Former Hamas leader discusses missile attacks, Middle East with Rudaw

Rudaw’s Bestoon Khalid spoke with the former leader of the Palestinian organisation Hamas, Khaled Mashal, on March 15, discussing a wide range of topics including Tehran’s recent missile attack in Erbil, the right to self-determination, and the relationship between the Kurdish and the Palestinian people. 

Khaled Mashal is a founding member of Hamas' politburo, becoming the recognised head of Hamas in 2004 shortly before Hamas won a majority of the seats in the 2006 Palestinian election. He stood down as Hamas' politburo chairman in 2017, at the end of his term limit.

The following transcript has been edited for length and clarity. 

Rudaw: Let us start with Kurdistan. A few days ago, Erbil, the capital of the Kurdistan Region, became the target of several missiles fired from Iran. The site that was hit was a civilian home and was close to the site of the new US Consulate. What is your comment on that attack?

Khaled Mashal: First, in the name of God, my greetings again to you. You know this incident happened during the period of the current conflict between Iran and the Zionist Israel. It was portrayed in the media that this was an Iranian response to targeting some Iranian targets in Syria No doubt you have more information on the incident in Kurdistan. I did not hear such a story from the media, but what is being published by the media is that the Iranians responded to the Zionists following the killing of some people in Syria and attacking some Iranian targets.

In Kurdistan, you are entitled to have your own stance considering it is your country and [you are] responsible for the security and safety of the country, and that you know [more than I do] about the political conflicts and the challenges there. We wish for the prosperity of Kurdistan, but you also know that Israel is the enemy of all of us, the enemy of all Muslims with no regards to their ethnicity, the enemy of Kurdistan, Iraq, and the enemy of the Islamic umma. But on the question of how we should protect our country and its stability, this is a question that we must come to an agreement on across the Arabic and Islamic world.

Some media outlets broadcast rumours or news that the site was an Israeli base. But on the one hand, it is the home of a well-known business person in the Kurdistan Region, and on the other hand, the Kurdistan Region has officially refuted that the site is an Israeli base. Wasn't the Arab world aware of these facts?

I did not hear the statement from Kurdistan myself. It was better for such statements to be carried out by the media and for the evidence and the truth to be mentioned - that is number one. Number two, on a subject like this - knowing that the government of Kurdistan has a specific narrative - they must solve it with the Islamic Republic [of Iran]. This means that it is an issue that could be resolved between you and Iran, a solution that could preserve the interests of all sides. Certainly, it must be resolved between you and Iran. As a Palestinian, Israel is the number one enemy. I wish the best for the Arab and the Islamic world including all its countries, nations, and ethnicities. We have been one umma throughout history. I hope that for the sake of the public interest and the stability of our countries and nations, we become one and hold our forces together to counter our enemies, those who occupy our countries and violate the things we hold sacred.

Don't you see that this attack is nonetheless a violation or an assault on Iraqi territory?

If the government in Kurdistan has a particular narrative regarding the incident, logic says that this must be resolved politically. That could be done in direct contact with Iran, and also to focus more on that narrative in the media. This is the responsibility of the people of Kurdistan. I personally have an understanding for countries’ need for peace, security, and the protection of their interests. When we face a situation where the narrative is different, it is better for the related parties to discuss this issue among themselves, to exchange their information and evidence with one another.

Let us go back a little and look at the history of the Kurdish people and the Kurdish liberation movement. There is a relationship and similarity between the Kurdish people and the Palestinian people. In this context, how do you view the issue of the Kurds and Kurdistan?

First, the people of Kurdistan are a respected nation. They are part of the Islamic umma, and we respect them and feel proud of their history. Kurdistan and the Kurds have recorded noble stances in history. Saladin Ayyubi came from this land and liberated Palestine from the crusaders, he went into al-Aqsa mosque, united the Islamic world and he stood against the crusaders in the Levant and Egypt; that is why the Kurds and Kurdistan have their own history and we are proud of their history. The shared history has become a bridge between us and the Kurds. It was Saladin who liberated Palestine and Jerusalem from the crusaders. This history is always in our minds.

