Comparative Analysis of Ahmed Yassin And Yasser Arafat

 Introduction 

The main aim of the research is to reveal the comparative aspects of the political ideologies of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Yasser Arafat. This chapter mainly discusses Hamas and Fatah being dialectical, comparative analysis of Ahmed Yassin and Yasser Arafat, and critical approach to Hamas and Fatah.

Hamas and Fatah being dialectical

Firstly, when we compare the contributions of Ahmed Yassin and Yasser Arafat, it is very essential to chronicle the ideological representation of Hamas and Fatah which was mainly led by Ahmed Yassin and Yasser Arafat respectively, it was very often that Hamas and Fatah ideologically fought each against other and made a rapid impact on Palestine freedom struggle movement. In my opinion, as research delivers, the ideological fight between Hamas and Fatah produced a good chance for Israel leaders to get in very easily and to not face a threatful impression from Palestine. It is clear that Israel wanted of Palestinians to split and divide their ambitions. It went really successful because Hamas and Fatah couldn’t ideologically join together to resist with armed forces of Israel.

The problem is that the absence of cooperating movement from Hamas and Fatah changed the direction of Palestine movement totally. It simplified the ways and decisions of Israel to conquer the holy land of Palestine. Fatah had early come forward with extension of power through various struggles. But the historical records imply that Arafat and some other Fatah leaders withdrew from their massive and strong intension and moved to peace keeping activities and collaborated with Israel.

Allegations of PLO against Hamas

As mentioned before, PLO was also guided by the influence of Yasser Arafat. He was also member of Fatah. But the formation of Hamas has been organized by some members of Muslim brotherhood in Egypt. So it is considered as a faction of Muslim brother hood. Arafat and his fellows had an idea that they could enlarge their movement and not only others can join and make an impact. So they felt jealous to the changes and influences made by Hamas all over Palestine. This ideological difference has been also expressed in the lives of Ahmed Yassin and Yasser Arafat. Fatah’s support didn’t come in the way of Hamas because it wanted to be only one leading group of Palestine. But Hamas intension was also good and then got a highlighting confidence and improvement as it enlarged more reliability on the people by winning the elections with more powerful and the ideological war between Hamas and Fatah had been getting very tight. The defensive preparations of Palestine went wrong after conflicts had Overwhelmed.

Fatah which had been formed in 1958, aims to emancipate Palestine from the black hands of Israel and to renounce Zionist ideologies without any negotiation with it. This aim was constructed and planned with the dignity of views and concepts and opinions. It had more chances to be self-promoted in the holy lands of Palestine but after being the active member of PLO, it concentrated firstly on the solutions and guidelines which were prominently considered as the methods of preserving Palestine from Israel. They had armed forces of different kinds which helped them in the freedom struggle of Palestine. Fatah was considered as the prominent face of resistance of Palestine. The other allegation by which Yasser Arafat stood against Hamas was that a political movement acting as parallel to PLO, doesn’t click and produce any type of benefits. Arafat also justified that it will be helpful for the enemies to come forward against them. He also suggested Islamists to stop their campaign and to join with Fatah strategy and ideologies. Arafat had tried to suppress Hamas activities and delivered so many times against Hamas leaders. In other conditions, Arafat intension to attack Hamas activists in Gazza and west bank caused to the arrests of number of people. The security courts had been built to charge them with the cases in February 1995.

These trials were known by “mid- night trails”. Amnesty international observed this vulnerable decision as unnecessary and hanging the justice. The other countries like America and Israel were in favor of these allegations and supported proceedings of court. As the allegations became strong, Hamas influence started to grow in a manner which was not anticipated and predicted.

Hamas: against Fatah 

Hamas was a phenomenal force and power in the freedom struggle movement of Palestine. it didn’t succumb to any adjustment with Israel. The proclamation of Hamas and its formation implied a positive impact on the hopes of civilians of Palestine because Fatah’s leaders especially Yasser Arafat succumbed to the enticements of Israel diplomats, Hamas’s impact produced a negative energy also because it led the people to divert from their concepts with being split to two factions.

