the Map; while the actual action was troops of American army and their allies moving to Iraq, in a warm war, which flares up again every time it cools a while. As for Jews they realized the lack of seriousness of America regarding the implementation of the Road map, at least in the current term of Bush administration. This is because America is preoccupied with its dilemma in Iraq
and she is in a year of elections. Therefore, they put fifteen reservations against the map, such that these reservations made of it not executable. They continued in committing their barbaric crimes under the name of fight against terrorism in Palestine. Despite that, talk continued about the map loud and low, but in vain, because it was in origin designed to achieve the well known saying (I hear roar without seeing grinding).
America became preoccupied in the dilemma in which she fell in Iraq. Her main concern became the protection of her soldiers from the resistance because of her occupation of Iraq. She left the subject of Palestine, militarily to Sharon, and politically to the interactions of the Road Map, though she knew it was born dead from the first moment. This situation continued till Sharon presented his plan from
one side in April 2004.
Sharon concentrated in his plan on unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and made that his main concern. As a way of throwing dust in the eyes, the subject of withdrawal from Gaza was followed by insignificant one in the West bank (four insignificant settlements), besides effectively annexing the main settlements in the West Bank to the Jewish state. Thus, the withdrawal mentioned in the plan was from Gaza strip. So, Sharon managed to transfer the issue mainly to Gaza, following the Jews style in transferring the issue gradually from the whole to the part and then to part of the part. The issue at the beginning was the (stolen Palestine of 1948), which changed to the (West Bank and Gaza of 1967), and then it became (parts of the West bank and Gaza of 1967), where it finally became Gaza only. Mention of the
four marginal settlements in West Bank can hardly be considered inclusion of the West Bank, as a whole, in the plan of Sharon.
Sharon paved the way for his plan (unilateral withdrawal from Gaza strip) by visiting Washington in April 2004. He got everything he wanted from Bush during this visit. The American president, George Bush expressed his support to the plan, which Sharon promotes. It requires unilateral withdrawal from Gaza strip and four unimportant settlements in the West Bank. Bush described the proposal of Sharon
as �historical and brave work� . Bush said in a joint press conference with Sharon in Washington in 13/4/2004 that Palestinian refugees must be settled in the future Palestinian state, and not in Israel. As service to the Israeli position, he gave great concession, saying the facts on ground have changed regarding Israel� s relinquishment of the Jewish settlements in West Bank. Bush said after meeting Sharon in the White House: (If the parties decided to follow this plan (of Sharon), then this will open the way for progress, and put an end to one of the most complicated conflicts in the world). The American president added: (This might also lead to establishing a viable, compliant and democratic Palestinian state). Thus Bush settled the final solution issues, as they call, in accordance with the wishes of Sharon. Sharon said, from his side his plan (will create a better reality concerning the state of Israel), and it can represent a basis for negotiations with Palestinians. The Israeli prime minister said in 22/4 in the Knesset (that the American support to the
withdrawal plan from Gaza is considered unprecedented success. Since the time we announced (the creation of) our state, we did not receive support similar to that which president Bush expressed). He added that (the Palestinians realize that the written pledges (of Bush) are the severest blow levelled at them since the declaration of our independence) in 1948.