The people of Kurdistan are certainly now oppressed, and we understand that very well. But my dear brother, let me tell you frankly, to compare the oppression - it is true. We are proud of the Kurds, it is true that they are our people and our brothers, I personally have met some Kurdish officials. But the difference is that we are confronting an occupier that is Zionist who has invaded our land and has aggressed against our sanctities. Israel is the enemy of all, and is not against Palestine alone. Israel is the enemy of all Arabs and the Muslims including the Kurds. Now, this aspiration by the Kurds to secure their interests, security, and sovereignty - and the fact about them being oppressed, I believe - since the Kurds are part of the political states of the region, I hope that their hopes and wishes to be in the framework of one umma and the unity of our states; however, this is one thing I do not want to interfere in, why? Because I want to see the picture the following way: the unity of our states, and the protection of their stabilities and the understanding between all the components of the umma including the Kurds, Arabs, Turkmen and the Muslims including the Shiites and the Sunnis, and between the Muslims and the Christians. We are an umma who have lived together with all these different components. I hope we can keep this mosaic considering the unity of our states and in light of removing oppression against any of the components of the umma.

Do you not see that the land of Kurdistan is an occupied land? Why do you think that the land of Palestine is an occupied land, while you do not consider the land of Kurdistan an occupied land?

Regarding this, dear brother. I cannot accept this subject as it is. Because Kurdistan is a country whose one piece is part of Iraq, another piece is part of the state of Iran, another piece is part of Turkey and the rest is part of Syria, should I call this occupation? This is geopolitics and has been formed in the last hundreds of years. Certainly, it is the right of the Kurds to aspire to independence, it is their right to say so, but on the other side there are other political entities who tell a different story and have their own view. How can we incorporate the wishes of the Kurds, their right to achieving freedom and their wishes, expressing their personality and identities into the current political system which is already in place? I wish it happens the way I described.

But our situation is different, and Palestine has never been a part of any other state, and throughout history has been at the very centre of the Arab and Islamic world. That is why we are not in disagreement against an Arab or Islamic partner. We are different from them in terms of ethnicity and religion. An occupation enemy has come across the oceans from a long distance and has occupied our territory for a religious purpose. And on this point, my dear brother, let me say something, I honestly say that I have great love for Kurdistan, its people, and its leadership. That is why we must be cautious about the plots and the games of Israel. Certainly, Israel would like to have a foothold with full force in every country in the region. Israel is always a source of threat. They have normalised their relationship with Egypt, but Egypt has not benefited from the relationship. On the contrary, Israel is now plotting against Egypt on the Nile River and through the dam in Ethiopia. It is also trying to open a new channel to replace the Suez Channel, all these actions are designed to undermine the national interests and security of Egypt. The same is true for Jordan. Jordan has not benefited from the relationship.

Unfortunately, currently there is a wave of normalisation by some Arab countries in the region with Israel. Israel wants to portrait itself as a partner in this region, although it is indeed a stranger in this region. My message to the Kurdish people, the Kurdish nation and its government is to be cautious of Israel’s games and plots, to not allow for Zionism to escape into Kurdistan. God willing, Kurdistan will remain part of the Islamic and Arab world; they are a source of pride.

I understand that. But you are talking about Salah Al-Din Al-Ayyubi and the state founded by Saladin Ayubi, which included the Levant and Egypt, and Jerusalem and Palestine were part of that state. When the Kurds were running a state in this way, there was no current Iran, Iraq, Turkey, or Syria. If the land of Palestine was occupied in the year 1948, according to your opinion, then the land of Kurdistan was occupied and divided in the year 1918 during the First World War. When you see that your land is occupied, why don't you see that the land of another nation was occupied during a number of historical events?

Look, when Saladin ruled Damascus and Cairo, he did not do so under the name of a Kurdish entity.

But the Ottoman Empire was also not a Turkish state, it was an Islamic state, and the Umayyad state was Islamic, and the Abbasid state was also Islamic...

That is right. In other words, I wish we could go back to the past, to become once again a one Islamic umma, whether the ruler would be a Kurd, an Arab or an Ottoman Turk. What is important is that we would have been part of one Islamic state. You know that…

But that is like a dream today, isn't it? This is not the reality we live in today.

