[News] Palestinian Islamic Jihad discusses October 7, the war against Israel, and whether Trump or Biden would be better for Palestine
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Tue Jul 16 19:44:35 EDT 2024
Dr. Mohammed Al-Hindi, a top leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad,
discusses October 7, the war against Israel, and whether Trump or Biden
would be better for Palestine
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏
Forwarded this email? Subscribe here
<https://substack.com/redirect/2/eyJlIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZHJvcHNpdGVuZXdzLmNvbS9zdWJzY3JpYmU_dXRtX3NvdXJjZT1lbWFpbCZ1dG1fY2FtcGFpZ249ZW1haWwtc3Vic2NyaWJlJnI9bHZwcGImbmV4dD1odHRwcyUzQSUyRiUyRnd3dy5kcm9wc2l0ZW5ld3MuY29tJTJGcCUyRm9zbG8taXMtb3ZlciIsInAiOjE0NjY0Mzk1NiwicyI6MjUxMDM0OCwiZiI6dHJ1ZSwidSI6MzY3NTE1ODMsImlhdCI6MTcyMTEzODI4OSwiZXhwIjoxNzIzNzMwMjg5LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMCIsInN1YiI6ImxpbmstcmVkaXJlY3QifQ.vKGQ6qVngwH1P07x-NdW0mpAY6B_twvh9SDsTXAUEmE?>
for more
Exclusive: Palestinian Islamic Jihad speaks to Drop Site News
<https://substack.com/app-link/post?publication_id=2510348&post_id=146643956&utm_source=post-email-title&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=lvppb&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozNjc1MTU4MywicG9zdF9pZCI6MTQ2NjQzOTU2LCJpYXQiOjE3MjExMzgyODksImV4cCI6MTcyMzczMDI4OSwiaXNzIjoicHViLTI1MTAzNDgiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.wYEQXJAoJF2_xJzzsSOgGlaATnlNORIe6h6zjMJHfO0>
Dr. Mohammed Al-Hindi, a top leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad,
discusses October 7, the war against Israel, and whether Trump or
Biden would be better for Palestine
Jeremy Scahill <https://substack.com/@jeremyscahill>
Jul 16
<https://substack.com/@jeremyscahill>
<https://substack.com/app-link/post?publication_id=2510348&post_id=146643956&utm_source=substack&isFreemail=true&submitLike=true&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozNjc1MTU4MywicG9zdF9pZCI6MTQ2NjQzOTU2LCJyZWFjdGlvbiI6IuKdpCIsImlhdCI6MTcyMTEzODI4OSwiZXhwIjoxNzIzNzMwMjg5LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMjUxMDM0OCIsInN1YiI6InJlYWN0aW9uIn0.igaiC_TbRzNvGZWR_w8XOIcRQlBkKPoRhTQrIwQDcjg&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email-reaction&r=lvppb>
<https://substack.com/app-link/post?publication_id=2510348&post_id=146643956&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&isFreemail=true&comments=true&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozNjc1MTU4MywicG9zdF9pZCI6MTQ2NjQzOTU2LCJpYXQiOjE3MjExMzgyODksImV4cCI6MTcyMzczMDI4OSwiaXNzIjoicHViLTI1MTAzNDgiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.wYEQXJAoJF2_xJzzsSOgGlaATnlNORIe6h6zjMJHfO0&r=lvppb&utm_campaign=email-half-magic-comments&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email>
<https://substack.com/app-link/post?publication_id=2510348&post_id=146643956&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&utm_campaign=email-share&action=share&triggerShare=true&isFreemail=true&r=lvppb&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozNjc1MTU4MywicG9zdF9pZCI6MTQ2NjQzOTU2LCJpYXQiOjE3MjExMzgyODksImV4cCI6MTcyMzczMDI4OSwiaXNzIjoicHViLTI1MTAzNDgiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.wYEQXJAoJF2_xJzzsSOgGlaATnlNORIe6h6zjMJHfO0>
<https://substack.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.99eGa5q5jCg2eIlnR75kplYy8a45KNsQvm3gjQlpIH0?&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email>
READ IN APP
<https://open.substack.com/pub/dropsitenews/p/oslo-is-over?utm_source=email&redirect=app-store>
<https://substack.com/redirect/298ea4e8-f435-44ca-9dba-bb03f9203606?j=eyJ1IjoibHZwcGIifQ.9RIwWbE6EVIB7Jy8lfazxZKfps8R18neRGMKwOiqnRM>Mohammed
Al-Hindi in 2005. Photo: Mahmud Hams/AFP via Getty.
Before Hamas, there was Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The resistance
movement, founded in 1981, organized itself around the principle that
defeat of Israeli occupation and subjugation could only be achieved
through armed struggle, and it sought to merge the secular and Islamist
strands of the Palestinian political landscape. For 30 years, PIJ has
engaged in a campaign of paramilitary warfare against Israel and has
controlled the second largest armed Palestinian resistance faction.
While Hamas has governed the Gaza Strip since 2006, PIJ has often set
the tone for increased militancy toward Israel and has proven its
willingness to engage in battles on its own.
Though PIJ says it did not know about the October 7 attacks ahead of
time, its armed wing joined the Hamas-led operation that morning, took
hostages of its own, and—together with Hamas’s Al-Qassam Brigades—has
waged a nine-month guerrilla war in Gaza against Israeli occupation forces.
This is part 3 in my series covering armed Palestinian groups’
perspectives on the war on Gaza. Subscribe to get the rest.
Upgrade to paid
<https://substack.com/redirect/2/eyJlIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZHJvcHNpdGVuZXdzLmNvbS9zdWJzY3JpYmU_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.X27ci0EvspAQDlFX7p0vM1cXAGHN-RqO7jQ1-LWIoG0?&utm_medium=email&utm_source=subscribe-widget-preamble&utm_content=146643956>
Senior leaders of PIJ rarely grant interviews to Western journalists,
but Dr. Mohammed Al-Hindi, the group’s second highest-ranking official,
agreed to sit down for a wide-ranging, in-person interview with Drop
Site News. Al-Hindi discussed PIJ’s role in the October 7 attacks, what
he sees as the political aims of the operations, his perspective on
President Joe Biden’s push to revive a “two-state” solution, Donald
Trump and the U.S. elections, the Abraham Accords, and the future of
Palestinian liberation and politics. He also discusses PIJ’s ties to
Iran and explains why he believes Israel would face a catastrophe in
Lebanon if it decided to go to war against Hezbollah.
Since the early 1980s, Al-Hindi has been a central figure in Palestinian
Islamic Jihad and currently serves as its deputy secretary general and
chief political negotiator. He is a pediatrician by training and early
in his career worked at Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza. Al-Hindi was jailed
for a year during the First Intifada and has been imprisoned several
times by both the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority. In
2004, Israeli helicopters fired several missiles at Al-Hindi’s office in
Gaza in what was widely believed to be an assassination attempt.
Al-Hindi is the chief of PIJ’s political department and the top deputy
to its secretary general, Ziyad Al-Nakhalah. He led PIJ’s negotiations
with Israel that achieved a ceasefire in May 2023 and continues to
advise Hamas negotiators in the current war. In 2019, Al-Hindi was named
a Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the U.S. State Department.
Drop Site News has decided to publish the interview with Al-Hindi in
full because we believe it is in the public interest to examine the
perspectives of a top figure in the current Palestinian armed resistance
and the second in command of an organization at the center of Israel’s
genocidal war against the Palestinians of Gaza.
