Hamas chief Khaled Meshal spoke to Sherine Bahaa in a telephone interview about the repercussions of the martyrdom of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was not only a leader of the Islamic movement Hamas, but a national hero. What impact will his assassination have on the Palestinian cause? First, targeting the martyred sheikh in his wheel chair, fully aware of all his health problems, is an act of sheer brutality. The man was targeted with three consecutive rocket attacks after performing his dawn prayers. Such Israeli brutality is nothing new, but it can be a lesson to those who dare contemplate the possibility of working out a peaceful settlement with [Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon and his government. The loss of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin is a loss to all of us. It is, however, a victory for the man himself, as well as for the Palestinian resistance. The assassination of Sheikh Yassin will reinvigorate the spirit of Intifada. Contrary to what Sharon was expecting in planning this crime, the assassination of our leaders adds more fuel to the resistance, and definitely will not weaken the Intifada. This has been the same throughout our history. Deals, bargains and transactions and peace talks with the enemy weaken the resolve of the Palestinian people. The martyrdom of our leadership rather strengthens our people's resolve. Israel had consistently resorted to targeted assassinations to liquidate all forms of resistance. According to Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, this was proof of political bankruptcy. What do you think? Targeted assassinations are an expression of an utter failure to suppress the resistance movement. It is an attempt to prop up the image of the Israeli army after it failed to crush the resistance either in Lebanon or in Palestine. Moreover, it is a vain attempt to exhibit Israeli supremacy in military and technology arenas. The assassination of Sheikh Yassin comes at a time when arrangements for a post-withdrawal Gaza are being negotiated with different Arab parties (mainly Egypt and Jordan). Would you care to comment? The assassination of Sheikh Yassin is a replay of Sharon's bloody nature and his crime should be a clear message to us all that Sharon should not be taken at his word. Dealing with this "Sharon mentality" we should not be trying to reach a compromise with him. He only understands the language of fighting and resistance. The timing of the assassination was very significant. Sharon wanted to re-enforce his army's reputation after the operation of Ashdod , which was carried out by two 17- year-old Palestinians. The Ashdod operation, which was described by Israel as a strategic operation, unravelled the paralysis in the Israeli security apparatus. Another aspect in choosing the "appropriate time" was the expected unilateral withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. Sharon did not want the Israeli army to appear to be fleeing the strong resistance in Gaza. Israelis would not repeat the Lebanese scenario again. They wanted to come out victorious after hitting at the significant symbols of Palestinian resistance. Sharon wanted to leave Gaza Strip in a shambles -- no resistance movements, no leadership. But Sharon wants to keep those Palestinians whom he regards as good partners and cooperative neighbours. Sharon opted, through the assassination, to improve his image within his government. By committing such a crime, Sharon was trying to score more points to outdo the extremist right wing in his government. You talked about Israel looking for a partner to replace the Palestinian Authority (PA). Is there such a partner in reality? Sharon is trying to marginalise influential Palestinians -- elements that reject Israeli and American pressure -- Hamas, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other resistance groups. Sharon totally rejects these groups. He is trying to liquidate them. The other party comprises those elements inside the PA and the leadership of Fatah who turned down the Israeli scenario for a comprehensive settlement, yet are still in search of an alternative initiative. This wing is represented by Yasser Arafat and his comrades. This is why Sharon is imposing a siege on their headquarters and is keeping them out of the Palestinian decision-making process, looking for a more "tamed partner". But since Sharon snubbed Arafat, it has became his declared policy to weaken all elements that oppose Israeli and US hegemony, leaving the Palestinian political scene ripe for the emergence of elements who seek a larger role by accepting Israeli conditions and complying to US dictates. Can you elaborate? Do such elements exist within the current PA hierarchy? I do not want to talk more about those elements, but I believe that the Palestinian people are fully aware of what is being planned behind the scenes. Palestinians from different political backgrounds confirmed yesterday that the assassination would mark a significant change in the pace of the Palestinian- Israeli struggle. What is your view? Sharon has miscalculated now as he did in the past. The impact of the assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, with his wide popularity in the Arab and Muslim worlds, will be massive. It will take the Palestinian resistance to a new phase and will induce the spirit of resistance and challenge to all parts of the Arab and Muslim worlds. Demonstrations erupted everywhere in the Arab world. Our Arab nation is not broken by confrontation. On the contrary. It might be shaken by blackmail, though. Of course, we lost a great deal by the murder of Sheikh Yassin, but it is a victory for resistance and all its movements. The assassination of Sheikh Yassin ignited the Arab street -- demonstrations swept the region. Would this impact the outcome of the Arab League summit in Tunis next week? We hope that Arab anger is translated into something more effective. It should support the Palestinians in their struggle. Arab leaders should adopt more concrete resolutions. The US initiative for Greater Middle East is targeting these regimes, not only the Arab people. The US is throwing its weight about. This is why we hope the coming summit will see fresh recommendations. The Arab official stance must reflect popular opinion or else we will all be losers. But are Arab leaders capable of such a move? At least 11 Arab countries have established diplomatic and trade relations with Israel, as well as 23 Islamic nations. Yes, of course, the will of the leaders to do something is a very important factor, even if they do it secretly. A will for steadfastness is what really matters; this prevailing mood of weakness, impotence and lack of options is unacceptable. If the Arab leaders have the will, they can do something. However, I would not like to see the issuing of more half-hearted initiatives. This is not the time for weak initiatives. If what the Arab leaders want is to look again into the roadmap or the Geneva document or make a rewrite of the Beirut document adopted at the 2002 summit, then it might be better for them to drop the whole Palestine issue from their agenda. If they cannot support us, at least they must not stab us in the back. Take us, the Palestinians, for example: our capabilities are limited and yet we remain defiant and adamant in defending our cause. We have achieved in three years of Intifada what was not achieved in decades. The Iraqi resistance also achieved what the Iraqi army could not. See: Focus: Ahmed Yassin