I know that. You talked about the past, and I visited the past. But you know who divided this region? We did not divide this region, the one who did it - France and Sykes Picot.

The British, the French, Turkey, and Iran.

It was certainly Sykes Picot that divided this region into pieces. Therefore, now the Kurds have their demands, I will say this issue can be resolved between you and the countries in the region, because…

But my question is clear, I want you to answer me clearly. Do you consider it occupied territory or not?

I also would like to speak with accuracy. My dear brother, regarding the Palestinian nation, we are not in conflict with an Arab or Islamic neighbor who might have different religions and ethnicities. This is a Zionist enemy who have crossed the distant oceans and have invaded our land. Today, Kurdistan - it is true that in the past it was a different story, but today it is part of the political entities in the region. I cannot describe this as occupation, just as I would describe the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

What about the right to self-determination?

I cannot call it an occupation. But at the same time, I cannot stop the Kurds, to tell them you are banned from having projects and demands. I therefore hope that this will be resolved within the framework of understanding with the states in the region, because any further division of the region will weaken us even further. This would finally allow the United States and Israel to benefit from the vacuum.

The right to self-determination... Do the Kurdish people also have the right to decide their own fate?

Let me give you an example. In 1951, a union was formed between Palestine and Jordan. After 1948, Jordan ruled the West Bank and they called it the Union of the Two Banks, and this continued for a while. Now in the present time, knowing that I am Palestinian and strive to liberate all of Palestine - back then Gaza was under the Egyptian rule - I do not look at the Egyptian rule of Gaza or the Jordanian rule of West Bank as occupation, because it is related to your partner in religion and nation. That is why I would like to be careful in applying the terms. It is a different story when it comes to the Zionist enemy.

But you are there. You and the Jordanian people are two Arab peoples, and with the Egyptian as well, you are both Arabs. However, you do not welcome this and want to enjoy your independence. As for the Kurds, in terms of language, history and national identity, they are different from the Turks, Arabs, and even the Persians.

Let me also give an example of the Ottoman state, a part of the Arab world used to look at the Ottoman caliphate and Ottoman state as part of an occupation of the Arab homeland; that is why they revolted against the Ottoman rule. That I am Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim, should I consider the era of the Ottoman state as occupation of the Arab homeland? No, I do not consider it an occupation, why? Because I was also part of that broad and big Islamic state. It is true that mistakes had been made during the last days of the Ottoman state, that oppression and violations were committed in Syria, Palestine, and other places, that is true.

It is true that some Arabs consider the Ottoman era as an occupation, but as an Arab and Muslim from Palestine I do not consider the Ottoman rule as an occupation. This is a different thing. When I deal with a Muslim who might happen to have a different ethnicity or religious sect, but when it is related to an enemy like the Zionist Israel or the crusaders who used to occupy our country, it is a different thing. Here the concepts must recognize their differences. It is true that this is my personal opinion. I do not blame you for expressing your views in whichever way you like; I respect it and I respect the Kurds in the way they express themselves.

Do the Kurds have the right to self-determination?

Considering that this is the wish and the hope of the Kurds themselves, I hope this would come true, but…

As a matter of fact, do the Kurds as a nation have the right to decide their own destiny, as they tried to do in 2017, but the world refused?

My dear brother, some political entities have already been formed. For example, in some parts of Syria, there are Turkmens, could we say these people are Turkmens and therefore should have the right to self-determination?

But are they a nation or an ethnic component?

They are also a nation. Turkmens are a nation and are different from Arabs…

But are they a nation or an ethnic component?

No, look my brother, I will give an example so that we do not end up in the same circle on this issue. You believe it is your right to decide your fate and that you have fought for this right for many years. Well, this is your right, and I do not argue against that. Now, as a human being when I look at the political map of the region, do I wish for the Kurds and the Turkmens to decide on their own fates while the region will be involved in a conflict that would further disintegrate the region? No, I do not make such wishes. I wish that this would come true through understanding of all parties. I mean some sort of political understanding among the umma. For example, if we discuss dividing Iraq, Shiites, and Sunnis, should we wish for two different regions? Shiites on their own, Sunnis on their own and the Kurds on their own? I do not wish for that. I hope that we all live in the unity of our homelands, but while respecting the peculiarities of each side. This is my view. But I do not deprive you of how you view the issue. 

