Hasan Abdel Rahman - PLO Ambassador - Speech (1977)

Speaker 1: Born in a small town near Ramallah, Palestine, our speaker today attended the Catholic University of Puerto Rico, where he studied for both a BA degree and for an MA degree in the field of public administration. He is currently a candidate for a PhD degree in comparative politics at City University, New York. In 1974, Mr. Rahman began his work for the Palestine Liberation Organization. in the capacity of assistant director for the PLO's New York office. At the present time, he's the deputy permanent observer for the Palestine Liberation Organization to the United Nations. He also serves as acting director of the PLO information office in New York City. Mr. Rahman was a delegate of the Palestine Liberation Organization to the Social and Humanities Committee of the United Nations. He also represented the PLO at the Habitat Conference in Vancouver, British Columbia. Mr. Rahman has given many talks on the questions of Palestine on radio and television. He's made similar presentations at numerous colleges and universities throughout the United States. He has traveled extensively in Latin America and the Caribbean areas. He's lived for two years in Brazil. Mr. Rahman will address us today on a topic of very current interest, Palestine, the key to the Middle East peace. I present Mr. Hassan Abdel Rahman.

Hassan Abdel Rahman: Mr. President, members and guests of the Commonwealth Club. Permit me at the outset to thank you in the name of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian people for giving me the opportunity to be with you in this beautiful city. The beauty of San Francisco, reminds me of Ramallah, my hometown in the occupied West Bank in Palestine. I intend to be candid and open in my remarks. The title of my speech is Palestine, Key to Peace in the Middle East. The selection of this title is significant. It is significant in that it reflects the reality of the conflict in the Middle East. When we address ourselves to what is called the Middle East conflict, it is essential that a distinction be made between two unidentical yet interrelated aspects of the problem. The first aspect concerns Israel's occupation of territories which belong to two sovereign Arab nations, namely Syria and Egypt. refers to the uprooting and national dispossession of the Palestinian people, a result of Zionist settlement of Palestine and the creation of the state of Israel on the national soil of the Palestinian people. This second aspect constitutes the core of the Middle East conflict. Mr. President, allow me to present a selection of historical truths about Zionism in Palestine. The first wave of Zionist invasion of Palestine began in 1881. At that time, the population of Palestine exceeded half a million, of which only 20,000 were Palestinian Jews. And the remainder were Palestinians of Muslim and Christian faith. every segment of the population enjoyed the religious tolerance characteristic of our culture. Between the years 1881 and 1917, the Zionist movement succeeded in settling 50,000 Jews in Palestine. In 1917, the Zionist movement succeeded in getting the British government to issue the infamous Balfour Declaration. which committed to help create a Jewish national home in Palestine at the time when the Arabs were fighting with the allies in the First World War. In the period between 1917 and 1947, while Palestine was under the British mandate, The Zionist movement, in collaboration with the Mandatory Power, settled in Palestine over 500,000 Jews against the wishes and will of the indigenous population of Palestine. The struggle of our people started at the same time that they became aware of the colonialist intentions of the Zionists and the role of the big powers in facilitating the process of the usurpation of our homeland and the destruction of our culture and our national identity. Our people were aware of the nature of the schemes which have been orchestrated against them. That's why they resisted tenaciously and fought heroically against British colonialism and Zionist settlement. Our people fought to preserve their national identity and to protect their very existence. And in 1948, the State of Israel was proclaimed. This marked the beginning of the Palestinian diaspora. Over one million Palestinians became refugees, expelled from their homes and properties. 375 towns and villages were destroyed by Zionist gangs. And the Palestinians who remained after the establishment of the state became third class citizens in their homeland, refugees in their homeland, nonpersons to the Israeli establishment. Their human, political, and national rights have been violated on a daily basis. Palestinians of my generation. recall vividly the agonies and miseries suffered by our compatriots. I, for one, witnessed Palestinians who gathered in a refugee camp near my town in the cold winter of 1950. Scores of children and old people died of lack of food and of the cold weather when their miserable tents proved inadequate to provide them with the minimum of shelter. I remember sharing my house with two refugee families who arrived from a village near Lodda. And I should note that the Palestinian people, despite their order, preserved their will to struggle for the preservation of their national identity and sense of nationhood. Their tragic experience moved the Palestinian people to search for means of survival. As individuals, they placed an extraordinary emphasis on education. And as a collectivity, they searched for what they thought were adequate political organizations. In the field of education, the Palestinians achieved one of the highest ratios of college graduates per capita among the peoples of the Third World. 