Charlot Zahra caught up with Palestinian democracy activist Mustafa Barghouti, on a visit to Malta, who spoke of his vision of a democratic, free Palestinian state

Your background is that of a doctor and engaged in civil society. How did you get involved in politics and why?

Every Palestinian gets involved in politics. It's in our blood because of our situation. I became involved in politics when I was a student. I was in the student movement at school and in the civil resistance against occupation.

I was active in the student movement in the University. I was also elected as a leader of the student union. There is no contradiction between being active in politics and being a doctor as well.

But I got more involved in politics because we realised that you cannot really help the health system only by treating one person or a number of people. You need to treat not the symptoms but the causes of the problem and the causes of the disease.

And the causes of the disease in Palestine are political - the occupation, the suppression of people, the obstruction of any possibility of development. But there was another reason.

I believe in democracy; I believe in civil society. And the time came when you feel there is the need for a new movement, and that's where we started work to establish a new movement not only for national liberation but also for democracy and a democratic system.

You formed part of the Madrid negotiations in 1991, yet you are opposed to the Oslo accords signed two years later. Why?

Because Oslo was a deviation from Madrid. Madrid was about finalising a solution. Madrid was about finishing all the problems. Madrid was about establishing lasting peace.

Oslo obstructed the whole solution by creating what I call partial agreements. It was supposed to bring along more confidence, but actually it did not. It created more chaos and more distrust between people.

And that's why I believe it was a mistake. Instead of solving the problems, the problems were postponed. And then the Palestinians were trapped in Oslo to reach an agreement without at least guaranteeing that Israel would stop the building of settlements.

In my opinion Oslo was like unilateral abstentions by the Palestinian side, even of struggle, while Israel continued to build facts on the ground through the settlement expansion.

So I think it was a trap, and it was a trap because Israel realised that there was a Palestinian leadership that could really make concessions at that expense just to guarantee that it remains the accepted leadership. And that was a mistake.

We should not have gone into Oslo. We should have insisted on negotiating a full agreement and we should not have accepted to postpone the issues of settlements, statehood, borders, refugees and others.

So why did the PLO accept Oslo then?

They made a strategic mistake. They thought they could make an agreement and maybe did not pay attention to how important this is - that when you sign an agreement it becomes obligatory.

They took it lightly. But they were also more concerned with being accepted as a leadership, and Israel played the game of making them frightened, although the local Palestinian leadership never thought of competing with the exiled leadership. Still, the exiled leadership was very uncomfortable and was very worried. And I think the Israelis used that.

But mainly the leadership made a very clear mistake that reflected a very serious level of incompetence - incompetence in understanding the strategic challenge, negotiations and legal matters. And they never took things seriously because they thought they could sign an agreement and then maybe break it later.

But that doesn't work. And that's why we insist that any future agreement will have to be ratified democratically by the Palestinian people because only agreements that are made between democracies can last, not agreements imposed by one side on another or by one side cheating the other.

In 2002 you set up Al Mubadara, the Palestinian National Initiative. How does this differ from Hamas and Fatah?

It's very different from Hamas and Fatah. It's an alternative to both. It's different from Fatah because we are against corruption. We are against concessions in relationship to national rights.

We are for true democratic reform and complete democratic reform. It's different from Hamas because we do not believe in fundamentalism. It's a movement that believes in the rights of Palestinians to be free in a two-state solution.

It's also a movement that concentrates a lot on building democratic structures and building democracy with all its means, not only elections but also separation of powers, independence of the judiciary and freedom of speech.

We are also different from both movements because we believe in social justice and social rights, women's rights, human rights and workers' rights.

We believe in the rule of law. We believe that people who are weak and underprivileged or sick must be helped.

We believe in strong social systems and, at the same time, we believe that a non-violent approach to the civil mass struggle is much more effective. Palestinians need a different alternative; they need a third force; they need a different approach. And that's why Al Mubadara is important for the future.

What is the strategy of this movement?

Our strategy is based on five pillars. One is unified leadership and unified clear strategy for the Palestinian people with a clear programme of what we should achieve, including building an independent, democratic and sovereign Palestinian state.