But if you take the Palestinian and Israel example, as someone foreign to your country, I do not see peace between you and Israel; you do not recognize Israel and they do not recognize you either - so that you could live in peace. Why is Hamas engaged in an armed struggle against Israel?

We have been discussing this issue for a while now, and I already stated what I wanted to say. But I reiterate: I do not have any sensitivities in dealing with any Arab or Islamic side with whom I might be in conflict of interest with regards to their politics or rights and so forth. The logic behind this issue is that I consider dealing with Arab, Muslim, Christian, Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish parties as components of the umma, I do not have any sensitivities in dealings with these groups of people, I prefer mutual and peaceful understandings with these groups.

I do not fight against Israel because they are Jews, but because they do not have that right and they do not belong to this region. They, like the crusaders, have come from outside and have invaded our land. There are Christians in Palestine, too, but they are part of Palestine and part of the umma. They are Christians when it comes to religion, but their culture is Islamic, and they belong to this region. It means they are our partners in this homeland, we respect them and understand their demands. In this regard, we have a strong national unity in Palestine. The Hamas Movement received votes from the Christians in the 2006 elections. There are Jews in this region as well who have always lived in peace and security. Islam is a great religion and respects other religions with a book and gives the right to worship and does not commit violations against them. But when an occupation comes from afar, and their justification is that there is a Zionist Movement, they are indeed secular and yet have made use of religion for the sake of this war; that it goes back to history and falsifies the history by claiming that this homeland is the homeland of the Jews. I cannot accept that, and I cannot live with this idea.

The crusaders also came from the West. We have Christians ourselves, but here I mean the crusaders. The crusaders use the Christianity religion against me, I cannot accept that. But our partners in the region, Muslims, Arabs, Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites - no matter which sect they come from - even if I might have some disagreements with them over a political issue, I am going to deal with them differently, differently from how I deal with Israel. This is my view.

Regarding the Hamas Movement, since its foundation in the 1990s and late 2000s, the view of the Hamas Movement out there in the world was a view that Hamas was a national Islamic Palestinian organisation whose objective is to liberate Palestine. This is not something I say, but throughout the Islamic world, when Hamas is put into a different category, that it is operating within the framework of the Iranian Shiite crescent. Are you not tired of this? Does it feel painful when the long-held view that Muslims used to have for the Hamas Movement have changed now?

Look, the view has not changed, nor has it been overturned. Of course, there are reservations and complaints from the loyalists of this ummah, and this is because of some statements that were spoken by some members and symbolic leaders of the Hamas Movement. It is true that there is some criticism out there, and some wrong remarks have been made, but the strategy of Hamas is that it is a Palestinian, Arabic, and Islamic - Sunni - Movement. But we are not extremists. I am Sunni but I do not hold any extremist views against the Shiites. I am an Arab, but I am not an extremist against other nations. I deal with Turks, Kurds and Persians and have no problem in this regard. It means that we are a Palestinian, Arab and Islamic Movement who fight against the Israeli occupation. We have a national cause that also happens to be an Islamic cause - Palestine is the heart of this ummah, and it is the first qibla of the Muslims, it is the land of the Isra and Miraj.

Now, for me to fight against this occupier and to be successful, any resistance movement needs support and aid, that is why we knock on the door of all the Islamic world. We did not knock on the door of any specific country. We knocked on the door of every Arab country, as well as Islamic and world countries. Any country who opened the door, we said to them “thank you” and we have accordingly requested their aid: we requested financial, military, weaponry, political and training aid. Every country has helped us with all they could. There are those who provided money but did not give us weapons. There are states that have provided weapons, there are states…

Apart from Iran, is there any other country that has provided weapons to you?

No, a state? No [other] state has given us weapons…

Only Iran?

