The document is ten typewritten A4 pages.

The document clarifies Fatah’s Central Committee’s position on two issues:

• Battle of Tripoli, Lebanon, which took place in November 1983 between the two Fatah factions, The defection is supported by the General Command, the Thunderbolt and the Syrian regime, And the leadership of the Fatah movement headed by Yasser Arafat, It resulted in the final withdrawal of Fatah and the PLO leadership from Lebanon.

• Yasser Arafat’s visit to Egypt during his transfer from Tripoli to Tunisia under the protection of the Egyptian Navy, This was seen by his opponents as a retreat into the arms of the Egyptian regime, which recognizes Israel and is linked to a peace agreement that is rejected by Palestinians and Arabs.

The document contains many political elements, Among the most important are:

• Fatah’s attack on the Syrian and Libyan regimes for their support for the dissent movement within Fatah.

• Fatah’s attack on the Palestinian forces that clashed with it and fought with it in Lebanon, These forces: The Fatah split movement led by Nimr Saleh (Abu Saleh), a member of the Fatah Central, Samih Kweik (Qadri), a member of Fatah’s central office, Musa Maragheh (Abu Musa), a member of Fatah’s military command, Standing next to them is the Popular Front General Command headed by Ahmed Jibril, and the vanguards of the People’s Liberation Forces (Thunderbolt).

• France and Egypt help Fatah forces get out of Tripoli, Lebanon, to Tunisia. It was understood as an attempt to polarize Fatah and the PLO leadership towards peaceful solutions, of which Egypt became the godfather at the time. Perhaps this is what the statement in the document suggests: “The battle for Tripoli was the end of a road and the beginning of a new one.”

• Arafat’s visit to Egypt was an improvised step that embarrassed Fatah and the leadership of the organization, condemning it, Then she listened to Arafat to understand his justifications and motives. The Central Committee considered it a wrong move but does not reflect a capitulatory approach. But today we know where things have been headed.

• The document refers to Fatah’s rejection of the Reagan Initiative, which called for autonomy linked to Jordan. It also rejected the autonomy project provided for in the Camp David Accords.

• The Central Committee stressed the escalation of the armed struggle after the Tripoli phase, This is something against which the following events and facts have been confirmed.

• The document repeatedly stressed the Fatah leadership’s keenness on the independent national decision. For his sake and for his sake, they clashed with the Syrian and Libyan regimes as they aimed to confiscate it. As a result, the trend towards Egypt was rejected by Palestinians and Arabs because of its signing of Camp David.

• The document opened the door to relations with Egypt, and a new path and approach, It ended with engaging in the peace process, recognizing Israel, stopping the armed struggle, and establishing a Palestinian Authority on part of the Palestinian territory without fulfilling Palestinian rights.