Ms. Ana Gomes. DR.
Mohsen Abdelmoumen: You sit in the Subcommittee on Security and Defense and in the Special Commission on terrorism in the European Parliament. What do you think of European coordination in the fight against terrorism?
Ana Gomes: It has improved considerably since 2015, particularly since the terrorist attacks in France that hit the Bataclan. It existed before but it is especially since the Bataclan that the information exchange between police and intelligence services has developed. However, there is still a lot to do. The causes of terrorism, including the reasons for radicalization among Europeans, have not yet been sufficiently addressed – and I am not talking only about the Europeans who went to join Daesh in Syria and Iraq, but Europeans who attacked us here at home. Most are our fellow citizens who are born and have radicalized here, and I think that has a lot to do with neoliberal policies that have completely disinvested in social inclusion, especially for young people from immigrant communities, and so it was easier for terrorist groups to recruit unstable people for any reason. I also think that we have not done enough, and we are still not doing enough, in terms of coordinating the external policy of the European Union so that we do not contribute to the conflicts that fuel the narrative of terrorist groups. So I think there is much to do. I do not believe that, from the point of view of terrorism, the situation is as serious as the rhetoric of the European governments claims. We see the latest reports from Europol and, of course, it is an important issue that can only be solved if we act in a coordinated manner as Europeans, but this is not the main cause of the murders of European citizens. In addition, most of the victims of terrorist groups are citizens of other countries, and most of them are Muslims. This is also an area where I do not think that European governments have done the right thing to engage Muslim communities in Europe in the fight against terrorism in order to lighten their efforts. Instead of considering them, as the extreme right does, as if they were co-responsible for the acts of terrorism, I think that Muslim communities are our main allies in the fight against terrorism and especially in terrorism that claims to be of religious and Muslim inspiration. In my opinion, there are many aspects to reconsider, even at the language level, for example, when we talk about jihadist terrorism, I do not agree at all with saying that, because I know very well that the concept of jihad is an important concept for Muslims. It is abusive to use that term. In the same way that we do not talk about the « terrorism of the Holy Spirit », for example, or about « Catholic terrorism » in Northern Ireland, we should not talk about jihadist terrorism.
It’s a political issue for you.
Since the attacks on European soil, have there been any advances in the fight against terrorism?
Yes. We have been able to foil a lot of terrorist attacks, not all, of course, but a lot. And cooperation at the European level and also cooperation between Europeans and other states of which many terrorists are nationals has been very important to thwart and thus prevent these attacks.
There is increasing talk of the possibility of chemical terrorist attacks on European soil. Do you think that the services of European countries are equipped to deal with such terrorist attacks?
The chemical danger is all the greater because we know very well that there are forces, for example in Syria, that possess chemical weapons and do not hesitate to attack the Syrian population. Many of these chemicals may have been supplied by European companies.
It’s very serious.
Yes. And it can actually turn against us. But there are also other kinds of threats, biological in particular. And the European authorities have repeatedly suggested that there might be concerns about nuclear power plants. So, I think that the European Union action plan against CBRN problems (note: chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear) is far below what it should be, especially, precisely, in relation to the terrorist threat. This is one of the areas we are going to focus on in the report we are preparing.
In your view, is it not time for Westerners to put an end to their alliances, particularly with the Saudis and the Qatari who are the main spawners of terrorism?
I do not believe there is a European alliance. There are alliances with quite varying geometry of some crucial Member States of the European Union for specific reasons, particularly trade-related, including the sale of arms. But in my opinion, yes, this is an area where we absolutely need to speak clearly and not to turn a blind eye to the actions of a few Member States that place themselves in the hands of the Saudis, and I am also concerned with issues that are related to the funding of radical proselytism, so extremist visions that lead to terrorist violence. I know very well for have been ambassador to Indonesia at the time when Jemaah Islamiyah was already attacking Indonesian targets but also European or foreign there, as was the case with the Bali bombing and other terrible attacks, that it was radical fringes linked to Saudi money and Saudi Wahhabi proselytism that were responsible for these abuses. And everywhere I went in the Arab world, one points the finger at Wahhabi proselytism. So, in my opinion, it is very important from this perspective to engage European Muslims. It is essential that the European Union and the Member States prevent any form of proselytism that comes insidiously with donations for mosques, preachers, imams, etc. On the contrary, we engage and encourage the formation of European preachers in a context of religious freedom where Muslims who are part of our European social fabric have the freedom but also the support of the state to develop a European Islam that is fully compatible and respectful of our standards and our tolerance and which prevents the infiltration of obscurantist versions of Wahhabism.