The Israeli prime minister added that he wanted to speed up building of the �security wall� in the West Bank; and he reminded with the written pledges, which the Americans undertook during his last visit to the White House. By Bush� s agreement to the plan of Sharon, he confirms America� s absence of seriousness regarding the implementation of the Road Map during the current term of Bush administration. This is because, despite play with words, the plan blows up the Map in many of its points. Had Bush been serious about his Map, he would have not agreed to Sharon plan, and would have not said after his meeting with
Sharon in the White House: (If the parties decided to follow this plan (of Sharon), then this will open the way for progress, and put an end to one of the most complicated conflicts in the world). This means he abandoned his Map for solving the problem, and that which solves it is (Sharon initiative). This does not mean the Road Map is better than Sharon plan, rather they are worse of each other. Rather, this means Bush� s proposal of the Road Map, for creating a state, ultimately in 2005, was a laugh in the face of the PA and Arab rulers, so as to tickle their emotions, where he knew they would accept any thing. When Bush
announced his ideas about the Road Map, in his speech of 24/6/2002, and he announced it officially and handed it over to the PA and Israel in 30/4/2003, he was only concerned about the interest of America and her war against in Iraq, besides tickling the emotions of the PA and Arab rulers with honeysweet words. Then he wanted to mislead Europe that he achieved to them that which they can talk about, which is the solution of the Middle East crisis. This lack of seriousness is confirmed by the hesitant position of the American administration concerning the barrier wall, which indicates collusion between Bush and his friend, Sharon in this issue. Therefore, no one in Israel dealt seriously with the Road Map, because Jews knew Bush was not serious enough regarding its implementation.
It seems the European countries felt they were misled and bypassed by the American administration through its adoption of Sharon plan. This is because Europe always insisted on a solution concluded by the concerned parties, under the umbrella of the quadrant committee that takes custody of peace in the Middle East. However, Europe that still dreams of an effective political role in the Middle East, under the name of the European Union found itself marginalized and abandoned, though it carries the economic burden of any solution imposed on the region. Therefore, the European foreign ministers announced they would
endeavour to revive the Road Map through holding meetings with the four parties that support the map, which are the USA, UN, Russia and EU. Brayan Koyn, the Irish foreign minister, whose country presides over the EU in its current term, confirmed after a meeting for the EU foreign ministers saying � the Road Map is the only political mechanism capable to achieve permanent peace in this region� .
It seems, however, Europe tried to save as much as it could, so it returned to welcome with the plan of the Israeli prime minister for disengagement from Palestinians, during the last meeting of the quadrant committee (USA, Russia, UN and EU). It said that (it welcomes and supports this step that provides a rare opportunity in the effort for bringing peace in the Middle east). This statement indicates of some European submission to the American policy, so that Europe is not left behind alone and does not leave room open for America alone. Therefore, Europe accepted matters that disagree with the policy it already pronounced, and instead agreed to and even praised Sharon plan for disengagement from the Palestinians without negotiations, a matter that fundamentally disagrees with the Road Map.
This is different to the position of Britain that complies with the American policy, whatever it was, besides trying to obtain or defend some interests, at the same time it keeps good relations with the EU. This position is represented in the statement of Blair after Bush declarations in 14/4/2004, in which he said: (The British prime minister, in his turn expressed his support to Sharon plans for unilateral disengagement with the Palestinians). Blair declared after that, in Washington, after his talks with Bush in 17/4/2004, saying: (The Road Map remains the basis for the peace negotiations, and Sharon plan is not considered
bypass to it). This statement is an example of the English evasion and cunning, because despite the two plans, namely the Map and that of Sharon, associate in the evils they have, Sharon plan definitely bypasses the Road Map. Sharon plan stipulates evacuation of four isolated Jewish settlements in West Bank and 21 settlements in Gaza strip, and the withdrawal of Israel from this region except �line of Philadelphia� , which is a line that extends along all the frontiers between Egypt and Israel. Israel also reserves its basic right of selfdefence, including undertaking deterrent operations and reaction through using force against threats that might occur in the areas from which it will withdraw. This means Israel will not give to the Palestinians except that which Sharon proposed to them since he took power, ie 40% of the West Bank, besides rejecting
any authority for them over water, air space or passages. This is in addition that the Palestinian (empire) must be demilitarised. All of this comes from one side, without having any relation with the negotiations
of the parties, as it came in the Road map. It does not also stipulate a state, whether it is a dimilitarised state or a powerless state of administration, or any type as that mentioned in the Road Map.