Hamas’s stances and concepts were massive and its leaders travelled through the paths of extremism. The Madrid summit between PLO and Israel really constructed the ways of negotiations. Oslo accord which was conducted between Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin totally destructed Hamas’s hopes and resistance. This accord got a final consent in August 1993 and in the presence of American president Bill Clinton, Rabin and Arafat signed in an accord which promoted negotiate ways of resistance. After the accord was setup, the floods of peace accords were getting increased such like second Oslo, Hebron protocol, Taba summit. But this movement from Arafat was so disappointing to Hamas and ideologies because it had participated in number of battles such like Intifada I and II and so many members and followers were killed and sentenced to death. Hamas opposed the way of Yasser Arafat dealt with. Under the guidance and leadership of sheikh Ahmad Yassin, Hamas attracted Israel and its occupied places.  Yassin got more support from different corners of the world.  Yassin and its followers hadn’t succumbed to any kind of enticements from PLO and Fatah. In 1990 April, Hamas has been invited to be a member of PLO. This was as the part of negotiation of Fatah and its spokespersons. But Hamas’s spokesperson Ibrahim Gushe sent a letter to the speaker of PNC (Palestine National Council) sheikh Abdul Hameed Al saeh in which he chronicled and expressed Hamas’s stances and ideologies. It says that Hamas is ready to join PNC but forty percentage of seats should be given to Hamas claiming that forty percentage of Palestine people promotes Hamas. The recent habit was that Yasser Arafat will suggest the wanted members. Hamas didn’t consider their type of suggestion.

Yasser Arafat had advised Hamas leaders to give up the resistances and struggle against Israel and tie up with efforts of Palestine. He informed this matter to Hamas leader Musa Abu Mansooqi to participate in the election of Palestine legislative council but the leaders of Hamas have pursued that they should take a decision only by discussing their prominent leaders.

The another reason of conflicts of Hamas with Fatah that discussions to negotiate with each other didn’t went victorious after Fatah regulated the discussions with some leaders who extremely take efforts to fight hard against Israel. With the extremist concept of Hamas against Israel, the discussions for exist peace can’t fulfill its dreams. Hamas had attacked Israel forces. After Some days Abu Ayyash has been killed by the army forces but this provoked Palestine authority as they started their suppressive implementation against Hamas. So thousands of activists have been jailed.

Since attacks and atrocities against Hamas go on, it’s prominent Sheikh Ahmed Yassin stood firm. He criticized Arafat for struggling against Hamas and not fighting against imperialist powerful confreres. His intension to criticize Arafat and PLO was well directed because it was very essential to renew the exact aims and targets of resistance.

 Yassin had been invited to the meeting of PLO central council by Arafat to split between Hamas but after some disapprovals, Yassin rejected to attend the meeting. He explained that there are no any contractions and divisions between Hamas and there may be some difference in the ideologies. There was an another allegation of Fatah and PLO against Hamas that the suicide bombing from Hamas are the factors behind the victorious campaign of right wing extremist party Liqiuid which of Benyamin Netanyahu. He had secured a win over Shimon Peres but that was strictly opposed by Hamas.

 Yassin and Arafat comparative analysis

 As before mentioned Yassin and Arafat are the personalities who have the same qualities combined in a comparative style of analysis, mean while they have some contradictory qualities which couldn’t be joined together. Their qualities really strengthened the scope of comparative analysis much more. The quality which combines them in a way of ideological development gives more clarity to their lifestyles. They stood against Israel's occupation of Palestine's holy soil by associating numerous followers in the different groups. In the stage of comparison of these two phenomenal leaders, portraying the qualities agreed by Hamas and Fatah deserves more prominence and importance.

