Middle East

Middle East

The Arab Press and the Assassination of Yassin

Editorials from six Arab newspapers, March 29, 2004

Former Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin waits for a transit visa to return to the Gaza Strip in Khartoum, Sudan, June 10, 1998 (Photo: Salah Omar/AFP-Getty Images).

Al-Quds al-Arabi (Palestinian expatriate), London, England, March 25, 2004
Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was truly a great Islamic symbol during his life, and with his martyrdom, he represents an unrivaled and unique exemplar in the history of this great [Islamic] community. History has never known a leader who transformed weakness into strength, as this warrior-scholar had done, who was a leader who didn’t believe for even one day in the concept of inherent human weakness…a man who spent 53 years completely paralyzed.

Indeed, the sheikh remains alive among those who carry his ideas and don’t accept oppression or surrender to the [Israeli] agents of destruction and terrorist devastation. His principles have become deeply rooted and established in the hearts of his followers and pupils.

The Israelis have proven with their assassination of the sheikh in his wheelchair that they are the most despicable of cowards. Furthermore, the [assassination] operation, beyond being an assassination of a crippled sheikh, should not be seen as any great Israeli military or intelligence coup because the sheikh was on his well-known way from the mosque to his home in full view. Regardless, the Israelis did not hesitate to use their U.S.-made helicopters to smash his wheelchair to smithereens.

Article Continues

This vile crime has ignited hatred for the Zionists and Americans among Muslims and non-Muslims—at least those who maintain some humanity. This despicable crime has put all coherence or moral authority of American and Zionist schemes in the prisoner’s dock. It is now possible to say that the plans to liquidate the “Palestinian question” and Palestinian existence have finally breathed their last, just as the last breath of the sheikh ascended to his Creator.
—Abd al-Aziz al-Rantisi. The author is the new leader of Hamas.

Al-Hayat al-Jadeeda (Palestinian), East Jerusalem, March 25, 2004
The assassination of the spiritual leader of Hamas, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, does not serve or benefit the interests of those 60 percent of Israelis who supported the operation. Who among those Israelis who supported the assassination has been hastened to his grave without knowing it? Meanwhile, the pens of Arab writers will be unable to write, as I have written before, calling for the cessation of [Palestinian] militant operations in retaliation.

[Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon has perpetrated his vile deed out of service to himself and not for his people. He wants to achieve political security for himself…and he wants to breathe new life into his contentious disengagement plan. Sharon is always saying that there isn’t a Palestinian negotiating partner with whom he can work: The moderate Yasser Arafat is not a partner and neither was the moderate Mahmoud Abbas. The moderate Abu Ala is not a partner and the pragmatic Ahmed Yassin, master of the hudna [truce] initiatives, who advocated avoiding civilian targets, was also not seen as a partner. And so who, then, is a partner? No one is left, except the human bombs.
—Hafiz al-Barghouti

Unsigned editorial, Al-Quds (Palestinian), East Jerusalem, March 23
Israel’s attack on Yassin, spiritual leader of Hamas, was by all standards a terrible crime that crossed all the red lines that all previous Israeli governments had withheld themselves from crossing. This is because going to such an extent will unleash such a ferocious surge of vengeful reactions in direct proportion with the significance of the crime. As well, vast sectors of Palestinian, Arab, and general world opinion will be shaken by this calamity and logically anticipate that no good will come to pass. How is it that Yassin, who was close to 70 years old, paralyzed, and wheelchair-bound, can become a target and have his body pulverized by the missiles of Israeli Apaches? How could Israeli authorities target a Palestinian symbol, who was also a Palestinian religious leader, without considering that this would have an immense influence in subsequent activities and developments in Palestinian lands and those outside them?

Al-Ra’i (pro-government), Amman, Jordan, March 23, 2004
The entire world without exception condemned this terrorist act perpetrated by the Zionist entity. Meanwhile the most Washington, which was pleased by an act of eliminating a “terrorist” of the caliber, integrity, and courage of the martyr Yassin, could muster was that it was surprised by the act. The most London conceded in its announcements was that [the strike] was an unacceptable act and that it represented a step backward in the Middle East—what a joke, as if the Middle East, since the establishment of the Zionist entity, has witnessed even one step towards justice, peace and stability.