To support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Upgrade to paid
<https://substack.com/redirect/2/eyJlIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZHJvcHNpdGVuZXdzLmNvbS9zdWJzY3JpYmU_dXRtX3NvdXJjZT1wb3N0JnV0bV9jYW1wYWlnbj1lbWFpbC1jaGVja291dCZuZXh0PWh0dHBzJTNBJTJGJTJGd3d3LmRyb3BzaXRlbmV3cy5jb20lMkZwJTJGb3Nsby1pcy1vdmVyJnI9bHZwcGImdG9rZW49ZXlKMWMyVnlYMmxrSWpvek5qYzFNVFU0TXl3aWFXRjBJam94TnpJeE1UTTRNamc1TENKbGVIQWlPakUzTWpNM016QXlPRGtzSW1semN5STZJbkIxWWkweU5URXdNelE0SWl3aWMzVmlJam9pWTJobFkydHZkWFFpZlEuMHBaempYN0JVOTJkTGNfVGRIMGFWYkN6cVd4SlVxV2lTdjNPajR4QThHYyIsInAiOjE0NjY0Mzk1NiwicyI6MjUxMDM0OCwiZiI6dHJ1ZSwidSI6MzY3NTE1ODMsImlhdCI6MTcyMTEzODI4OSwiZXhwIjoxNzIzNzMwMjg5LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMCIsInN1YiI6ImxpbmstcmVkaXJlY3QifQ.X27ci0EvspAQDlFX7p0vM1cXAGHN-RqO7jQ1-LWIoG0?&utm_medium=email&utm_source=subscribe-widget-preamble&utm_content=146643956>
Palestinian Islamic Jihad: The Backstory
Palestinian Islamic Jihad began to carry out armed attacks against
Israel in 1984, three years prior to the founding of Hamas. More than a
decade before the first Oslo Accord was signed in 1993, PIJ’s founders
took the position that the Palestine Liberation Organization of Yasser
Arafat had started the Palestinians on a course to disaster by opening
the door to conceding substantial land to Israel in a two-state
settlement. The founders were also inspired by the 1979 Islamic
Revolution in Iran and saw the overthrow of the U.S.-backed shah as
evidence that they could topple their oppressors.
“In the 1980s, when a young guard of Palestinian students wanted the
Muslim Brotherhood to engage in armed violence or in armed struggle
against Israeli occupation, they were dissatisfied with the Muslim
Brotherhood’s lack of interest in armed struggle,” said Erik Skare, a
postdoctoral researcher at the University of Oslo who is widely viewed
as one of the leading English-language scholars on PIJ. “If you were a
Palestinian in the 1980s in the Gaza Strip who wanted to participate in
the armed struggle, there was no feasible vehicle to do so. On the one
hand, you had the Islamist movement that did not partake in the military
armed struggle. And on the other hand, you had the secular nationalists
who were either in jail, [or] who were incapacitated.” PIJ filled this void.
Skare has written two books on the group, including /A History of
Palestinian Islamic Jihad: Faith, Revolution and Awareness in the Middle
East/. He said PIJ’s founders rejected what they saw as the dogmatism of
the Muslim Brotherhood, from which Hamas rose. “They did not just read
Ibn Taymiyya. They didn't just read Sayyid Qutb. They didn't just read
Hassan al-Banna. They read Lenin, they read Jean-Paul Sartre, they read
Fyodor Dostoevsky. They read everything that they could come across as
they tried to figure out the future and the way forward and out of that
Palestinian impasse,” Skare told me. “They wanted to be true to their
religion and go to the cinema. They wanted to read, study Islamist
orthodoxy, while being open to new ideas.”
In August 1987, members of PIJ ambushed and killed an Israeli army
officer in the Gaza Strip, in what would become a precursor to a broader
Palestinian revolt. During the First Intifada, which began in December,
the PIJ expanded its armed operations in Gaza and the West Bank,
initially utilizing stones, knives, and small arms. By the end of the
decade, the group’s senior leadership was exiled and many of its members
jailed. In 1992, Israel deported hundreds of PIJ and Hamas members,
including influential leaders of both movements, to Lebanon. In exile,
the two groups forged closer ties and discussed coordinating actions
against Israel. PIJ also deepened its relationship with Hezbollah, the
Islamic Republic of Iran, and the Syrian government. Its members
received military training and support from all three.
PIJ rose to international recognition and infamy in the 1990s as both it
and Hamas began to conduct suicide bombings against Israeli civilians
and military targets. PIJ also began to formally organize its
paramilitary wing, Saraya Al-Quds, the Jerusalem Brigades. On January
22, 1995, a PIJ operative disguised as an Israeli soldier approached a
crowded bus stop in the central Israeli town of Beit Lid where Israeli
soldiers were awaiting transport back to their bases. The operative
detonated an explosive belt in the middle of the crowd. A few minutes
later, a second suicide bomber attacked. In all, 21 Israeli soldiers and
one civilian were killed. “We confirm our ability to penetrate all the
enemy’s false security lines and reach the heart of the enemy,” a top
PIJ leader said in claiming responsibility for the attack. President
Bill Clinton responded the next day by issuing an executive order
criminalizing any financial support for PIJ.
In 1997, both PIJ and Hamas were officially designated as terrorist
organizations by the U.S. State Department. During the Second Intifada,
which began in September 2002 and lasted for nearly five years, both
organizations engaged in military battles against Israeli forces and
conducted extensive suicide bombings inside Israel.
"The logic is pretty much the same as the PLO in the 1960s and
1970s—that what has been taken with force has to be regained by force."
In the years since the last intifada, PIJ has cultivated its presence in
both the West Bank and Gaza, from which it has regularly engaged in
rocket attacks against Israeli military targets and cities. Unlike
Hamas, PIJ is not a political party that fields candidates for elections
run by the Palestinian Authority, as it rejects the entire framework of
the Oslo Accords that gave rise to the PA. Instead, PIJ has prioritized
confronting Israeli settler colonialism and occupation through direct
military action. “They fight for the entirety of historical Palestine
from the river to the sea,” said Skare. “The logic is pretty much the
same as the PLO in the 1960s and 1970s—that what has been taken with
force has to be regained by force.”
While PIJ is often narrowly portrayed as a violent Islamic terror
organization, it views itself both as an armed vanguard advocating a
unified liberation movement and a political and social movement rooted
in Islamist and Palestinian history and culture. “We saw two categories
of Palestinian: the nationalists, who talked about liberating Palestine
but who forgot about Islam, and the traditionalists, who talked about
Islam and an Islamic state but who forgot about Palestine,” observed
PIJ's founder Dr. Fathi Shaqaqi in an interview
<https://substack.com/redirect/44b4d1a3-5c3e-4965-af56-3c912793b097?j=eyJ1IjoibHZwcGIifQ.9RIwWbE6EVIB7Jy8lfazxZKfps8R18neRGMKwOiqnRM>in
1995, nine months before he was assassinated by the Mossad in front of a
Malta hotel. “We had to solve this problematic issue, to make the
crossing-point between nationalist and Islamist.”
Many of PIJ’s earliest recruits were drawn from the ranks of the secular
PLO, and PIJ’s leaders forged a path to uniting that secular
revolutionary spirit with Islamist ideas. Its central objective was to
reclaim all territory seized during the creation of the state of Israel
in 1948 and to avenge the violent displacement and killing of
Palestinians during the Nakba. “Islamic Jihad turned the logic of the
Muslim Brotherhood upside down,” said Skare. “The Muslim Brotherhood
focused on Islamization for liberation. That is, you had to Islamize
Palestinian society first and prepare the Palestinian masses by
spreading Islamic values so could you prepare them for the armed
struggle to liberate Palestine. But Islamic Jihad, on the other hand,
they said first we have to liberate the Occupied Palestinian
Territories, and only then can we focus on Islamization.”
Skare said that despite its designation by the U.S. and other Western
nations as a terrorist organization, PIJ does not conduct attacks
outside of historic Palestine. “It also distances itself from attacks
against the West and also against Israelis outside of Israeli or
Palestinian territory because it would weaken the Palestinian struggle
and the legitimacy of the Palestinian struggle,” Skare said. “They make
it quite clear that their struggle is not against Israelis because of
their Jewish faith, but because of the occupation.”
Since Hamas’s founding in 1987, its relations with PIJ have seen periods
of tight coordination as well as conflict, strategic disagreement, and
turf wars. After Hamas won the democratic elections in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories in 2006 and consolidated its control of the Gaza
Strip, the two groups often synchronized their operations against
Israel. The year it took power in Gaza, Hamas announced an end to the
use of suicide bombings against Israel, causing the number of such
attacks to plummet. Hamas said the tactic had only been deployed during
an “exceptional period.”