In one of his books, Gilles Kepel spoke about the role played by the Algerian community in France during the attacks committed by the GIA (Armed Islamic Group). He said that the Algerian community had played a major role in the neutralization of these groups, in particular the network Khaled Kelkal and Djamel Beghal. Kepel says that it is useful to call on this community to help us fight terrorism.
Absolutely. That’s why I think that instead of be joined to the extreme right that tries to denigrate our Muslims who live in Europe, we must absolutely engage them and support them because they are in the best position to be able to counter a religious affiliation of people who make terrorist statements.
For you, it’s a kind of vaccine?
Recruitments are made at the prison level and elsewhere, and books disseminating takfirist ideology circulate freely on European territory. Do not you think that the fight against terrorism is not only military but that it is especially necessary to fight the ideas? Is not the fight primarily ideological?
Yes, I think there is an ideological fight that is very much related to this issue of engaging our Muslims and above all not to feed the narrative that purports to amalgamate Muslims in Europe or refugees or migrants, with the danger of terrorism. Clearly, it is necessary to demonstrate the lack of religious basis of the comments of terrorists, because they are absolutely contrary to the teachings of any religion, including Islam. Only Muslims can deconstruct the narrative of terrorists at all levels of our communities, whether in the family, in schools or in the police, to prevent recruitment and to demonstrate that this religion that is invoked is not at all served by these attacks. I also think we need to tackle the financing of terrorism and now that we see rather low-cost attacks, it is not in the cost of attacks, it is in proselytism that many money is placed in Europe. And here our governments are not serious enough in the fight against money laundering – the directives are also against the financing of terrorism. All this why? Because many of our elites in some Member States, especially those selling arms to Saudi Arabia, do business and therefore are “captured” in one way or another.
It’s a vicious circle…
Absolutely. In my opinion, all these aspects are very important.
What do you think of Europe’s cooperation with countries like Algeria in the context of the fight against terrorism, that is to say the southern shore of the Mediterranean?
I do not know exactly how important Algeria is in this fight. I would like it to be important because I believe that there is an experience in Algeria and then it’s still a country with many secularized people and very convinced Muslims. What I do know is that cooperation is considered indispensable in relation to Morocco and Tunisia. I do not know if this cooperation is always good but it is indispensable.
Because the terrorists come from these countries?
Because there are a lot of terrorists coming from Tunisia and Morocco. We know very well that all this is linked to youth unemployment in these countries. So cooperation with these countries is considered indispensable. As for Algeria, I do not know if the cooperation is good. But it must be considered indispensable. I imagine that it is also important for Algeria. But I doubt that it works well since Algeria has a rather military regime.
I do not know how effective it is at the level of society’s perception. I do not know. I think that Algeria is well placed in the region because of its own experience but I am not part of the intelligence services. I do not really know.
Do you think this cooperation is desirable?
It is desirable, but in my opinion it is also desirable that in Algerian society there be more democratic forms of governance. I do not believe in societies that are not democratic. I do not believe that the intelligence services can be well informed of everything if one does not live in democracy (she laughs).
That’s an idea of Mrs. Gomes (laughs). You disarm the terrorists by « democracy ».
Yes. That’s it.
You denounced the influence of the Israeli lobby in the European Parliament and you asked for an investigation into the defamation campaign that targeted you. How is it that every time someone denounces Israel’s apartheid policy, he is described as anti-Semitic?
Yes. And I’m not at all against Israel. On the contrary, I am for Israel’s right to exist in security and I think the only way for Israel to exist, it is to recognize its Palestinian neighbor, respect it and live in good neighborliness with Palestine, so I am for the solution of both states. But I see that things have changed a lot for years, and I’ve been here in Parliament since 2004, and I think this change is due to the growing influence of the far right, in Europe too, and around the world. I would even say a fascist populist extreme right. These are the allies of the current Israeli government. We can see very well that Mr. Trump is one of the great actors in the world of this proto-fascist wave…
You think Trump represents this far-right wave?
Of course. I see a link between the ideas and the actions of Mr. Trump, for example by favoring Brexit. There is a link between Mr. Trump, Putin and the Israeli far-right in power.
How do you explain this link?
The link is constituted by reactionary, anti-human rights, anti-democracy, racist, xenophobic, supremacist ideas, and that’s what we see. These ideas have been growing in Europe too, as seen with the Brexit, with Marine Le Pen in France, with the AfD in Germany, as seen in Austria, in Italy with Salvini… and all are drinking in the same source, which is a visceral reactionary, anti-democratic, intolerant source, and these are also the waters of Mr. Netanyahu and his close friends. Of course, this impacts. I see with much concern the mainstream governments of the European Union running behind the fascist narrative of the extreme right against immigrants, against the refugees, against the Muslims, against the Gypsies, the Romani, and one of these days it will be the turn of the Jews again. And in the midst of all this, there is the Israeli far-right which is in power, which is responsible for blocking the peace process, and which is the great ally of all these very dangerous far-right forces.