11,000 college graduates among the Palestinians, and about 100,000 Palestinian students are actually enrolled in universities and colleges throughout the world. The Palestinians have contributed greatly to the development of most of the Gulf states and the countries of North Africa. The level of political consciousness among the Palestinian is considerably high by international standards. In 1964, the Palestinians began their organized political life in the context of the Palestine Liberation Organization. This started at their national convention held in May 1964 in the city of Jerusalem, where the Palestinian people, through their representatives, chose their first national council, equivalent to a parliament, as well as an executive committee. Since then, the PLO has been organizing the Palestinian people, mobilizing them, articulating their demands, and leading their struggle towards the restoration of their national inalienable rights. The PLO first acquired its legitimacy as the representative of the Palestinian people by the Palestinian people themselves in that convention. And at the summit conference in Rabat, Morocco, 1974, the Arab states recognized the PLO as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. And in the same year, 105 states, members of the United Nations, voted to invite the PLO, the representative of the Palestinian people, to participate in the debates and deliberations on the question of Palestine at the United Nations. And Yasser Arafat, chairman of the executive committee, appeared before the General Assembly and brought the case of the Palestinian people to the international community. Since then, the PLO has participated actively and effectively in the works of the United Nations and its specialized agencies. In 1973, the conference of foreign ministers of the non-aligned countries in Algeria voted to recognize the PLO as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. In 1975, the conference of foreign ministers of the non-aligned countries admitted the PLO as a full member of the movement. And in 1976, At the summit conference held in Colombo, Sri Lanka, the PLO was elected to the Coordinating Bureau of the Non-Aligned Movement. Even the European Economic Community in its collectivity has conferred some recognition on the PLO. In brief, the PLO is recognized as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people by the overwhelming majority of the international community. In its 29th session, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 3236, in which the national inalienable rights of the Palestinian people were recognized and defined as follows. First, the Palestinian people have the right to return their to their homes and properties. Second, the Palestinian people have the right to self-determination, national independence, and sovereignty in their homeland. And third, the Palestinian people have the right to struggle by all means to achieve the restoration of their rights. Against this background, Israel has intransigently maintained a policy of aggression against the Palestinian people. Israeli phantom planes bombed civilian targets in Palestinian refugee camps. They completely, in 1975, destroyed 2 thirds of the refugee camp. And one wonders why. I can give only one answer to this. The Israeli authorities want to tell the world, if you recognize the Palestinian people and their rights, we are going to destroy those people. Israel has formulated a clear-cut policy towards the Palestinian people. The official Israeli policy on the Palestinian problem, as it was enunciated in the program of 3rd of June, 1974, on the basis of which the present government of Israel received the vote of confidence of the Knesset, the cabinet decision of 21st of July, 1974, the premier's statement to the Knesset of 5 November 1974 and the Six Point Platform of 9 June 1975. And as it has been less formally expressed in dozens of statements and press interviews by the prime minister and the minister of foreign affairs and of defense, including the two statements made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs before the United Nations. In October 3, 1974, and the 30th of September, 1975, the position of Israel consists of the following eight negatives. that the Palestinian problem is not the core of the Middle Arab-Israeli conflict, that the Palestinians do not constitute a distinct people, that the Palestinians have no national rights, that Israel will never withdraw from all the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967, under any circumstances, that Israel will never permit the establishment of Palestinian state between Israel and Jordan, that Israel will never negotiate on the future of the West Bank or with any Palestinian party, but only with the government of Jordan, and that Israel will never meet the Palestine Liberation Organization except, and I quote on the battlefield, Israel does not recognize the right of Palestinian refugees to return. Those are the eight points on which the Israeli position is based. And it is tragic, Mr. President, that the United States' position coincides to an extent with that of Israel. In assuming such a position, the US government stands against the national and the human rights of the Palestinian people. At the same time that we hear voices from the administration claiming commitment to the defense and protection of human rights of individuals, whether they are real or