While Hamas became a governing authority, responsible for the basic
administration of civil life on the Gaza Strip, PIJ eluded these
functions and squarely focused on armed resistance. PIJ opened its doors
to Palestinians who prioritized armed action against Israel, including
those “that were dissatisfied with the governance project of Hamas,”
said Skare, who has interviewed senior PIJ figures. “It says something
about the way [PIJ] can push other armed movements.”
PIJ and Hamas formed a united front in a series of shorter duration wars
in the years following Hamas’s election, including in 2009, 2012, and
2014. In 2018, the two groups revived a joint operations center with
other smaller armed factions in Gaza. In May 2021, PIJ and Hamas
launched a barrage of rockets at Israel in response to Israeli attacks
on Palestinian worshippers at Al-Aqsa mosque and threats of evictions in
East Jerusalem, killing 12 Israeli civilians. Israel launched an intense
11-day bombing campaign against Gaza, during which more than 250
Palestinians were killed and some 1,900 injured. The war ended when
President Joe Biden called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and
told him the runway was finished. Both Hamas and PIJ leaders made clear
that while a truce was reached, the broader war would endure. “We will
come to you, God willing, in a roaring flood,” Hamas’s Gaza leader Yahya
Sinwar declared in a speech in December 2022. “We will come to you with
endless rockets, we will come to you in a limitless flood of soldiers,
we will come to you with millions of our people, like the repeating tide.”
While Hamas generally respected the Egyptian-brokered ceasefire with
Israel, PIJ and Israel continued to fight. In August 2022, Israel began
a campaign of targeted assassinations against senior PIJ leaders in
Gaza, killing important commanders. Israel said the attacks were
“preemptive” strikes. Two of the Israeli airstrikes killed dozens of
Palestinians, including children. In retaliation, PIJ launched more than
1,000 rockets into Israeli territory as Israel pummeled Gaza with
further air raids. Israel also swept PIJ strongholds in the West Bank,
arresting PIJ operatives.
The intermittent battles between Israel and PIJ lasted until May 13,
2023, when an Egyptian-brokered ceasefire was declared. While Hamas was
not a party to the fighting, it praised PIJ for “defending the
Palestinian people against the most recent Israeli aggression against
the Gaza Strip.”
Prior to October 7, Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s Al-Quds force was
estimated, in Western government and media sources, to have between one
and eight thousand fighters in Gaza. Sources within PIJ, however, say
the number of fighters and logistical support personnel exceeded 10,000
(reliable, verifiable statistics do not exist). While it is a smaller
force than Hamas’s Qassam Brigades, which prior to October 7 was
estimated in the range of 20,000–30,000 soldiers, PIJ also enjoys a
stronger paramilitary presence in the West Bank, particularly in Nablus,
Tulkarm, and Jenin. PIJ recently said that it has continued to enlist
new recruits to fight Israel in both Gaza and the West Bank.
In reporting on the October 7 attacks against Israel, PIJ is often
unmentioned or described in passing as another militant group that
participated in Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. By the group’s own account, it
was not involved with the planning of the October 7 attacks but joined
in immediately that morning when the operations began. Skare said that
while PIJ may not have organized the attacks, its militant posture of
armed struggle as the only solution against Israel may have played a
role in Hamas's decision to contemplate the large-scale, decisive
action. “Hamas had to balance on a knife’s edge between being a provider
of services, a provider of governance in the Gaza Strip, and maintaining
its [role] as a resistance movement. Islamic Jihad could continue
stressing the need for armed resistance, continue stressing the need for
a complete liberation without being encumbered by the inconvenient
responsibilities of governance. And that always was troublesome for
Hamas,” he said. “I think the fact that Hamas carried out October 7 was
partly caused by the fact that Hamas found itself in an impossible
situation.”
Along with Hamas, PIJ’s standing among Palestinians in the occupied
territories has risen significantly since October. Its members have
fought alongside Qassam forces in the guerrilla war against Israel’s
occupation forces in Gaza, and it regularly posts videos of its forces
ambushing Israeli tanks and soldiers.
PIJ continues to hold an unknown number of Israelis taken on October
7—PIJ initially said it had 30 captives—and participated in the
exchanges last November during which 105 Israelis were freed in exchange
for hundreds of Palestinians held by Israel. Along with Hamas,
Palestinian Islamic Jihad is a member of the Axis of Resistance, a
coalition that includes Iran, Syria, Ansar Allah in Yemen, and several
regional militant groups that coordinate strategy in confronting Israel.
*Below is a full transcript of our in-depth interview.*
<https://substack.com/redirect/b4a76dbd-c2b0-44b8-8c2e-835a719e76e2?j=eyJ1IjoibHZwcGIifQ.9RIwWbE6EVIB7Jy8lfazxZKfps8R18neRGMKwOiqnRM>
Mohammed Al-Hindi speaks with Jeremy Scahill. Photo: Jeremy Scahill.
My Interview With Mohammed Al-Hindi
*Jeremy Scahill:*Dr. Mohammed Al-Hindi, thank you for agreeing to do
this interview. It’s unusual for a Western reporter to be able to
interview one of the leaders of Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Explain the
political ideology and objectives of the organization.
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate.
First of all, Islamic Jihad is generally perceived as a fighting group.
That impression, however, is not accurate. In the early stages of its
establishment, our movement tried to develop its own vision and
understanding before engaging in active fighting against Israel. A
vision of the political reality, understanding the Islamic world, and
the region’s history. So, it started as an intellectual discussion
before it took up arms. Ultimately, however, its analysis was that the
project of establishing Israel was a Western one. The West had its
issues with the Jews. In short, it could be said that antisemitism is a
European problem that did not exist in the East. It was solved, however,
at the expense of the Palestinian people and the region. The Zionist
project is not about the Jews in the first place. Rather, it is a
Western colonization project that aims to control the region and
preclude its independence and development.
This is the Zionist project at heart. We do not have any problem with
the Jews per se. Rather, our problem is with Zionism as a racist
movement which was based on usurping our resources and homeland and
displacing us in 1948. This was the founding political vision upon which
Islamic Jihad movement was established. Our vision relied on Islam which
constitutes the culture, history and faith of the Palestinian people.
Based on that vision and that understanding of the political reality and
Islamic history, the movement was established. This debate started at an
early stage when we were students in Egyptian universities in the
mid-1970s. This vision was translated, though, when we returned to the
Gaza Strip under the occupation. Since there was occupation, it was
imperative to have resistance. So, the Islamic Jihad started to engage
in resistance in the early 1980s after we returned from Egyptian
universities.
“The Zionist project is not about the Jews in the first place. Rather,
it is a Western colonization project that aims to control the region and
preclude its independence and development.”
So, the resistance emerged based on the presence of the occupation. As a
religious, Muslim people, we base our resistance on our understanding,
history and faith. That’s why some identified Islamic Jihad as standing
somewhat in the middle between Islamic extremism and the national
movement, which was based at the time on Fatah and the Palestinian left.
In brief, we are a national Palestinian resistance movement which is
rooted in our people’s faith, culture and belief, namely Islam.
*Jeremy Scahill:*When you say that Palestinian Islamic Jihad is a
national resistance movement you're talking about armed struggle.
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*No, I’m talking about the idea of Islamic Jihad.
*Jeremy Scahill:*How do you define then what a resistance group is in
the context of what you’ve said?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*As long as there is occupation, there must be
resistance. We started our resistance in the presence of occupation
through the Nakba in 1948 and then in 1967 with the occupation of the
West Bank and Gaza Strip. We were conceived in the Gaza Strip and the
movement then expanded to the West Bank under the occupation. The
occupation was engaging in practices which all the world could see. But
they were silent, unfortunately, because ultimately the Zionist project
is a Western one. That’s why in 1987, in the First Intifada, under
then-Israeli Prime Minister Rabin, they used an extremely oppressive
policy which was the ‘bone breaking’ policy against children involved in
the uprising. Quite literally, a soldier would hold a child’s hand
against a rock and then break it with another rock. It was implemented
literally. So this violence used by Israel under which we grew up, made
it necessary to resist.
*Jeremy Scahill:*But Palestinian Islamic Jihad, for instance, does not
run for elections.