It worth mentioning here that Sharon plan of withdrawal from Gaza is not something new. The Israeli leftists, particularly Shimon Perez, often called for that; and withdrawal from Gaza was one of its aims. This is because its demographic conditions make the situation in it more complicated than in West bank. Furthermore, withdrawal from Gaza does not dramatically affect the security aspect of the Jewish state. This is contrary to the situation in West Bank, whose width in some areas, such as Tulkarm and Qalqiliyah, is not more than few kilometres. This does not guarantee the strategic depth; besides the Jewish entity,
does not have, even by its occupation of the West Bank, the strategic depth that enables it to defend itself in case a land attack came from the eastern front, because of the large length and small width of that front. Therefore, the withdrawal operation from Gaza will not be painful and neither effective. It would rather bring many benefits to the entity. It would first get rid of about 1.3 million people living in Gaza, according to the official statistics. This comes at a time where Israel suffer of the demographic worry, and the continuous increase of the Arabs inside the green line, Wet Bank and Gaza. By the mentioned plan of withdrawal Jews get rid of the wasps nest as their politicians call Gaza strip. By keeping Philadelphia passage under its control, Israel will make of the strip a big prison for the Palestinians, where they cannot leave it without the Jewish prison guard.
This is in addition to the waters problem from which the strip suffers. Since the mid eighties, the Israeli authorities dug artesian wells on the eastern borders of the strip with Negev after conducting wide exploration operations of underground water reservoirs and their trends underground. Since that time, Negev started to flourish while the quantities of underground water in the strip started to diminish,
to the point that many of the artesian wells in the strip started to produce salt water due to its advance for rplacing the fresh underground water. This is not a reversal operation; which means if Israel stopped in future to pump water to Negev, the water will still remain salt in the areas affected by saltiness, because the question is connected with ions and chemical processes. It is also known that municipality of Gaza city started, since the end of the eighties, to dig new water wells outside its borders, specifically in the Northern areas that belong to the municipalities of Jabalia and Bayt Lahia, to neutralize the salinity of its wells. The purpose of mentioning this information about the problem of water in Gaza is to link it to the secret appendices of Camp David treaty with Egypt. This treaty stipulated supplying Israel with the Nile water through the (peace canal). If we took in consideration that Gaza would not have any drop of fresh water by 2020, according to the predictions, then this would be suitable reason for building the (peace canal) to supply Sinai with Nile water, and extending that to Gaza strip and Israel, under the pretext of Gaza strip and provision of Palestinians with water. It is necessary to mention here a significant subject that Bush often called for the change of the Palestinian leadership, claiming it is incapable to bring peace. He called for brining an alternative leadership capable to take brave decisions that lead to peace in the Middle East. Therefore, the American administration exercised pressure on the PA to create position for a prime minister. This resulted in bringing Mahmoud Abbas whom Arafat quickly got rid of when he realized that he would try to dominate him in the PA by stripping him of his responsibilities, particularly that related to the security dossiers and structures. Abbas intended to assign these to Mohammad Dahlan, who was nominated to become interior minister in his government. Therefore, Arafat replaced Abbas with Qurai� so as to guarantee his loyalty to him. Arafat did not honestly comply with American plans for the Middle East, and nor he was of her sincere people. He goes along with the English since the foundation PLO. After the decline of the British influence in the Middle East, the English advised him to comply with the American course. Therefore, he accepted a state in West Bank and Gaza after he used to call for a secular state in Palestine for all the religions of Muslims, Christians and Jews, in accordance with the British view, so as to facilitate the acceptance of Jews in the region and their control over it. However, his ties with Europe, particularly with Britain have never been broken. Thus, America was not sure of the results of his compliance with her. Therefore she announced the necessity of removing him as a leader to the Palestinians. And she called for bringing a Palestinian leadership that does not only go along with America but remains tied with Europe; it is rather tied to her alone. Jews followed America� s course in this matter. Thus, the idea of founding a prime minister was an introduction to become the competent authority instead of Arafat.