alleged, Not one single statement or comment has been made in defense of the human rights of the Palestinian people. For the last 30 years, our people have been denied their basic human right to self determination. For the last 10 years, our people have been living under the military occupation of Israel. They have been subject to inhuman methods of oppression and subjugation. Thousands of our young people are perishing in the jails of the forces of occupation. Over 19,000 houses have been destroyed. Our lands have been confiscated, and settlements for Jewish immigrants have been established on the lands of the Palestinians. I would like to note that the US government is fully aware of the Israeli violations of the human rights of Palestinians under Israeli military occupation. Kai Bird and Max Holland, reported in the Christian Science Monitor on March 2nd, 1977, that the United States, for the sake of political expediency, suppressed a 1975 report on violations of human rights of the Palestinian people, both in Israel and in the occupied territories after 1967. The version of the report on human rights of this year enumerates those violations. The report states, and I quote, Israel's Arab minority, though equal under the law, have not enjoyed in practice the same equality of citizenship or civil rights of other Israelis. Some restrictions are placed on the Arab minority's freedom of movement within the country, And the rights are further restricted in the occupied territories. End of quote. Amnesty International reports that arbitrary arrest and detentions of suspected Arab continues. The report of 1977 of the State Department states that Israeli authorities have engaged in torture and cruel and inhuman treatment in the occupied Arab regions. End of quote. Israel is aggressively transcending its limits. In addition to locking up thousands of our men and women in Nazi-like dungeons, the Zionist authorities of Israel demand that we dissolve ourselves as a people, and that we renounce our national identity, our Palestinian identity, in order to deny to us our human right to return to our homes. Egal Alon, the Israeli foreign minister, said last February in the presence of Cyrus Vance, the U.S. Secretary of State, that in order for Israelis to talk to the Palestinians, the Palestinians must first dissolve their political organization and become loyal Jordanians." At the same time that Alon asked the Palestinians to become citizens of another country, he invites Jews from other nations to become Israeli citizens. This is not only Alon's position. It has been official Israeli policy since the proclamation of the Jewish state in 1948. The so-called law of return, which stipulates that any Jew, regardless of his country of birth and citizenship, can become a citizen of Israel upon application. While the Palestinians who are born in Palestine, whose ancestors were born there, and who have centuries of collective history on that land are denied that basic right. In other words, ladies and gentlemen, while future generations of Jews are given the right to live and settle in Palestine, the present generation of Palestinians, as well as future generation of Palestinians, are condemned to live in dispersion and exile. Yet not one single comment has been made against those injustices by many officials in the United States. Not only that, but the United States government has been burdening its taxpayers, sometimes cutting back on urgently needed projects in order to provide the Israeli arsenal with military hardware to perpetuate the expulsion of our people and the occupation of our homeland. Our people ask what they have done to the American people to meld such treatment. Just before Secretary of State Vance embarked on his fact-finding trip to the Middle East, he was asked by a journalist whether he intended to meet with any representatives of the Palestinian people. Mr. Vance replied that we would discuss the Palestinian question with other Arab leaders. We would like to ask, if the Palestinian problem is the core of the Middle East conflict, and if the Palestinian people are the principal party to that conflict, and if the Arab governments individually and collectively have recognized the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people, then why does Mr. Vance insist on ignoring the PLO? Isn't it more logical that Mr. Vance meet with the organized Palestinians to discuss affairs which concern the Palestinian people rather than to discuss it with some people? Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, with respect to the movements for peace in the Middle East, From our side, we declare that we are a peaceful people and welcome any serious effort to achieve a just and lasting peace for our people. But we also declare that real peace cannot be achieved, that real peace can only be achieved with the participation of the PLO on an equal footing with all other parties concerned in any peace conference. Real peace can only be achieved if that peace is based on the recognition and the realization of the national rights of the Palestinian people, namely the right to return to their homes and properties, and their right to self-determination and independence, and the right to establish their own independent state. The national rights of the Palestinian people cannot be an issue for discussion on how to achieve a Middle East peace. Our national rights must be the starting point in any such discussion. These must be recognized before any serious discussion can begin. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.

Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Rahman, for your remarks on the subject of human rights and the subject of peace in the Middle East from the Palestinian point of view. Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, the question and answer period will be presided over by our president of the Commonwealth Club, Mr. David McDaniel. Mr. McDaniel.

David McDaniel: Thank you, Mr. Justice Rouse. Mr. Rahman, if you will return to the platform, there is an unusually large number of questions which have been submitted by our members, members of the Commonwealth Club and their guests. I have done my best to try to give a cross-section of the kinds of questions. The first one is rather pointed. Is the Palestine Liberation Organization in favor of the extermination of Israel?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: The Palestine Liberation Organization is in favor of peaceful integration of the Jewish people in Palestine and the Arab people of Palestine.

David McDaniel: The next question. According to Farouk al-Qadumi, chief political officer of the PLO, it is impossible to revoke that portion of the national covenant calling for the destruction of Israel. If this is correct, how can the Arab nations expect peace in the Middle East?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: This is a very important question and I would like to elaborate on it. According to the principles on which Israel was established, that it have to be an exclusive Jewish state. And its behavior has been consistently towards that end. Expulsion of Palestinians, discrimination against Palestinians, whether Palestinians under occupation or Palestinians who are supposedly Israeli citizens. Now, if Israel insists that it is a Jewish state and it is an exclusive Jewish state, and there is no place for non-Jews in that state, that Palestinian Arabs have to continue living in refugee camps as they have been doing for the last 30 years, then what is the alternative to such a state? What we call for, we call for the establishment of a secular democratic state as an alternative to the exclusivist state that exists now. Why, when we address ourselves in other occasions besides what concerns the Palestinian people, we are all for democracy. Why can it be for democracy in Palestine? This is the question that we ask ourselves. What we want is that there's a state based on theocracy that is a Jewish state, what we call for is the secularization of the state. And we have to distinguish between the only social reality in the state, and that's the people. And I think Chairman Yasser Arafat, before the General Assembly, and until now, this is the position of the PLO, and it would be the position of the PLO, that every single Jew, including those who arrived yesterday from the Soviet Union, can have full-fledged rights similar to those of the Palestinians, but not at the expense or in place of the rights of the Palestinian people. So what we call for as an alternative to exclusivism, we offer universalism. As an alternative to theocracy, we offer secularism. And as an alternative to exclusive democracy, we offer and we suggest universal democracy that includes the Palestinians as well as the Jews. Thank you.

David McDaniel: This question reads as follows. Recognition of mutual existence is the prerequisite of any meaningful negotiation. Never before in recent history has one people denied the existence of another. The PLO claims that it has a moderate wing. Will you define what the PLO means by moderate?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: Moderate is to seek peace, peace with justice. That's what moderate in our view is, but not peace that means surrender or to renounce your national inalienable rights. So what we have been for, as I stated in my statement, and as it is the position of the PLO, that we are interested and we work hard towards the achievement of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East. But a settlement that would guarantee to us our inalienable right to return to our homes and properties and our basic right to self-determination. That's all we ask for. Now, it is impossible to ask the Palestinians to renounce those rights. So mutual recognition means that we, as I stated before, recognize that there are three million Jews living now in historic Palestine. And they are there. And we have four million Palestinians, or three million and a half Palestinians, who are living in exile or under occupation. Those two peoples have to get together, live together in equality. Now, we recognize that. What does the Israelis recognize? They have said that not one single Palestinian can return, that the Palestinians have to become loyal Jordanian citizens, and that the problem of Palestinian refugees is an Arab problem, and that for the Palestinians to exercise their right to self-determination, they have to take over Jordan. after taking my home, suggesting to me that in order to have a house, I have to take the home of my neighbor. This is what we are faced with, and this is what we are not going to accept. We recognize the right of the Jewish community in Palestine of 2.5 million to 3 million to be equal citizens with us, and we are struggling towards that end. Now, we want to know what is the position of the other side on the rights of our people.

David McDaniel: Hmm. Israel has indicated that it may be willing to entertain the notion of a Palestinian homeland. I'm not answering the question. This is the question. Is not the notion of a democratic secular state with a Muslim majority discredited in view of what has happened in other Arab states, Iraq, Sudan, and Lebanon?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: To be honest, the question is not clear, although I will try to answer it. Israel may entertain the notion of a homeland for the Palestinians. From what I know of the Israeli position, and which has been traditionally consistent, that they say, when Golda Meir was asked at least, she said there's no such a thing like Palestinian people. She said they don't exist where they are. And Israeli officials insist that there is no such a thing like Palestinians. There are Arabs who are living in the Arab world. And there is no such a distinct people as Palestinians. Now, isn't it ironic that someone like Golda Meir, who was born in Russia, raised up in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, come to Palestine, become a prime minister, and tell me, I am the Palestinian who is four years older than the state of Israel, that I don't have the right to be in my homeland. I mean, just if we reflect on that, 65% of the population of the state of Israel are settlers in Palestine. They took over the land of the Palestinians. In every Palestinian home, there's a Jewish family that came either from San Francisco, Brooklyn, or Moscow. While those Palestinians are living in refugee camps either in the desert of Jordan or around Beirut. And we are told that Israel entertains the notion of a Palestinian homeland. This is one of the most chauvinistic things I ever heard, that someone from Russia will tell me that he would entertain the notion of having me living in my home or not. Isn't this a basic violation of the human right to self-determination? What is self-determination if it is not that? Now, in relation to the aspect that is dealing with secular, democratic state. We are told that in light of the experiences of some other Arab states, it is impossible to have a secular, democratic state in Palestine. In fact, what happened in Lebanon was not because of the lack of possibilities, for communities to exist it is precisely because Lebanon was not secular and the whole conflict in Lebanon, or at least partially, was towards the secularization of Lebanon. We know that, at least in our part of the world, we have always coexisted Muslims, Christians, and Jews together. And there has never been any mass persecution of any group because of their religious affiliations. On the contrary, when the Jews were persecuted in Europe, they found haven among us in Palestine. And this is on record. And we are proud of this.