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *That’s not true. We do take part in student
elections in Palestinian Universities. We take part in elections of
syndicates, all Palestinian syndicates: doctors, teachers, lawyers,
engineers. All syndicates. Around 13 syndicates. And we have taken the
initiative in forming some other syndicates too. This impression or
perception, though, was because we did not take part in the 2006
Palestinian legislative council elections. Refraining from participation
constitutes a form of participation itself, a form of political
position. We have taken a position towards the Oslo Accord, which at the
national level has conceded some basic principles in addition to its
being undemocratic as the Palestinian people have not been consulted,
nor were other members of the PLO and its factions. This agreement was
reached behind the back of the Palestinian people. So the position of
the Islamic Jihad was to boycott any arrangements or elections of an
authority emanating from this agreement. This is a political position of
its own right. We take part in all other elections.
Drop Site News is a reader-supported publication. Support us by becoming
a free or paid subscriber.
Upgrade to paid
<https://substack.com/redirect/2/eyJlIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZHJvcHNpdGVuZXdzLmNvbS9zdWJzY3JpYmU_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.X27ci0EvspAQDlFX7p0vM1cXAGHN-RqO7jQ1-LWIoG0?&utm_medium=email&utm_source=subscribe-widget-preamble&utm_content=146643956>
*Jeremy Scahill:*What is the relationship between Palestinian Islamic
Jihad and Hamas?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*First, in terms of the founding principles, Islam
constitutes the faith, culture and history of our Palestinian people. It
is a faith for Muslims and a culture for Christians. Both Hamas and
Islamic Jihad use the faith of our people and their culture in the case
of Christians as a point of departure. We further agree with Hamas on
some aspects of our political vision in terms of the position vis-à-vis
the Oslo Accord and rejecting it and in relation to the resistance
imperative and maintenance of Palestinian basic principles. On the other
hand, there are disagreements in relation to our vision or some
political issues such as elections. We had a position, Hamas had a
different position, and so on. So in some political issues, Islamic
Jihad holds a different position from Hamas. Our differences were more
pronounced in the past. With time, however, the scope of disagreement
between the two movements started to diminish.
*Jeremy Scahill:*I want to ask you about the two-year period leading up
to Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. You had the 2021 Israeli bombing campaign
against Gaza. And then over the course of the two years that followed,
the Israelis continued to target and assassinate leaders of Palestinian
Islamic Jihad. Maybe we could begin by describing this period and how
your movement experienced Israel’s attacks from the end of 2021’s
intense war until October 7, 2023. Also, Palestinian Islamic Jihad was
launching rocket attacks against Israel and Hamas was largely staying
out of it or at least saying that they were not directly participating.
They were not condemning Palestinian Islamic Jihad, but they were saying
that they weren’t participating in it.
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*First of all, Israel is under the illusion that
eliminating military or political leaders of Palestinian resistance
movements would affect these movements. In the two years you pointed
out, Islamic Jihad was exposed to a wave of assassinations, actually
three waves. So Islamic Jihad engaged in defending the Palestinian
people and responding to those crimes committed against leaders in the
military structure Al-Quds Brigades. Hamas, during those three
confrontations, did not intervene. But as you said it did not condemn
the Palestinian resistance and launching rockets. As a matter of fact,
it stood by the Islamic Jihad in its political position stating this was
a normal response to the Zionist crimes. Some, especially in Israel and
some regional media outlets tried to disgrace Hamas for having abandoned
the Islamic Jihad, saying it could have helped fend off the Zionist
aggression on Gaza since it was in charge of its administration. But let
me clarify that Islamic Jihad was capable of responding and persisting
in confronting Israel for a long time without intervention. If it were
not capable, we might have blamed Hamas for not taking part, but Islamic
Jihad proved to be capable and Israel was forced to engage in
negotiations with the Islamic Jihad movement in Cairo. I was leading
these negotiations with the Egyptians. We reached an agreement. Those
observing may not use this episode to drive a wedge between Hamas and
Islamic Jihad. On the contrary, Islamic Jihad understood Hamas’s
position and decided we can manage this battle on our own in the three
confrontations and we managed quite well.
<https://substack.com/redirect/8d40a023-87e9-4def-885e-f3c573c4a6d6?j=eyJ1IjoibHZwcGIifQ.9RIwWbE6EVIB7Jy8lfazxZKfps8R18neRGMKwOiqnRM>
Mohammed al-Hindi (right) with Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed
Yassin (center) and Hamas’s Ismail Haniyeh (left) at a memorial in 2003
for assassinated Hamas leader Ismail Abu Shanab. Photo: Mahmud Hams/AFP
via Getty.
The October 7 Attacks
*Jeremy Scahill:*How did Operation Al-Aqsa Flood come into being? Who
initiated the idea for it? Did it come from Palestinian Islamic Jihad or
Hamas or was there a joint committee that was assessing potential
responses to Israel or potential positives and negatives of launching
some sort of attack? I’m trying to understand how this was organized.
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*Hamas, or more accurately, Al-Qassam, were getting
prepared for Al-Aqsa Flood and no one knew about it. A day earlier, on
October 6, we in Islamic Jihad had a celebration of the anniversary of
the Islamic Jihad movement. Thousands took part in the celebration and
we were taken by surprise like everybody else. However, very shortly
after learning about the Flood, we engaged in this battle. It was our
duty as a resistance movement to confront the aggression immediately.
*Jeremy Scahill:*Just to clarify: You’re saying that Palestinian Islamic
Jihad, even its special forces, were not at all involved with the
planning of it until the morning of the knocking down of the fences, the
walls?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *Right.
*Jeremy Scahill:*So once your forces started entering the battle space,
were you surprised at how deep into Israeli areas of control they were
able to get, particularly on the military bases?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *The whole world was surprised! The Israeli military
units just evaporated.
*Jeremy Scahill:*Once the operations were under way, were the military
commanders of Palestinian Islamic Jihad able to give orders to their men
in the field? Given that they didn’t participate in the planning, once
your soldiers were in battle did Islamic Jihad issue guidelines for them
or objectives? How were the orders given then to the PIJ forces that
participated?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*At the beginning, the [Al-Quds] military commanders
of our movement started to give orders to engage. So after a short
while, the Islamic Jihad’s Quds Brigades took part in the battle and the
confrontations started. As a resistance movement, our duty was to fight
against occupation and against this aggression. Whenever a battle
erupts, Al-Quds Brigades take up their role and engage.
*Jeremy Scahill:*When you started watching the initial media
reports—some of the first reports said two thousand people, mostly
civilians, were killed, though those numbers were later reduced and it
became clear a large number of Israeli soldiers were also killed along
with civilians—what sort of response did you expect from the Israeli
state to these operations?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*We know Israel was built on lying and this was one
more lie. We recognized from the beginning that there was a great deal
of misleading information addressed to the West. We expected, of course,
that there would be a strong response. However, over time, these lies
started to be exposed. The Israeli response to October 7 was not
governed by any sort of laws. Neither military laws nor laws of
occupation nor any sort of laws. I believe with time, more crimes that
no one knows about until now will be exposed. Especially in relation to
detainees who were arrested just outside Gaza and many of whom were
executed in the field.
*Jeremy Scahill: *What do you understand as the direct objectives of the
October 7 operations?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *First, this is another episode of this conflict. It
has erupted like that, but it is another episode of a long, bitter, and
bloody conflict since 1948. By 1948, we refer to the Nakba where
enormous crimes were committed. Around 500 Palestinian villages were
destroyed. The Palestinian people have been fighting since 1948. You
might know, or not, that there is no Palestinian family that does not
have at least one martyr. All the fake news that Israel fabricates to
mislead the Western world is obvious, but the West accepts and wants it
because they want to keep Israel as a control and hegemony project in
the region. What happened on October 7 was an extension of those crimes.
It is also proof that the Palestinian people cannot be destroyed. In
short, Israel and the United States wanted to completely end the
Palestinian cause, not only in Gaza but everywhere.
Things started to become clearer after the Abraham Accords, which
overlooked the rights of the Palestinian people and aimed to arrange the
region along security terms by building security and economic alliances
in the region away from the rights of the Palestinian people. Obviously,
the Palestinian people are not dead and it was expected they would
defend themselves and their rights. Unless they receive their rights in
full, there would be nothing but more blood in the region. It is against
that context that we understand Al-Aqsa Flood: not in the context of
October 7, rather in the context of 1948.