However, it seems there are international circumstances, particularly European, that prevented America from effectively and fully changing him. She instead adopted decreasing his authorities gradually. Had she been serious in executing this matter currently, she would have done so; because the man is within the reach of the Jews, and it is not difficult to fabricate a suitable theatrical operation for his removal.
Anyhow, Europe still supports Arafat; and his relationship with it, particularly with Britain still remains; and the contacts of Europe with him still continues. The question that arises now is: Can Europe continue in his support, and can it oppose the wish of America if this wish became a serious decision? It is expected Europe would not be able to continue that till the end, if America decided to realize her mentioned desire. This is because there were many issues in which Europe opposed America, but when America took the decisive decision Europe retreated, particularly if Europe managed to reach an understanding with America that gave it some interest when it went along with her. Therefore, the European support to Arafat might dwindle if he became loser, and the gamble on him is also losing; besides taking his side does not realize its interests. It is noticed that the question of changing the leadership became debatable, and the different (Palestinian) organizations rushed for solidarity with the symbol, besieged president. In the ocean of these events Israel assassins many people, kills humans and destroys trees and buildings. All of this takes place while the besieged president is within its reach without being touched. This reminds of the story of
the disaster of June (1967) when the following statement was repeated: �as long as the leader, the chief is safe, then the country is good; even if most of the country was occupied� .
O Muslims: Palestine cannot be liberated from the filth of Jews by rulers who succumb to the enemy, and openly concede the sanctities of the ummah to them, all of this as price for retaining disgraceful thrones and crowns. Likewise, an impotent authority (PA) cannot liberate it. It is Omer who conquered Palestine; Salahuddin is the one who liberated it from the crusades; so it is in need of people like the descendants of Omer and Salahuddin to liberate it from the filth of Jews. The issue of Palestine does not concern the people of Palestine or the Arabs alone. It is rather an Islamic issue. It is simply an issue of a land and an issue of Islamic sanctities robbed by the infidel Jews, with the support of the infidel superpowers: America and Britain, and with the help of the agent Muslim rulers. Palestine is an Islamic country; and it is the southern part of Sham area. Muslims conquered it with their blood; so hardly you can find an inch of it without having the dust of the horse of a mujahid, or blood drops of a shaheed. It is property of the whole
Muslims; and it is duty upon them to offer their souls and lives for regaining it. Any concession of any inch of it is betrayal to Allah, His Messenger and the believers. Allah obliged jihad upon Muslims for liberating Palestine from the Jewish state, and for eliminating the Jewish entity from Palestine, besides removing the control of America and all infidel countries away from it. This is the issue, and this is its reality. It has turned to become an international field of struggle between America and Britain during many past decades. It became one of the international issues after the downfall of the Ottoman state; and the infidel western countries undertook the responsibility of reshaping the region based on their perception.
People of Palestine were the food for this struggle during the past decades; and they still pay of their blood and souls the price of achieving goals that often serve the infidel colonialists. The influence of America in the last decade of struggle in Palestine became the strongest in the region, not only on her agents, but also on the British agents who cannot confront her; and even if they confronted her they back off. The American mark dominated the plans presented for the solution of the Middle East crisis. It is noticed that America proposes the projects and plans, while the others take over these projects and plans trying to solve them in accordance with their interests or according to the level of struggle. As for the Arab rulers, they have no any role in that except implementation. The superpowers: Russia, Britain and France try to
have a role through joining America in processing the American plans. Thus, America proposes the plans first, and then the other countries take them over and proceed with them. This is clear in terms of the Road Map, where America announced it, and these states adopted it. These states acknowledged that their role is to complete and facilitate the American role, rather than to be its alternative. It is necessary to mention in this context the following: The fact that America is superior internationally, that its influence is the strongest in the region, and that the other major powers could not shift her from the position of leading state.
That fact that Jews are the spoiled child of America, where she provides them with weapons, ammunition, funds and even with men who carry the two nationalities. The fact that the people of PA and Arab rulers fall in line with the infidel colonialists in Europe and America. All of the