Only Iran, that is in terms of providing weapons. But we have also received money from Iran and others. Now, when I talk to Arab countries, I tell them “Dear brothers, we are a liberation organisation, we are not an opposition to a regime that might endanger you. Help us with money, weapons, and politics. This is against Israel; it is not against an Arab regime or against the Palestinian Authority.” Some of them are afraid, and the reason for that is American pressure, or it is out of their conviction. We respect that. But when we knocked on the door of Iran at the beginning of the 1990s - 30 years ago - they welcomed us, they provided us with money, weapons, training, and industry… Sorry, but today the aid from Iran or from any other state that the Hamas Movement receives, does it make a proxy of that state? No.

But at the same time, do you believe that Iran provides these weapons and money for the sake of your eyes, just for the sake of you? Or to support Jerusalem? It is politics, it is political rhetoric, no doubt they should also have their own objective.

My brother, this does not apply only to Iran, it applies to every country…

All the world.

I am based in Qatar now. What is the interest of Qatar when it hosts the Hamas leadership, helps Gaza, it transfers 30 million monthly to fund the electricity and the salaries of some employees and the poor families? Turkey as well has projects in Gaza and in Jerusalem and similarly hosts some Hamas leadership, the same question is true for them, too: what is their interest? It is true that life and politics are all based on interests, but there are also principles. First, as a matter of principle, I do not want to enter the minds and the hearts of people, but I cannot deny the fact that these countries who are helping Hamas and Palestine - whether Arab or Islamic - do so out of principle. I have met these leaders up-close: some of them love Palestine, some of them feel sorry for Palestine. That is why there could be religious, national, or noble reasons by those states and their leaders and I cannot reject this motive of them.

But as for interests. That is true, what are their interests? I will tell you this, I will give you some examples. Before I mention Iran, I will give you examples from other countries. Hamas has waged several wars. In the 2008-2009 war, the Hamas leadership was in Damascus, what did Damascus get in return? Damascus became the centre of the world during the war because the Hamas leadership was there. Damascus at the time became the centre of all the political, regional, and international efforts who were trying to hold a ceasefire and visited Hamas. This provided Syria with a card.

Also, in the 2012 war, some of the Hamas leadership, the head of the Palestinian Jihad and I went to Cairo. It was the same, Cairo during the rule of President Morsi became the capital of all the political, regional, and international efforts aimed to halt the hostilities. Hillary Clinton personally paid a visit to the presidential palace and did not leave the place until the ceasefire was announced. In the 2014 war, I was the head of the [Hamas] Movement and I was here in Doha. Again, and in the same manner, the American administration indirectly - through the Qatari leadership - negotiated with us. The same pattern repeated in the last war.

Does that mean Tehran would become the centre for the world war?

One minute, God knows, but we are not in Iran at the present time.

The next war?

I mean, no, no - not necessarily. Wherever the leadership of the Movement is based, the capital where the leadership would be present in, or to host part of the leadership especially the head of the politburo - formerly [Khaled Mashal] and now my brother Ismail Haniyeh, the place where the head of the Movement is present will become the centre for political and diplomatic efforts. This means the states will benefit from sheltering Hamas in their countries. Of course, providing support to Hamas, whether political or financial, by some states will create some hardship for them. But considering that Hamas is a strong and famous movement and is loved by the people, the presence of the Movement in any given country will serve that country as well - politically. 

But regarding Iran, 10 years ago in my conversation with a foreign minister of an Arab state that has a specific stance with Iran, he told me “Abu Walid, you think that Iran is a charity organisation in supporting you? You think it is out of duty to God? Life and politics are about interests.” I said, “it is true that life is about interests.” He said, “it means [that] this aid [from Iran] also has a price tag.” I said, “yes, it has.” The minister became happy, to him it was like Hamas itself admitted something that embarrasses the Movement. I asked the minister whether he knew what the price was...