*Jeremy Scahill: *Do you have a sense as to why this specific day was
chosen for those operations?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *This is an issue that was at the discretion of
Al-Qassam. But I could say that Gaza has been under blockade for 17
years. There are crimes being committed in the West Bank and Gaza. There
is a regional political setting in which a new enemy is being invented
for the region away from the Zionist enemy. This is the context in which
we understand this. So a fighting group makes its arrangements and takes
its decision and makes the judgment on the appropriate conditions.
Undoubtedly, the conditions were indeed appropriate.
*Jeremy Scahill: *I want to ask you about the taking of civilian
captives on October 7. Hamas officials have told me that their forces
did not have any orders to take women who were not soldiers or children
back to Gaza as captives. Hamas has told me that essentially when the
fence and the wall encircling Gaza was broken down and the second and
third wave of people came in—this included ordinary people or people
that were not officially involved in the operation—that they started
taking Israeli civilians back to Gaza and then Hamas had to essentially
find these people and offered to return them to Israel. What is your
understanding of the civilians taken to Gaza?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*Hamas already declared that. In Islamic Jihad, we
had a boy and an elderly lady. We issued a statement at an early stage
saying we wanted to release them both, without anything in exchange,
should the security conditions be available. This was publicly stated
and filmed at the time. So, yes, this issue was there, especially that
children, women, and elderly people were taken in by mistake. We
declared our position, and you may go back to the records. We said we
have these people in our custody, and they appeared in a video, the
young boy and elderly lady, and we were ready to let them go just like
that should the security conditions allow for it. They were then
released within the first deal.
*Jeremy Scahill: *How do you think history is going to see the events of
October 7 and the months that have unfolded since?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *A huge strategic failure for Israel on October 7 at
all levels: the political, military, and intelligence. It was also a
failure for the protectors of Israel. The nine months that followed were
just more failure because they committed crimes against civilians,
destroyed Gaza, employed the starvation policy. All those add to the
military and moral failure. Israel’s image has been damaged. The image
of victimization which it sold to the world for years is over. It has
become a wanted criminal. So, Israel has lost at the level of its image
and narrative and at the moral level. Further, the army has not achieved
any of its objectives and has been exhausted. So those successive months
have only been more failure at all levels: military, political, moral,
and in terms of Israel’s image.
*Jeremy Scahill:*You’re the chief political negotiator for Palestinian
Islamic Jihad. Are you directly participating in the negotiations over a
ceasefire or ending the siege on Gaza?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*I would like to make one thing clear. In these
negotiations, we as resistance factions have mandated Hamas to lead the
negotiations. We agreed that Hamas would manage the negotiations for
various reasons. We are reassured that Hamas will not yield in these
negotiations because it is more in the crosshairs than Islamic Jihad.
So, papers are put forward in those negotiations, be it from Israel, the
U.S., or others. Hamas presents those papers to us, and we discuss them
and offer feedback. Based on this, Hamas responds. So, the response is
not that of Hamas but of the resistance and its factions.
“We realized that Netanyahu was trying to create a fracture between
Hamas and Islamic Jihad and we did not give him that chance.”
Hamas is the chief negotiator mandated by the resistance factions. It
discusses the proposals made with the resistance factions and provides a
response that is a reflection of the resistance factions’ view. Hamas is
mandated and authorized to negotiate on behalf of the factions.
The other point is that Israel has tried to drive a wedge among
resistance factions in terms of the negotiations. Netanyahu has
personally asked the UN representative to meet him in Jerusalem around
four months ago. Netanyahu and his negotiations team asked him to go to
Lebanon and meet the Islamic Jihad to convey a message saying that
Netanyahu was ready to engage in direct negotiations with Islamic Jihad
and that he would be lenient in reaching an agreement with them on
prisoners exchange.
It was around three months ago, the UN representative came to meet one
of our brothers in Lebanon, an Islamic Jihad official, and he delivered
Netanyahu’s message. We realized that Netanyahu was trying to create a
fracture between Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and we did not give him that
chance. We announced this at the time, but we did not try to make a big
fuss about it. We talked about it in a Lebanese newspaper, Al-Akhbar.
Some Israeli papers talked about this issue the day after. Some regional
powers also tried to invite Islamic Jihad to meetings and discussions,
but we kept that door shut, too. I mean to have a delegation and make
visits, but we realized that they were trying to initiate individual
negotiations, so we just turned these proposals down.
<https://substack.com/redirect/75c35872-0ccd-4494-92dd-775bcc9048de?j=eyJ1IjoibHZwcGIifQ.9RIwWbE6EVIB7Jy8lfazxZKfps8R18neRGMKwOiqnRM>
Screenshot from an Al Quds video of a parade in Gaza City marking the
36th anniversary of the founding of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, October
4, 2023.
One State, Two States, or Perpetual State of War?
*Jeremy Scahill: *You also have forces in other areas of Palestine, in
the occupied West Bank and elsewhere, and I’m wondering why there
weren’t then coordinated uprisings in other areas beyond Gaza in the
immediate aftermath of October 7. I’m wondering if that was a strategic
decision or if the leadership of Islamic Jihad held their forces back.
I’m trying to understand why this operation did not spread to other
areas of Palestine.
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *In the West Bank, the resistance is present and
escalating and the Islamic Jihad takes part in it or even takes the lead
in it. There are arrests in the West Bank on a daily basis. Not a day
passes by without arrests and other crimes being committed. There have
been more than 500 martyrs in the West Bank since October 7 and around
10,000 detainees in addition to thousands of wounded people. So the West
Bank is indeed taking part. However, due to the magnitude of crimes
committed in Gaza, this does not feature much on the media.
Internationally, there are also other open fronts in Lebanon and in the
Red Sea in Yemen. Their fronts are backing the Gaza front. They have
decided that the battle on those fronts will not end until the
aggression on the Gaza Strip stops. The Islamic Jihad is present in
Lebanon, given there are refugee camps in Lebanon and it is part of this
confrontation in Lebanon. However, it is Hezbollah that constitutes the
main part of this front.
*Jeremy Scahill:*Do you think the conditions are present for a full
intifada at this point?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *I believe the political horizon in the West Bank is
blocked. We have an extremist government in Israel which does not
believe—the program of the members or components of the government is
publicly known. When [Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel] Smotrich talks
about the options for Palestinians being either to completely surrender
and work as wageworkers for Israel, to be displaced, or to be killed.
This is what they call the resolve program. It is a declared program.
And he is a fundamental part of this Zionist government. [Israeli
National Security Minister Itamar] Ben-Gvir also has a similar program.
So the political horizon for a Palestinian state is blocked and the
Palestinian people know it. On the other hand, the magnitude of crimes
Israel is committing in the Gaza Strip have shown they could not come
from a state which claims to be the oasis of democracy in the region nor
an army governed by laws and rules. Rather, it is a gang of murderers
and criminals killing civilians, women, and children, whose leaders are
being prosecuted in international courts for war crimes. So, the blocked
horizon and the magnitude of these crimes leads precisely to an intifada.
The form the intifada is currently taking in the West Bank involves
little popular participation due to the huge security crackdown by
Israel. As I mentioned, there are more than 10,000 detainees in the
enemy’s prisons. Also, the operations have not ceased. These people are
not without families, supporters, organizations; the same goes for
detainees. This magnitude paves the way for a big popular uprising in
the near future hopefully.
I would like to add that there is no Hamas in the West Bank nor is there
an October 7. What is there in the West Bank is Oslo. Nonetheless,
assaults by settlers in the West Bank are commonplace. Thousands of
settlers are being armed away from any formal structures even the
Zionist army and police. These are Ben-Gvir’s militias. The crimes being
perpetrated in the West Bank are unprecedented. The settlements that are
being built today and recognized are arbitrary settler clusters which
even radical Israeli governments had refused to recognize. Nonetheless,
they are being legalized now.