The martyr Yassin was not merely a political leader who sustained the courage of his people in resisting the occupation sacrificed all that is possible to liberate Palestine. He was also an Islamic leader who enjoyed the esteem and respect of hundreds of millions of Muslims who follow how the occupation is preceding in the Holy Land and who watch as its holy places are desecrated and the war continues on its mosques and churches. And so he is not only a martyr of the Palestinians, but also a martyr of the Arabs. He is like one of the martyrs of Islam who fell in the war between the faithful and pagans, between good and evil, and between Islam and its enemies. And these enemies of Islam are really enemies of Christianity, just as they are the enemies of those Jews who reject Zionism due to its racism and enmity….
—Khalid Mahadin

Unsigned editorial, Al-Ahram (government-owned), Cairo, Egypt, March 23, 2004
By assassinating Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the head of the Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas, after he performed the dawn prayers, the Israeli government has carried out a gross terrorist crime which can be added to its black history in this regard, and it did so using U.S.-made helicopter gunships. If Israel committed this crime without the knowledge of the U.S. administration, then Washington should at least condemn it clearly if it is serious about combating terrorism. U.S. aircraft were used against a paralyzed old man who in himself did not form any danger to the security of Israel. His assassination is a blatant act of terrorism against a man who carried nothing more than an ideology. If, on the other hand, the United States was aware of this crime and did not stop Israel from carrying it out, then this is a catastrophe that will bring about legitimate responses in many forms. It will also denude the U.S. role in sponsoring a political resolution in the region of any true credibility.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat (Saudi-owned), London, England, March 24, 2004
At the Beirut Summit of the Arab League two years ago, the Arabs presented the most open-handed, comprehensive peace proposal possible. And all of the Arab leaders, without exception, passed the proposal, which became known as the [Saudi] Crown Prince Abdullah initiative. Even Iraq’s Izzat al-Douri, who was in attendance, voted for the resolution! And Arabs thought (as did Europeans) that the United States would carry the resolution to Israel, summon Likud and the [Palestinian] resistance and tell them to stop. This was a unique opportunity that couldn’t be duplicated. If the United States had done this, it would have solved our problem too—we wouldn’t have to continue spending $50 billion every year on internal security and we wouldn’t have to remain living in fear and we could stop announcing warnings to our citizens all the time.

But the United States said a few general words about the matter and went to sleep. And before it went to sleep, it didn’t forget to ask Ariel Sharon to look after stability in the Middle East. And Sharon didn’t waste a moment: He essentially imprisoned Yasser Arafat after demolishing all the institutions surrounding Arafat. He bombed Syrian targets in Lebanon. He devastated the refugee camp in Jenin, beat down Gaza, angered Egypt, and concluded a military pact with India!

After that, Sharon began construction of the security barrier…and initiated the policy of assassinations by missiles. He destroyed houses, schools, orchards, and streets, turning them into heaps of rubble. Finally, under his own personal oversight, he coordinated the assassination of the most important Palestinian leader outside of the Palestinian Authority, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.

What differentiates the Beirut Summit from the Tunis Summit, which is to be convened at the end of this month, is this series of many events and developments. Even as cases were being placed on table at the Tunis Summit, they have all been preempted by Yassin. He will enter the summit with each [Arab country’s] delegation. His name will be the title of each file. His name will precede all of the other studies and cases on the Middle East, or on the “Greater Middle East,” or the question of a democratic Middle East.

The first Arab summit was convened to deal with the Israeli-Arab conflict over rights to the waters of the Jordan River. Since then, every summit has been immersed in a fear of Israel and grief over Palestinians. The fear has increased and the grief has been magnified, day after day, summit after summit. Arabs have taken 1,000 steps forward and the Israelis have taken 1,000 steps back. But this isn’t the problem. The problem is that the Americans have taken 1,001 steps back.
—Samir Attallah

Related Articles

Israel: Road Map or Bulldozer Map?
By Nasser Lahham, Ma'an News Agency, Bethlehem, Israel, July 25, 2008

Hamas and Israel: Strange Bedfellows
By Paul Scham, Washington, D.C., Common Ground News Service, July 6, 2008

Why a Cultural Boycott of Israel Is Necessary
Remi Kanazi, June 4, 2008

What Syrian-Israeli Talks Mean
Hasan Abu Nimah, Jordan Times, Amman, Jordan, June 2, 2008

Web-Exclusive Alert

Sign up for both our web exclusive e-mail newsletter and our indispensable World Headlines.