There are two things that Iran benefits from: first that it can say I am for the Palestinian cause which is the prime cause of the Islamic ummah, and this accordingly helps the state become famous, because it can say that Tehran does not only support the Shiite Hezbollah, but that it also helps Hamas, a Sunni Arab movement. This fact surely helps the fame of Iran in the region, especially there are some sensitivities with Iran because of the sectarian issues. So yes, Iran will benefit from this aid to Hamas. Second, when they visit the European countries, they will say what are the things you would like from Hamas, we can reach an understanding with them. This is part of being smart. I said to that Arab minister, “During your visits to the United States and Europe, what are the things that prevent you from saying that Hamas is a Palestinian Arab Movement and that we can talk to them?”

We are not puppets of any country, and we belong to the entire ummah. I met with one of the Arab Kings in 2012. He said he was going to visit the United States and would meet with Obama. He said, “what do you want me to say to him?” I told him say to the Americans, “Hamas which is a Palestinian, Arab and Islamic Movement, we can reach an understanding with them.” That is why we are open to all sides, for the sake of the interest of our cause. Take this as a principle: we thank everyone who helps us and we say may God reward them, but this support is our right from the ummah, and we thank any party who helps us. But we are not ready to exchange our independent decision making with any form of support we would receive. We do not hold our decision hostage to the support from a country, in any form. It is not possible for us to give up our decision-making process to any country, no matter the volume of their support. We do not change our policy, either because of pressure or demand of such states. Even though we thank and appreciate the support we receive from a given country, this does not necessarily mean that we will be in line with their agendas elsewhere. This is true for Iran, Turkey, Qatar, and Iraq. It means that Hamas enjoys full independence.

It is campaigning. I fully understand what you are saying.

The criticism against us is there, this is something that is occurring every now and then, because of a remark that sometimes goes beyond what should be said. But this is not related to the Hamas view and the strategy of independence of Hamas.

Okay, this is your view. It is not only criticism, it is not only some remarks, either; the war that took place in 2021, a vast majority of the Arab intellectuals, a vast majority of the Islamic intellectuals also thought that it is better for Hamas to stay out of the situation. They would rather see the protests to continue in its civilian form, that it would help promote the Palestinian cause. But you, suddenly, you entered a war and your rockets started to talk, and because of that, some Palestinian and some Israeli people died. In one way or another, you caused some violence which is not necessarily in the best interest of the Palestinian people. This triggered a question, whether this rocket war was at the request of Iran or not. Of course, this is not a random question, but this is a question that the think tanks in the Arab world ask.

Okay, you just touched on two issues. First, why did Hamas not continue the popular protest against the Israeli forces in Jerusalem and the yard of al-Aqsa mosque during the events of last year? Then I will come to the second issue. Look my dear brother, Hamas and the Palestinian people, throughout the last one hundred years - since the British colonization and since the 20s of the last century,meaning exactly for one hundred years - have continued their struggle, and have tested all forms of struggle: uprising, popular revolution, wide strikes like the one in 1936, armed struggle, sacrifices, and by deploying volunteers from outside through Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon in the 60s and 70s; and also by acts of resistance from within Palestine that finally extend to become a total war in response to the Israeli aggressions. The people of Palestine have one fixed objective, it is to liberate Palestine from the Israeli occupation, to reclaim Jerusalem and al-Aqsa mosque, for the refugees to return to their homeland, setting the prisoners free and to announce the independent state of Palestine while enjoying its full sovereignty.

Are you now trying new techniques?

Just one minute, to achieve this objective we will try every means.

Is it a new form compared to 2021?

No, I will give you an example. We have tried many resistance and fighting forms in Gaza; in Gaza we staged protests for the Right to Return that went on for about two to three years and it was peaceful. It means that Gaza has tried both military and peaceful means. We together with our brothers in Ramallah - I told President Abu Mazin let us together agree on a way of resistance. You believe in the popular resistance, we also believe in the popular resistance, but we also believe in armed struggle. Popular resistance is the common ground between the two sides, let us conduct a popular resistance. 

Unfortunately, they agree with the logic but fail to follow the logic with actions on the ground. Hamas is open in this regard. But look my dear brother, last year in Ramadan Israel staged an aggression against Sheikh Jarrah and wanted to relocate its people, violated al-Aqsa mosque, and entered the mosque while some people were already sheltering inside the mosque. We resisted. But the violent behaviour of Israel and the martyrdom of some people forced the people inside the mosque to ask for help from the Resistance. The Resistance in Gaza cannot stand still. We are one nation and have one cause, especially when the issue is related to Jerusalem and al-Aqsa. This will be recorded under the name of Gaza and Palestine.