Palestinians in Gaza are killed. In the West Bank, however, they lose
their lands which are turned into settlements and lose their
livelihoods. That’s why the situation in the West Bank will explode, and
I believe it is going to be a big bloody conflict. The West is now
turning a blind eye and talking about Gaza and the administration of
Gaza, but Israel and Netanyahu refuse even the presence of the
Palestinian Authority in Gaza. He is trying to come up with alternatives
away from the Palestinian Authority, which is working in the West Bank
in accordance with the Oslo Accord, restricting itself by the so-called
“security coordination.” Hence, the horizon is completely blocked. The
conflict in the West Bank is going to be bloody. Then the West would
turn and say, “two-state solution.” But that’s nonsense because what we
see on the ground is more relevant than the statements we hear and which
have no value.
“The situation in the West Bank will explode, and I believe it is going
to be a big bloody conflict.”
*Jeremy Scahill:*The most cliché question any reporter asks any
Palestinian is, “What do you think about the two-state solution?” But
that is what is being pushed by the Biden administration. When I’ve
interviewed officials from Hamas, they say that if the democratic will
of the Palestinian people was to establish a state along the 1967
borders, Hamas would not stand in the way of this. What is the position
of Palestinian Islamic Jihad on this?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*This is not a realistic question. It is not as
though anything depends on this question. Yasser Arafat signed the Oslo
Accords and accepted the two-state solution and he was the head of the
PLO; he signed on its behalf. Thirty-one years later, the lands on which
the Palestinian state was supposed to be established have become the
second Israel. They have become a state for settlers. It seems that a
two-state solution was about the first state of Israel of 1948 and the
second Israel in 1967.
Even Gaza has been under a suffocating blockade for 17 years because no
one wants Gaza, this narrow strip of land on which 2.5 million
Palestinians live. So with the question of the two-state solution, the
West asks, “What is Hamas’s position on the two-state solution?” But
Yasser Arafat had already signed off on the two-state solution 31 years
ago, and it was for nothing. Some journalists ask about the position of
Islamic Jihad of a two-state solution, but no one asks the Israeli
parties who constitute the government and are members in the Knesset and
who are calling for eliminating the Palestinian cause and displacing the
Palestinian people in whole, calling for a transfer while being in the
Zionist decision-making position. So, we object to putting the
Palestinian people to a test by asking, “What is the position of the
factions on the two-state solution?” This is not logical.
On the other hand, Hamas is sometimes forced to answer this question
because it is administering the Gaza Strip and everybody wants to ask
Hamas, “What if it were the wish of the Palestinian people?” But Israel
refuses that solution, objects to it and resists it. It is building a
state on the lands that were supposed to become the lands of the
Palestinian state. Now some propose a one-state solution. If they are
really keen on democracy, there is a Palestinian population in the
occupied lands across historic Palestine. What about state governance?
Why doesn’t anyone ask about one state where all citizens enjoy the same
rights?
So as a matter of principle, I believe we are in a national liberation
stage which requires resistance. When there is a partner willing to
solve the Palestinian issue, whether in Israel or the West, especially
the United States, only then they can talk. Now, however, talking of a
two-state solution offers the Palestinian people mere illusions as
though the U.S. administration and the West are keen on the two-state
solution. The American wizard has just pulled this out from their pocket
to throw it against Al-Aqsa Flood. That’s all! They are even talking
about a renewed authority, not even about the Palestinian Authority
which is the partner in the two-state solution. They are talking about a
new authority and no one even knows what that is. Nonetheless, Israel
refuses that proposal. It says the Israeli army will re-occupy the Gaza
Strip, but because of the security concerns and the heavy cost of such
return, Israel wants to find some sort of agents in the administration
of Gaza and when they fail, then [Secretary of State Antony] Blinken for
example would make a statement saying we don’t accept occupation, we
don’t accept that Hamas manages Gaza, we don’t accept chaos. Tell us
please, what is the alternative? Make a proposal. So the problem is not
with the Palestinian people nor with Palestinian factions to answer this
question. The problem is basically that Israel does not want to give us
any of our rights and the American administration sponsors this Israeli
position and does not dare, for many reasons, to face this blocked horizon.
“Blinken for example would make a statement saying we don’t accept
occupation, we don’t accept that Hamas manages Gaza, we don’t accept
chaos. Tell us please, what is the alternative? Make a proposal.”
Our problem lies in the injustice inflicted upon us, the aggression
against us. Our problem is not with the Jews, not with the Americans. It
is injustice. So, if Netanyahu stood on the highest minaret in
Palestine, or the minaret of Al-Aqsa Mosque and embraced Islam, the
problem would not be over. Our problem with Netanyahu and Israel is
because they occupied our land, killed our people, and they are engaging
in aggression against us. Even if he embraced Islam, the problem would
still be there. The Americans must understand this.
*Jeremy Scahill:*What would an acceptable resolution look like from your
perspective?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*Look, let’s agree on some basic rules. After 76
years, the Palestinian people have not given in, and they started
Al-Aqsa Flood. Israel is governed by an unprecedented radical government
that believes only in ending the conflict with a resolve that is full of
racism and grudge. This puts things at an unreconcilable position.
For us as Palestinians, and I’m not talking about a resistance group,
Islamic Jihad or Hamas, unless we achieve our rights, there will be no
stability in the region. The whole world is shifting. There are ongoing
international conflicts which affect the Palestinian issue and are
affected by it. The region is also changing. The region today is not
what it was ten years ago when it seemed the Arabs had turned their
backs on the Palestinian people and the whole thing was over. It is
clear now that there are back up fronts supporting the Palestinian
cause. The internal Palestinian setting is also shifting.
After more than 30 years, Oslo is over. The Palestinian Authority is now
being used as a security tool. It is clear that the constituency of
Fatah is also engaging in the confrontation against Israel and is not
content with the position of the [Palestinian] Authority. The
Palestinian resistance in Gaza has persevered in Gaza for nine months
and is still in good shape and ready to persist in a way no one could
expect. All those changes must be taken into account when talking about
the Palestinian cause. The rights of the Palestinian people at the bare
minimum which was agreed upon involved a state in the West Bank and Gaza
Strip. This is the minimum which the Palestinian people could accept as
a first stage. We are not against Jews living amongst us in the region,
but they can’t dominate, take control, and lead the region and arrange
it on security terms in accordance with their interests and those of
their allies. This region has its people who have rights which they will
not give up.
Time is in favor of the Palestinian people, despite all the pain we
experience. All those illusions in the minds of Israeli leaders are
shattering before the new reality in the region and the world.
*Jeremy Scahill:*Do you believe that Jews who emigrated from Europe or
the United States or Australia or South Africa have a right to live in
that state?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *We don’t have a problem with them if they were not
conspiring, engaging in aggression, inflicting injustice, controlling
the region. We don’t have a problem otherwise.
*Jeremy Scahill:*What purpose do Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian
Authority serve right now?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*Mahmoud Abbas has a vision and a project which were
translated into the Oslo Accord. Now, 31 years on, the vision of Mahmoud
Abbas and the Palestinian Authority is evaporating. They’ve become
completely irrelevant whether for political partnership with Israel or
for the resistance. So this whole project is coming to its long-expected
end. I believe the PA’s project is disintegrating over time.
First, it has not yielded the bare minimum expectations it was built
upon. Second, Israel is only dealing with it temporarily to manage the
situation in the West Bank while it has no true sovereignty whatsoever,
even in Area B. In Area A, too, there is no real sovereignty whatsoever.
Israel enters those areas whenever it wants, arrests whoever it wants in
Area A. So with time, I believe any opinion poll in the West Bank will
find that most Palestinian people are with the resistance, not with the
PA. So the Oslo project was basically what Yasser Arafat and then
Mahmoud Abbas hoped would evolve into a state in the West Bank and Gaza
Strip. Israel, however, wanted it to be a tool to manage the Palestinian
people so it would be an easy, uncostly occupation. The balance of power
helped Israel achieve that goal, achieve its vision of this agreement.
On the ground, it stripped the PA of any sovereignty and rendered it
into a tool to manage Palestinian communities. Then it built that
separation wall which devoured large swathes of the West Bank, built
these settlements, Judaized Jerusalem. Thus, the PA project is almost over.
