- November 7, 2009
- 4 minutes read
Nazzal: Abbas’s speech vague, unconvincing
GAZA — Mohammed Nazzal, the member of Hamas’s political bureau, has described Thursday the speech of Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas as “vague”, “uncomforting”, and “unconvincing”, adding that the coming days would reveal Abbas’s real intentions.
“This is not the first time Abbas threatens to resign… he had threatened to resign five years ago, and he used to reiterate this statement as a kind of threat”, asserted Nazzal in an interview with the Quds satellite TV channel.
He also refuted Abbas’s accusations to Hamas, saying, “It is the wrong strategy of Abbas that led the Palestinian people to deadlock and foiled our efforts to achieve the national reconciliation, however, we would relentlessly strive to achieve it”.
Nazzal also shrugged off Abbas’s claims that he (Abbas) was correct when he adjourned the voting on the crucial Goldstone report in the UNHRC, underlining it was Abbas who asked his envoy to the UN to withdraw the report but he was compelled to retable it again before the UN body after the overwhelming anger in the Palestinian and Arab arenas that was generated by the withdrawal decision.
For his part, Maher Al-Tahir, member of the political bureau of PFLP, seconded Nazzal’s remarks and described Abbas’s speech as clear confession that his political option had failed.
“Based on the tangible and concrete facts that the political experience of Abbas has produced, he decided not to contest the elections; because he finally realized that Israel wants to liquidate the Palestinian issue and it wasn’t interested in peace with full and clear political support from the United States, which was also the same conviction of the late PA chief and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat after the Camp David summit in the year 2000”, Tahir underlined in an interview with Al-Jazeera satellite TV channel.
Moreover, Tahir pointed out, “since the inking of the ill-fated Oslo agreement in 1993, the PFLP warned that the agreement would not retrieve the legal rights of the Palestinian people, and that the Israeli occupation government wasn’t interested in peace, in addition to the fact that the United States wasn’t a honest broker for peace but, in fact, it was and still is against the Palestinian national interests”.