Every Movement has always - look at history, every nation that has fought for the right to self-determination, take Vietnam, Africa, and Latin America and everywhere else - the nations have tried all forms of struggle, long-term military, and peaceful struggle with the objective to liberate their countries. This is one. And number two, my dear brother, the missiles of the Resistance are fired only at the command of a national decision and is to achieve only the Palestinian cause. It is not part of the Iranian agenda or of any other country in the region. As I said, we are not the military wing of any country.

Okay, these remarks of yours, people believed in these remarks one hundred percent when you were the head of Hamas. But today, after the participation of Ismail Haniyeh in the funeral ceremony of Qasem Soleimani, the timing of the events, and with the use of drones and missiles that appear more like a fighting pattern deployed by Iranian armed proxies in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, these remarks are no longer accepted or believed.

I [will] tell you the truth. The strategy and view of Hamas on a sensitive issue like this has not changed, not during the time of Khaled Mashal, not even during the time of Ismail Haniyeh; Khaled Mashal and Ismail Haniyeh are part of this Movement and its leadership, and both have the same strategy and conviction. But some differences are being felt in the ways remarks are made, such remarks sometimes provoke some people, some remarks might be excessive or wrong - we admit that.

Even during my time, some things were said that angered people. But it does not reflect the strategy and the view of Hamas. That is one, and second, for those people who focus a lot on the issue of Iran, I understand that some countries in the region do not agree with the Iranian policy, and it is their right to disagree. But they should rest assured and know that Hamas is not anyone’s puppet.

Now, the big question is this: instead of just sitting and spending time discussing this issue, why do the Sunni Islamic and Arab countries do not make an initiative by fulfilling their real duty towards the Palestinian issue? I [will] give you an example, if a human being needs something, he will appreciate anyone who gives a helping hand. When someone falls into the seawater or a swimming pool and is about to drown, anyone who throws a rope to him, of course he will thank him because he saved his life. Right when you are drowning and one of your relatives passes by and stares at you without taking any action to rescue you, but some distant person who may happen to be a Christian, or might have a different sect, religion, or ethnicity, he will come and rescue you, certainly you will thank him and blame your close relative who did not try to rescue you.

Today, the Palestinian people need the support of anyone who can help him in its resistance and defense against the Israeli aggression. That is why it says thank you all. But it will not become - I tell you this: the Hamas Movement is not in the pocket of Iran, not in the pocket of Qatar, not in the pocket of Turkey, nor in the pockets of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, or any other Arab country. We are free, and anyone who helps us, we will say thank you. We have our independent decision, and if we made mistakes in some remarks, this would never mean a change in the strategy and the view of Hamas. I hope everyone will understand the issue like I said.

Were you unhappy with Ismail Haniyeh’s participation in the funeral of Qasem Soleimani?

Why should I be unhappy? I know that some nations in the region see Qasem Soleimani in a different way because he had an agenda in the region, but we as the people of Palestine see Qasem Soleimani as someone who supported the Palestinian Resistance. So, there is a difference of views, the two sides look at the same person differently. You would say thank you to anyone who supports you, and you would go to their funeral should he die. My brother Ismail Haniyeh who is the head of the Movement took part in the funeral, and it was based on a decision by the Movement. It was not like he would go independent of the Movement.

Did you take part?

No, I was not a member of the leadership of the Movement at the time.

I say this because you were [in the leadership] in 2020.

I became part of the leadership later in August. 

After you were re-elected the head of the politburo.

Yes.

If you were the head of Hamas at the time, would you have taken part in the funeral?

I will not respond to a hypothetical question. Thanks to God, I am a man who - after God - has enough bravery and trust in myself to express my view on any subject that faces me and for which I will be held accountable. But to answer hypothetical questions, it is not necessary.

But right then, a source told the Independent Arabic that you were unhappy about that stance.