*Jeremy Scahill:*Would it be better for the Palestinian people if there
was no PA? What would replace it?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *The alternative would be an internal Palestinian
agreement. There are fundamental Palestinian powers which did not exist
when the PLO was built. Hamas and Islamic Jihad are not in the PLO
despite being primary active powers on the ground. The PLO comprises
factions. Fatah, as a faction, is present and has its impact and
constituency. But most other factions are marginal factions with no
significant presence. Internal Palestinian arrangements must now be
built on the realities and the actors on the ground rather than on the
situation back in the 1960s and 1970s. Therefore, rebuilding the PLO is,
in my opinion, the best way to approach rearranging the internal
Palestinian structure.
This is part 3 in my series covering armed Palestinian groups’
perspectives on the war on Gaza. Subscribe to get the rest.
Upgrade to paid
<https://substack.com/redirect/2/eyJlIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZHJvcHNpdGVuZXdzLmNvbS9zdWJzY3JpYmU_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.X27ci0EvspAQDlFX7p0vM1cXAGHN-RqO7jQ1-LWIoG0?&utm_medium=email&utm_source=subscribe-widget-preamble&utm_content=146643956>
*Jeremy Scahill:*If the negotiations between Hamas and Palestinian
Islamic Jihad and the Israelis result in the freeing of Marwan
Barghouti, would you support his candidacy to become president of an
independent internationally recognized Palestine? /[Note: Barghouti is a
Palestinian resistance leader imprisoned by Israel since 2002. While he
is a member of the ruling Fatah party, he was a vocal critic of the Oslo
agreement, and Hamas and PIJ have consistently demanded his freedom.
Sometimes referred to as the Palestinian Nelson Mandela, he is widely
viewed as the most popular choice among Palestinians to be a future
president of an independent state.]/
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *It is premature to say. First, there is the issue
of releasing Marwan Barghouti. Of course, we demand releasing all
Palestinian prisoners including leaders of the Palestinian resistance,
Marwan Barghouti, all of them. The question of running for president
later is something for Fatah to decide. Barghouti is a leader of Fatah
and if they nominate him, then this can be discussed. So Islamic Jihad
or Hamas, just for being the reason for his release will not support or
otherwise oppose him. It is for Fatah to nominate him, and then we look
into all the candidates and we reach certain agreements. So this is
quite premature. But I can say that in Islamic Jihad, we are keen on
having a solid, strong, and cohesive Fatah that is internally unified.
The Axis of Resistance
*Jeremy Scahill: *In the broader news media there is a lot of reporting
that asserts that Palestinian Islamic Jihad is supported quite
significantly by Iran, and I wanted to ask you about the relationship
with Iran and if these reports are true that there is military and
financial support being given by Tehran to Palestinian Islamic Jihad?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *We are a Palestinian resistance movement. Our
struggle started before the Iranian Revolution. The struggle of the
Palestinian people has been ongoing for 76 years. We are grateful and
appreciate all those who stand by our side. Now, Iran stands by the
Palestinian people and the Palestinian resistance. It supports the
Palestinian people and resistance with all that the Palestinian people
may need. This is declared and obvious for everyone. It is no secret.
The Islamic Jihad movement started in terms of discussion and internal
dialogue before the 1979 revolution. We started in the mid-1970s. We
started resistance in the early 1980s before having any relations with
the Islamic Republic. We were in occupation prisons in the Gaza Strip
and we did not know anyone from Iran. We started because we had our
vision and understanding of history and politics in the region. So we
fulfilled our duty. Now, Iran comes and supports us. We appreciate this
support. Especially at a time when the Arabs abandon us, go to Israel
and reach agreements with it.
When it comes to Iran, the big fuss in the Western media and even in the
region was caused by Israel who is trying to say, in the context of
normalization with the Arabs, that there is a new enemy for the Arabs in
the region while Israel is becoming an ally rather than an enemy. This
is the context within which the Iranian role is discussed and the
Iranian support for the resistance which Israel and part of the West
designate as terrorist. Therefore, it invented that enemy suggesting
that the region has Israel, who is an ally to Sunni states in the
region, and there are agreements and peace deals being reached while
there is an enemy that constitutes a threat to everyone, both the Sunni
states and Israel. This enemy is Iran which is supporting ‘terrorist
movements’ in the region, namely the Palestinian resistance. Israel is
thus trying to invade the whole region as such. However, Iran is not a
transient state.
If we look at the populations inhabiting this region for thousands of
years, we see Arabs, Persians, and Turks. Iran is nothing new. It is a
recognized state in the region and has its interests. Arabs and
non-Arabs recognize these interests. It is a state that cannot be
overlooked in the region. Israel is the transient state. That’s why it
is trying to change the equation. These accusations are leveled at the
Islamic Jihad or Hamas or the Palestinian resistance suggesting they
follow Iranian commands or as though they are part of this alliance
deemed as “devilish” against Western and world interests.
*Jeremy Scahill: *Is it true that there is a command center of sorts
where the factions—whether it’s Iran or the Islamic resistance in Iraq
or the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad—is
there an official agreement on coordination in resistance?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*Whether there is or there is not is not a matter of
media discussion. There is resistance engaged in a battle right now, a
confrontation. There are back up fronts. That’s all that can be said on
this matter. This is what is publicly known and declared. I have nothing
to say.
*Jeremy Scahill: *What’s your current political analysis of what might
happen in Lebanon? It seems as though the Israelis want at least to
engage in some form of more intense warfare against Lebanon, against
Hezbollah. The Biden administration has indicated it would support
Israel in such a war.
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*Hezbollah declared they opened a backup front since
October 8 and that confrontations on this front will not stop unless the
aggression on Gaza stops. Now, Israel is threatening to expand the war
and some hardline voices in the Israeli government are calling for a
full-fledged war in south Lebanon. But I believe it is unlikely. First
of all, Israel is exhausted; its army is exhausted in the Gaza Strip.
For nine months so far, they have not been able to resolve anything or
achieve any of its declared goals. It is sinking in the Gaza quicksand.
Despite all the violence and massacres, Israel’s options in Gaza now are
hard. Be it staying in Gaza, or having a partial withdrawal and
redeployment and maintaining the Philadelphi Corridor or Netzarim
Corridor, or complete withdrawal. Israel is unable to resolve any of its
problems in Gaza. So, how can it take an exhausted army to a war in
south Lebanon? They know Hezbollah has multiple times the capabilities
of the resistance in Gaza.
It also knows that Hezbollah territory is not like Gaza, i.e., open like
a football field. The topography is quite different. The front in
Lebanon, also, is not closed like Gaza but could be said to extend from
the Mediterranean to the Caspian Sea.
On the other hand, what targets does Israel have in Lebanon? Are there
military targets or economic facilities of Hezbollah for Israel to
target? Israel might destroy the southern suburb of Beirut in terms of
buildings. But what targets are there in Lebanon? None. In Israel, there
are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of military and economic targets for
Hezbollah. They have published some such targets around two weeks ago.
The targets were filmed and published.
Further, is the decision to wage a war on Lebanon a purely Israeli
decision? Or does it need an American approval or greenlight in a
decision which could drag the region into a regional war which may be
hard to contain? The Americans are not in a position now to allow for a
war that may expand into a regional war at such critical times with the
upcoming elections, the war in Ukraine, and other issues. That’s why I
believe all Israeli threats, particularly by Netanyahu and his minister
Gallant, are just empty words.
*Jeremy Scahill:*Do you feel betrayed by the Arab nations in general in
this situation post-October 7? Do you think the approach to the Abraham
Accords and the other negotiations that the U.S. is engaged in to try to
normalize relations between Israel and Arab nation states represents a
betrayal of the Palestinian cause?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi:*Since the beginning of the normalization agreements,
the Abraham Accords, it was clear that the Arabs have abandoned their
previously held position adopted in the Arab Summit in Beirut in 2002,
which talks about willingness to normalize relations with Israel only
when the Palestinian issue is addressed through the two-state solution.
Then they made this leap in the Abraham Accords, namely normalization;
they had made up their minds. However, now we have October 7. What was
before October 7 is different from what comes after, including for the
regimes which have normalized relations with Israel.