Yassin’s methodology

As Hamas started its campaign, it moved through the path of extremist way.  Yassin led the way of resistance and struggle without allowing any kind of peace keeping activities. He constructed his way charging upon the extremist stances. That is why he was arrested for conducting suicide bombing and other destructive atrocities. He was a spiritual leader of Palestine where he touched the hearts of more people. But the spirituality connected with him was not famous because he spent his almost of times to engage with freedom struggle movement of Palestine. He was asked once about Hamas’s army group Izzudin Al Qassam in an interview, then he answered “Hamas is totally only one body, It will be destructive when it’s organs have been separated”. This answer denotes that what kind of importance he entitled for freedom struggle movement of Palestine. He guided the army wing with the support of leaders such as Abdul Aziz Rantisi, Mahmood Assuhar and Khalid Mishal. His intensive stances startled Israel diplomats and they had planned to kill him number of times. But he escaped from the murder as they restarted their conspiracies against Ahmed Yassin.

His methodology was not based on peace keeping activities or any negotiate discourses but he wanted to free Palestine considering that the soil of Palestine is only deserving for Muslims. Since the influence of Ahmed Yassin on Muslims strengthened the revolts and rebellions, It grew up day by day as a shocking threat for Israelis. So, they organized discourses and effective discussions with Arafat and Fatah to withdraw Yassin and Hamas from the way of resistance. Intifadas were conducted and planned as it could improve Palestine armed forces and frighten Israelis to withdraw from the movements they came forward with it.

The ability to conduct Intifadas was based on the extremist approach of Ahmed Yassin and Yasser Arafat. Fatah and its leaders had tried to siege the guidance of intifadas under Yasser Arafat as Israeli diplomats also did the same. The other notable point that leaders of Hamas such like Yassin and Rantisi deserve more connectivity with historical records. As Arafat and other Fatah leaders have been emerged and introduced by history very well, Hamas and their leaders especially Yassin haven't advantaged more by historical records of Palestine's politics.

Arafat’s methodology

 As Fatah and PLO performed well in the earlier time to resist with Israel and participate in the freedom struggle movement of Palestine. It is also a typical in the stand of Arafat who seriously adjusted to apply a moderate concept which is based on peace keeping processes.

His moderate methodology shouldn’t be criticized by denying his efforts through various stage of Palestine resistance movement because his invaluable times were used for the useful diplomatists and discussions with other countries like Jordan. In that time, influence and commitment of Arab countries was so essential to make such on impact of resistance and struggles.

Arafat kept a peace keeping connections with Israel because he wanted to get back from atrocities and bombing that left critical situations of horrifying number of human beings life. In this strategy, It can be said that his ideology was more helpful to save the lives from destroying and annoying incidents and activities. He dealt with leaders of Israel like Yitzak Rabin and Ariel Sharon to go on the peace keeping activities. His quality of leadership which left deep consideration from both Israel and Palestine. Discussions and negotiations came in the way of him as he was considered a superpower leader of Palestine from the point of view of Israel. They neglected the way handled by Yassin and his fellows. That is why Arafat was more useful and impressive for Israel. They ensured support of Arafat so many times like accord of Oslo and other accords. They capitalized his methodology of peace existence. But Arafat’s real intension was to reinsure peace with Israel and their diplomats not diverting from the way of resistance and struggle. The way he handled the situation was successful regarding the eminent factor that will construct a glorious future. The other quality of Arafat that he had matured preparations for negotiations with Hamas when the situation went wrong. He invited Hamas representatives to conduct negotiate discussions that will lead to avoid the atrocities and bombings. But Hamas leaders didn’t adjust with any cooperation without struggle and conflicts.