David McDaniel: Two questions in one. First, are you aware of recent discussions in Paris between PLO representatives and General Pallad of Israel? And if so, what do you think of their usefulness as aids to Arab-Israeli peace?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: When I heard about those discussions, we believe that this is a positive step that discussions between Palestinians and Jews who recognize the national rights of the Palestinian people, although I'm aware of some differences that exist, or probably basic ones, that this could be developed. I think discussions between two groups that have ground for discussion is useful.

David McDaniel: Briefly, could you define the position of the PLO vis-a-vis Jordan, Iran, Syria?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: Iraq or Iran? Iraq. Well, we respect the sovereignty, independence, and national territorial integrity of all those states. I mean, we have our agreements and our disagreements with the policies of those states, and we deal with them as such. We are an independent people. They are also sovereign states, and we define our relations with them in light of our interests and in light of their interests.

David McDaniel: What is the attitude of the leadership of the PLO towards terrorists and hijackers?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: The PLO is against any act of violence that takes place outside of occupied Palestine or involves a third party. And this is the position of the PLO, and it has been consistently so. But we also have the right to defend our rights. And we are, as a national liberation movement, recognized by the United Nations and by the Charter. We abide by the Charter of the United Nations. We have the right to defend ourselves. And we are engaged in armed struggle for the restoration of those rights. But we are against any act of violence that takes place outside of occupied Palestine, which includes any individual act of violence, or involve a third party.

David McDaniel: How do you explain the Syrians turning against you in the bloody civil war in the Middle East?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: This is not part of my discussion. I'd rather not answer this question.

David McDaniel: Please state your views or hopes of what might be accomplished in the Geneva peace talks if and when they proceed.

Hassan Abdel Rahman: believe in peace, as I said, and we work hard towards the achievement of a peaceful settlement. But we have our conditions for the participation in any peace conference. First, that the terms of reference of any peaceful conference have to recognize the national rights of the Palestinian people and to recognize the PLO as the sole and legitimate representative of those people. Resolution 242, on which Geneva conference is based, does not recognize the Palestinian people as a people, to recognize the existence of a refugee problem in the Middle East. And it does not refer either directly or indirectly to the Palestinian people. Therefore, Geneva that is based on resolution 242, we do not attend. We attend any conference that would be based on the recognition of the national rights of the Palestinian people and the recognition of the PLO as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. The PLO have to receive an invitation to participate on equal footing with other parties concerned, and the question of Palestine has to be a separate item on the agenda of any peace conference. Those are our conditions, and if those are met, we are willing to participate in any efforts towards peace.

David McDaniel: How will Palestine support itself economically if it becomes an independent state?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: Well, I think that there's a system of interdependence between all states in the world. The Palestinian people, we count on a huge resource of human who are qualified and prepared and capable of creating and developing and in cooperation with other states in the region and probably find a new system of economic relations in the Middle East in general. So there are many ways that economists can formulate. And I think this would not be a problem.

David McDaniel: Mr. Hassan Abd al-Rahman, we have time for only one more question. Before I ask that question, I should like to thank you for your address on Palestine, key to the Middle East, before the members and guests of the Commonwealth Club of California, who are gathered here this Friday afternoon in the Palace Hotel in San Francisco. Your remarks will be rebroadcast over more than 100 radio stations throughout the western part of the United States. When this question is answered, this meeting will stand adjourned with no further action. The last question is, do you feel that your handshake with President Carter yesterday meant a gesture toward the establishment of relations between the Palestine Liberation Organization and the United States?

Hassan Abdel Rahman: To shake hands is... basic human gesture of courtesy between two people towards each other there is I hope as I was told that this was intended to be a political gesture by the United States. But before any two people can talk to each other when they first meet, they have to shake hands. So probably this could be a good start.