No, I did not have any comment on that issue, and no one can talk on my behalf.

There is a photo that I very much would like to show you. Do you see it or will you need your glasses?

No, no, I see it.

In this prayer, there is Ismail Haniyeh, but you are not there. First, why are you not there? Second, is it necessary for Hamas to be there? 

You must ask the person who took the photo why I am not in it.

But the question is about your stances. Perhaps it is because of your stances that you are not in that photo?

No, no. I am going to respond to you. The person who made that photo or who drew that photo, he did not put me in the photo. That question must be asked to that person. It is no secret that people in Iran complained against Khaled Mashal for the fact that he did not stay in Syria, and that they hold me responsible for that. It is a stance that I am familiar with, and I did not commit any wrongdoings against anyone. I did not do any wrongdoings either against Iran or Syria. I did not do any wrongdoing against any Islamic or Arab country or on the international level against anyone who has supported and provided aid to Hamas.

I make my own independent decisions and will not bow down to any party. I can take [a] left or right, move forward or backward based on the interests of my cause, and based on my own decisions as a Hamas leader. I am not anyone’s puppet - any party who becomes angry, unhappy or makes criticism, it is up to them. But I am independent.

Do you not regret the decision to leave Syria?

No, of course not, why should I regret it?

Are the outcomes better for Hamas this way? If Hamas were to stay in Syria, would it have had another outcome?

Look - no, no, leaving Syria by Hamas was the right decision, because when Hamas left Syria, it was not because the Movement was seeking its interests. On the contrary, we had a lot of interests in Syria… Hamas wanted to avoid taking sides. The Syrian leadership at the time criticised the Hamas leadership and they wanted to have us on the side of the state or the regime against the Syrian people. We rejected that demand and stayed true to our principle. This way we did not become part of the Syrian crisis: we did not side with the regime against the people, nor did we side with the people against the regime. This was our independent decision.

If Qatar one day demands you to take a stance in a comparable situation, are you going to leave Qatar as well?

Look, if we enter a chaotic situation, if we are asked of a stance or to give up on something without our conviction, if it is against our principles, our stances, and if it is interfering in our decision-making, certainly we are free and we will do the same thing with everyone.

Let us not forget the pictures, that Hamas could be seen in the same picture that includes Houthis and the [Iran-backed] resistance groups in Iraq…

I will answer you on this. I wanted to respond to that, but another question came in the way. In short, I am not happy to see Hamas to be framed in one colour of the many colours of the ummah. I see the ummah inclusive of all its colours: Arabs and non-Arabs, Muslims and Christians, Sunnis, and Shiites. All these together form the umma. With all these colours, I have no problem being side by side with a Christian brother, a Kurdish brother, an Iranian brother, a Turkish brother, an Aab brother, a Sunni brother, and a Shiite brother - I do not have any problem with this. But to be seen within the framework of only one colour, this is not suitable for Hamas. I represent a Movement that is part of this ummah inclusive of all the components. I do not feel shy to side with one of the components of this ummah but to segregate one of the components of this ummah and to put Hamas within the framework of that component, so that it will stand against other components of the ummah, no, we do not accept that. 

Within that framework, you do not like your name to appear within the framework of what is now called resistance, also called the uncontrolled arms -meaning Shiite groups themselves are not happy with these groups either. The same is true in Yemen and Syria. You do not like to see the name of your Movement next to these groups in the same sentence? 

Yes, I also said that. Look, I said in general terms, if we are put in the framework of one colour and one group, it is something that we do not accept: to side with a party that fights against Israel, I do not have any problem with that. Any party fighting against Israel, whether Muslim or not, Shiite or Sunni, we side with that party and we have no problem with that. But we do not side with Hamas and the anti-Israeli resistance with a party who are against the system [of governance] in their country, or with a party who are part of a political or military situation in their country. We are not that type of colour. It is true that we are all on one side in our struggle against Israel. But there should not be one formula to group all the parties who fight against Zionism. Those who have their own conviction, it is their will, whether in Iraq, Yemen or anywhere else. Those who have their own agenda, policy and military programs are different from those who stand against Israel, no matter what their colour is.