But Arafat had faced so many allegations from different parts of the world as well as Muslims and Muslim countries. He and Yitzhak Rabin had been awarded Nobel prize for the peace because of that they relentlessly worked hard for considering Oslo pacts as a good looking movement from both countries. In this context, Arafat had been accused of being enticed to the efforts made by Israel diplomats. As well as, some people argue that Arafat had been enticed or attracted by the Nobel prize awarded to him and he was more satisfied with it. It may be right or false regarding to the different point of views of different people. In my opinion, Yasser Arafat’s mindset to accept the Nobel prize with Israel prominent leader Yitzak Rabeen was a negative aspect of freedom struggle movement of Palestine, because it may demolish the all efforts made by Fatah and Hamas in different contexts. Also, civilians of Palestine may not be happy with that decision taken by Arafat because almost of Palestinian people don’t want to satisfy with peace keeping stand. Then the only benefit that decision made impact that Arafat got his nobility and personal achievements only. Arafat had promised to Hamas authority to set up systematic development of ideology and concept of peace Keeping activity. His intention was to stop atrocities against Israel and recap peace and stability of the nation. His methodology totally caused to internal conflicts between Hamas and Fatah authority. It really helped Israel to get their diplomacies and planning on the right way. Sometimes, we may think that why Arafat is having in favor of Israel when he led the army campaigns against Hamas or any other resistance movement of Palestine. It could be acceptable one between the views of politicians because he wanted to set up a systematic and peaceful activities to exist peace and security and stability in Palestine. But he never withdrew from atrocities against Hamas. That is why political analysts consider that Arafat was making the way to support of Israel.

Critical approach against Hamas and Fatah

 As the approaches of Hamas and Fatah being contradictory, it is liable to criticize these two different approaches because it is totally accepted that the combined alliance of Hamas and Fatah would be more convenient and useful but it is compulsory. While Hamas moved to the way of extremism, Fatah stood steadily and straight in the way of existing and recapping peace and security. The two concepts shouldn’t be denied or disapproved because two concepts had more useful benefits and qualities. The real problem was that the absence of combined style of resistance by participating with each other in all procedures caused by the resistance movement. Its consequences were heartbreaking as Palestine’s holy soil had been driven to the atrocities and bombings, not being stable and secure.

Fatah’s adjustments with Israel

 The thing that went more criticized in the case of Fatah was that it relied more on the agreements and adjustments with Israel and diplomats. Arafat and Fatah leaders had tried to conduct on inclusive stand with Israel but the other thing was that Israel capitalized from what Arafat and his fellows were doing. It was the cause of the oslo which turned to Arafat and Rabin’s favor for getting them rewarded with the Nobel prize. There were no any other benefits which could result a massive and productive turn over. The atrocities and attacks were flowing like a river without any changes.

The other criticism raised against Fatah that it tried to siege the fatherhood of Intifada II. Intifada II which is known as Al Aqsa intifada was taken under the control of Hamas and Ahmed Yassin. But some American media and Israel spread the allegation that Intifada II had been started by Yasser Arafat. In this context, any other proper reply never came from the part of Arafat and Fatah. But this argument had been countered by Benny Morris’ saying that the stand of Arafat being inclusive in Intifada II is completely meaningless.

Fatah worked relentlessly to suppress Hamas and its followers. As earlier said, this concept was really terrible. Mahmood Abbas and Dahlan worked each other to suppress Hamas and its visionaries. There was an accusation against Dahlan that he set up many ideological discussions to exit Arafat from Fatah and demolish his large influence on Palestine society. Then, US and Israel played a vital role in using Dahlan and Abbas against Hamas. Fatah suspended Dahlan for the suspicion that he is trying to set up a coup against Abbas. Totally, the problem was that some internal conflicts between Fatah’s leaders, interrupted the way of resistance. In this situations, Arafat couldn’t do anything to avoid such internal conflicts. This conflict may destruct all the positive aspect of freedom struggle movement of Palestine.

The proclamation of Mahmood Abbas as the follower of Arafat, was not a supportive and popular movement from Fatah because so many other popular leaders were there like Marwan Barghouti but the interference of US and Israel relationship simplified the way for Abbas to come in.