Second, we believe in building a strong relationship between Palestinians inside and those in the diaspora, and getting the Palestinians in the diaspora to get involved in our struggle. Third is to build a strong international solidarity movement with the Palestinian people. This international solidarity movement is very important if you want the Palestinian cause to succeed.

Fourth, we believe in mass popular struggle and in civil disobedience against the Israeli measures.

Finally, we believe that we should build strong relations also with the peace movement in Israel and encourage such movements inside Israel.

Last year you contested the Palestinian presidential election, running against Abu Mazen and placing second with 19.8 per cent of the vote. How tough was it to contest an election where the whole international community was siding with Abu Mazen?

It was very tough but it was fun. I enjoyed every minute of it and people supported us. We got tremendous support, about 30 per cent.

Everything was fine till the last four hours of the election, when the Palestinian Authority and the Fatah people started shooting at the Central Election Commission and they made them change the law when they allowed that at least an additional 100,000 votes be added to Abu Mazen's total.

We then felt very bad because we thought this was not fair and that there was a process of theft, of stealing people's votes.

I know this would not have changed the result, but at least I believe that even with that we managed to build something that will serve the Palestinians in future. And if it weren't for the presidential elections, and even our struggle against the mistakes that were made, we would not have seen clear, honest and clean Legislative Council elections.

I believe in freedom, democracy and variety to compete. I believe in pluralism and I believe we added a substantial contribution to the right of democracy in Palestine, and are determined to continue that.

We started a movement that would stay. It was not a coincidence that one of the people who started the movement was Dr Haidar Abdul Shafi, who is the most respected Palestinian in our society, who himself was one of the founders of the Palestine Liberation Organisation and a member of the executive committee of the PLO, even before Arafat.

Another one was Edward Said, who is probably the leading Arab intellectual, a man who lived in the United States and also lived in the West and at the same time defended the rights of the Palestinians and the cause of Palestine.

Together with myself and others, this combination of people reflected a cry among the Palestinian people for change. Maybe what we are building is not just a political movement; it's a new model of a political movement in the Palestinian circumstances. A model of a voluntary political movement rather that a movement that is built on bureaucrats who are paid. And I feel optimistic about the future.

What are the main problems facing Palestinian society at the moment?

Poverty, unemployment, a very poor economic situation, lack of security, but above all it's occupation by Israel. It's the occupation that is the main problem. None of the other problems can be solved without first solving the problem of Israel's military occupation, aggression, humiliation and the apartheid system that Israel has perpetrated against the Palestinians.

Why is the problem of occupation so central?

Because it is the core root of the entire problem.

What is your view of the current situation of stalemate at the Palestinian Authority and in the Middle East peace process? Who is to blame for this?

Israel... and the international community, which is not doing enough to push to correct this problem and to protect and promote human rights and international law.

But there is also some blame on Palestinians because we are not united. This is our mistake; nobody else's mistake. And that's why we must get united and have a clear vision about what we need so that we can improve the situation.

How can the situation be unblocked?

In my opinion, by setting up a national unity government in Palestine immediately and then calling for an international peace conference.

What, in your view, would be a just solution for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict?

A two-state solution and a Palestinian state in every part of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. Israel must end occupation and leave all the occupied territories of 1967.

It must go back to the lines of June 4, 1967. And then we must find a just solution to the issue of Palestinian refugees in accordance with United Nations resolution 194. Then we can speak about full peace.

What timeframe is envisaged?

I don't know. I wish I knew! If I knew, I think I would be in a very good position, but I can't tell you now. I know what is needed, I know there are lots of obstacles, but I also know that we are determined to get there.

How did your visit to Malta contribute to the situation?

I hope that I've managed to give some information to the people here about the reality on the ground. I hope I have managed to bring to people's knowledge some more understanding of the suffering of the Palestinian people but, more important, more conviction that Palestinians have the right to be free like all the others.

Did you find support for the Palestinian cause?

I found a fantastic reception (and) great hospitality by everybody. And I thank Joe (Mifsud) for organising this trip. If it wasn't for him, I wouldn't have been here.

Mr Barghouti was in Malta as guest of the Euro-Med Movement (Malta), and took part in an international seminar on Transforming Conflict in the Euro-Mediterranean Region.

charlotz@maltanet.net

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.