The vision of these regimes depends on the outcome of this war. So,
everybody is waiting to see what this confrontation in Gaza will bring.
It is clear that Israel has not achieved any of its goals so far and
will emerge in a different light, not the light in which it was seen
when it signed the Abraham Accords. In the Abraham Accords, it was
regarded as a strong state that can replace the U.S. when it gradually
withdraws from the region to southeast Asia for its confrontations with
China and the Russians. Israel would take the lead in the region. This
perception has now changed. And based on the outcome of the battle in
Gaza, it is clear things will continue to be different from before.
Of course, we will not see quick and clear results at the beginning, but
these are states who have interests. I expect these states would, in the
medium term or sooner, start to act based on the rules upon which the
region would be built after October 7.
How Does the Palestinian Resistance View Biden vs. Trump?
*Jeremy Scahill: *I’ve reviewed your history going back to the 1980s,
and you’ve been been in this struggle through many U.S. administrations.
What is Joe Biden’s place in history?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *We kind of miss Trump now, his debates and
statements. President Biden is not to be seen as one person, but he
represents the Democratic Party which has a clear policy. He is an
expert. President Biden is not a newcomer to politics. He is an expert
with extensive experience. He spent a lifetime working in politics as a
senator, vice-president, etc. He is a veteran [politician]. He
represents the Democratic Party quite well. He has a grasp of balances
in the international arena. He made a mistake, probably, when he led the
battle by coming to Israel and attending the first cabinet of war.
I believe his calculations failed him in this regard. Netanyahu, who has
a long experience in dealing with the various administrations,
especially during elections, was the winner in this case with Biden’s
blunt involvement in the war. Netanyahu went to the Congress during the
Obama administration. He has prior experience. He is going to go there
now, too. It is clear he will try to linger in Gaza until the U.S.
elections, in one way or another, in the hope things will be resolved if
Trump wins the elections.
The U.S. administration is restricted, be it Democrats or Republicans.
They are bound by internal affairs, lobbies, capitalists,
businesspeople. U.S. elections are affected by all those factors. Quite
frankly, we don’t count much on the outcome of those elections.
At the grassroots level in the American society, at the level of the
youth, there are genuine shifts and many free and humane voices that are
spreading in universities. Even the American officer who torched
himself—we would build a monument for him not just in Gaza but in our
hearts. These are quite strong manifestations. However, these free and
humane moves would not translate—and we do not expect them to
translate—into policies which would govern the U.S. administration.
*Jeremy Scahill: *I’m wondering if you think the situation for
Palestinians would be better if Trump won instead of Biden?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *I believe this depends on how things evolve on
certain issues. Trump, at the end of the day, just like Biden, would be
looking after American interests. So, developments in the region,
developments in the world, the war in Ukraine, tensions with China, all
those are factors that influence any American president, Democrat or
Republican. I believe the world is shifting, the region is changing, the
Palestinian people are moving, the Palestinian resistance has proven
that it is not a player that can be overlooked. There are existing
regional powers that support the Palestinian people. All of this must be
taken into account. The ongoing war in Ukraine, its outcomes and trends,
the rules it instills, the conflict with China, all these issues will
affect the approach adopted by Trump or any Democrat president, be it
Biden, if he continues as a candidate, or any other Democrat candidate.
We prefer to have a candidate other than Biden, though.
Israel’s strategic weight in the region has undoubtedly been affected.
How would regional states, allies of the U.S., look at Israel now after
this failure on October 7 and for over nine months? This is important.
How would the world regard Israel as well? In the eyes of the world and
the region, would Israel, who have failed so miserably before Gaza, be a
reliable ally to be trusted with protecting the region and securing its
security and political and economic future? So, any future president
will find those changes on the table and they cannot be disregarded.
Especially if he is a businessman like Trump.
“Trump, at the end of the day, just like Biden, would be looking after
American interests. … We prefer to have a candidate other than Biden,
though.”
The UN Secretary General spoke in honest, human and strong terms and
exposed Israel. The ICJ and ICC are rightly prosecuting Israel. Yet we
are concerned that all the resonance of these crimes would fade away and
cool down with time. That is why it is very important for us that the
U.S., especially the new generation, would maintain this relationship,
which is not about Palestine alone. Rather, Palestine has become a
symbol of resisting injustice, imperialism, and encroachment on humanity
at large. These are crimes unprecedented in human history being
broadcast for the first time on air around the clock.
I would like to stress one more time, there are some Jewish voices,
especially in the United States, who are better than some Arabs and
Muslims. Zionism is an idea and a policy. One might find Arabs or
Muslims who are Zionist, too. Just like there are Christian and Jewish
Zionists, there are Muslim Zionists. So, I reiterate again that we
respect all those voices, those free voices who want humanity to prevail
at the end of this battle, and we believe our battle in Palestine is the
battle of all against injustice, encroachment, grudge, racism: a battle
against all those evils which the American people oppose.
All the more so because this conflict will not be over with the end of
this war. It is an open conflict. So, while we understand these voices
will not be translated into policies overnight, since this is an open
conflict, these voices will have a significant impact in the future.
There have been some important American examples such as Rachel Corrie
who stood before the bulldozer in the past in Rafah. /[Note: Corrie was
an American activist who was killed in Rafah, Gaza, in 2003 as she tried
to prevent Israeli forces from demolishing Palestinian homes.]/
*Jeremy Scahill: *I read the U.S. State Department designation of you as
a specially designated terrorist and I’d like to hear your comment on
that designation.
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *I believe the Americans do not know Mohammed
Al-Hindi. It is the Israelis who introduced me to them, so this
designation is ultimately Israeli. They said, “These are terrorists.” At
the time, when they designated me years ago, they said as deputy
secretary general of Islamic Jihad, he holds responsibility for the
movement’s acts of resistance. So, the Americans took decisions that had
no value whatsoever like freezing assets. I have never been to the U.S.,
nor do I have a dime in American banks or other banks. So, these
decisions are just without any value and have no bearing on the ground.
I believe these are Israeli decisions par excellence.
There is a sheikh associated with the founding of the Islamic Jihad
movement. His name was Abd Al Aziz Awda. He returned to Gaza after the
Oslo Accord. An American newspaper wrote about him at the time saying he
was a founding member of the Islamic Jihad and mentioned his name among
four names which the paper said were dangerous and wanted. He was told
the Americans are saying so-and-so about you. He said that is not
important. What is important is that Israel knows the truth.
The Americans see the region with only one lens, which is Israel’s,
because it is their project. So, all those decisions have no bearing and
no value for the resistance but only make us more determined.
*Jeremy Scahill*: Is there**any message that you would want to send to
the American people or the U.S. government?
*Mohammed Al-Hindi: *The American people are free people. The movements
we see in American universities and the voices of important American
figures give us hope. We appreciate all this, and we believe that
humanity will prevail, hopefully soon.**For us, in Palestine, it is our
duty to fight the Zionist project as a threat not just to the
Palestinians but to the whole region. In short, there can be no security
or stability in the region unless the Palestinian people access their
minimum rights. Now Al-Aqsa Flood has brought the conflict back to
square one in a way no one could foresee. This is not the message of
Hamas alone. This is the message of the Palestinian people as a whole.
Thank you for reading Drop Site News. This post is public so feel free
to share it.
Share
<https://substack.com/app-link/post?publication_id=2510348&post_id=146643956&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&utm_campaign=email-share&action=share&triggerShare=true&isFreemail=true&r=lvppb&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozNjc1MTU4MywicG9zdF9pZCI6MTQ2NjQzOTU2LCJpYXQiOjE3MjExMzgyODksImV4cCI6MTcyMzczMDI4OSwiaXNzIjoicHViLTI1MTAzNDgiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.wYEQXJAoJF2_xJzzsSOgGlaATnlNORIe6h6zjMJHfO0>
te News, Inc.
Drop Site News Inc., 4315 50th St. NW
Ste 100 Unit #2560, Washington, DC 20016
<https://substack.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.ufhGl22D-Pgw60pKDLUP_K6O3GbkzHbOuybP_7p0JdI?>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20240716/3f271d97/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list