Fatah couldn’t identify the real intension of Israel as it was made as their toy boy to meet their all needs. They moved in the routine where Israel wanted to go on and move. After Arafat’s demise, the all control for existing peace, didn’t came in the favor of Fatah. The whole Israelis really capitalized and took an advantage of the bad situations very positively. Even Fatah had a prominent control over PLO members, it can’t make a positive impact on freedom struggle movements of Palestine.

Hamas’s extremist view

The only matter that provoked the criticized concepts against Hamas was Its extremist view which laid a number of allegations on Hamas and its views. The main criticism against Hamas is that it only follows the way of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. This stand provided them to keep distances from the other western countries. It was considered as Al Qaeda, and Taliban and etc.

Not only it’s extremist way, but also its some decisions also deserved a numerous criticism from different corners of the world.

In the Parliament elections of 2006, Hamas had captured a dominant victory over Fatah and its factions. It was so shocking for Fatah and its whole influence. But the dominance of Hamas in the parliament was not helpful regarding the people of Palestine because the selected members from different constituencies didn’t want any proper proceedings that will lead to the upcoming peace keeping activities in the future. They had a chance to align with Fatah leaders in the PLO and nurture the proximity of conflicts and resistances. But they never satisfied with what Fatah and Its leaders are dealing with it and it is totally disgraceful to say that some of them had the entertainment of corruption.

After going victorious in the parliament, Hamas had conducted many rebellions and revolutions against Israel to conquer Gazza strip. It never looked back to the peace keeping activities but it also focused on the rebellions and revolutions against Israel. This movement has been frightened by Israel but it came with strong power and will to overcome the attacks and suicide bombings from Hamas. It prepared so many youths to participate in the suicide bombing which could affect negatively on the views of Palestine.

Another problem of Hamas is that it organized number of attacks such as Intifadas. But this kind of atrocities provoked Israel and their Brigades. It came forward with sophisticated machine guns donated by America and other western countries. As everyone says that they have to identify the power of enemy and they should come forward without any planning. As Hamas innovated a lot of relief programs including building houses for orphans, establishing educational institutions, it couldn’t ensure safety and stability of peace in Palestine.

Inside the western media, it also reported that Hamas and other extremist groups are ideologically connected. It may be a right thing regarding the previous extension of atrocities and bombings. This attacks are the open testimonies for that Hamas is ideologically connected with another extremist groups. But Hamas authority has strictly neglected this view justifying that it is only based on resistance with Israel. No any other intentions for its views and stances. Hamas aims to be a government like AK party in Turkey. This reality has been clearly explained by foreign minister of Hamas government Ahmad Yusuf in an interview with Hurriyat.

But this kind of justifications are not liable to believe and agree because the politicians observe a party's views and concepts according to what it is doing and what kind of regulations it made.

The conclusion

As this research results that the possibility of comparative analysis between the contribution of Ahmed Yassin and Yasser Arafat in politics of Palestine gives more chances to one who want higher studies in this subject itself. The result of the research is that the absence of a combined form of resistance guided by Ahmed Yassin and Yasser Arafat really denied the chances of liberation of Palestine very soon because their ideologies in politics of Palestine were contradictory.

Bibliography

1- Hamas Samaravum Sandeshavum – PK Niyas (IPH publication)

2- Palestine Samboorna Charitram – Dr. Tariq Suvaidan, translated by Abdu 

Rahman munnoor (IPH publication)

3- Yasser Arafat: Psychological Profile and Strategic analysis /Shaul Kimhi

4- Zionism olichu vecha chatithram /Ralf shuman translated by Ap kunjamu

(Other Books).

5- Palestine pashchathya madhyamangalum /Nm Hussain (IPH publication).

6- prathirodhanglkk oru amukham /edited by kk joshi (ipb books).

7- Gaza poralikalude parudeesa / C Davood (IPH publication).

8- Gaza paranju theratha kadhakal / Ramsi Barud translated by Pk Niyas 

(Other Books).

9- Conversations with Arafat / Herbert c Kelman (Harvard University)