How do you explain that the Israeli far-right, namely Mr. Bennett and Mr. Liberman, are linked with people like the Austrian Chancellor – we saw recently the Netanyahu-Bennet meeting with the Austrian Chancellor – while they keep talking about Auschwitz and the Holocaust? How do you explain that they find themselves in the company of neo-Nazis?
I believe that it is the Russian and Eastern European networks that have migrated to Israel in recent years. They are far-right, racist, xenophobic people who convey the same ideas from Russia and European countries and who are now very strong behind Netanyahu’s regime. And there is also Putin who is perhaps the strategist of all these developments of the extreme right, for example on the side of Trump, against Europe, against a Europe of democracy, peace, values, respect and tolerance.
And at the same time, we see a rapprochement Macron-Putin. What does Macron play?
Macron plays all the angles. We saw when he went to the United States; he was even ridiculed by Trump. Macron plays all the games that he wants.
You invited Omar Barghouti, co-founder of the BDS, to speak at the European Parliament during a seminar. Why does the BDS movement disturb Israel so much?
I think that the BDS movement-and I do not have to agree with everything they advocate-is a crucial interlocutor for peace, for its representation on a part of the population-and the young population-of Palestine, and because they expose precisely the reactionary nature of the apartheid system imposed by Israel throughout the territory it occupies. What bothers Mr. Netanyahu and his close friends, it is that very effectively and very clearly, the BDS expose the reactionary nature of Israel’s domination and how it prevents peace. There are other types of opponents with whom all the Netanyahus of Israel can live because ultimately they are allies. I remember very well when I was in Tel Aviv in April 1992 when the first visit of the European Troika took place throughout the region, so Egypt, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. We did all the tour of the region and we met Isaac Rabin just two months before he became Prime Minister of Israel. He confessed to us – it was in the story of the countries that made up the Troika, that is to say Portugal, Great Britain, and the Netherlands, and of course the European Commission – that Israel had helped to create Hamas in order for Hamas to delegitimize Fatah and when he told us that, he recognized that eventually the creature had turned against the wizard who created it.
This is an important testimony.
Very important. There are other so-called opposing forces with which Israel can live very well, including Hamas. Because, ultimately, they serve its purpose, while a very effective peaceful organization like the BDS strikes where it is needed by exposing apartheid-type domination without any legal and completely counterproductive basis that Israel imposes in Palestine.
In your opinion, where does the power of the Israeli lobby come from within the European Parliament?
Yes, absolutely. This power, I saw it grow. I remember when my colleague Véronique De Keyser was here, there was a lot of talk about Israel and Palestine and she always tried to have an open vision and keep in touch with all the camps.
Why are you fought when you have this open position?
Because they are used to intimidating people but me, they do not intimidate me. The problem of the occupation of Palestine is no longer discussed even though it is known that it is at the root of the narrative of terrorism. It will always come back. When I was in Indonesia, it was the big mobilization factor at the beginning of Al Qaeda. I believe that this also has to do with the way in which the European Union has paralyzed itself from within by many new Member States that have a submission agenda to Israel by the same factors: money, intimidation, etc. This contaminates the European Parliament. The European Union was decisive for the launching of the peace process in 1991, and today it does not count. It is limited to making increasingly shocked statements without any content and the peace process is dying, if it is not already dead, as many Palestinians tell me.
Is not Europe dying with this process?
Yes, absolutely. The big problem we have in Europe right now is the existential problem of Europe. When we see, for example, what they propose to us for the next European Council, they are euphemistically speaking of regional disembarking platforms (note: for migrants)! But these are internment camps that they want to build outside Europe! It’s a way of outsourcing our responsibilities. It’s absolutely unthinkable!
What do you think of “hotspots”?
I have nothing against hotspots (note: European method for identifying and registering incoming migrants) if they are places where national and international law is respected. I recently visited the Pozzallo hotspot.
The US Secretary of Defense, General Mattis, confirmed that they were going to build internment camps.
If it is the Australian model that parks people in islands, it is certainly against international law. And it’s completely contrary to European law. So, it’s anti-European. I am sure that there is this idea and I hope that we will be able to fight it and that it will not be accepted. If Europe enters this path, it is Europe itself which is in the process of extinction and which is in question. And of course, that serves Mr. Putin’s strategy.
You think Putin…?
Yes, I think Putin wants to destroy the European Union.
For what purposes?
To rule. It is an idea of revenge and especially an idea of imperial Russia which is an idea of the past which seems to me absolutely incompatible with the globalized world in which one lives at the moment. I think we are reliving the 1930s when we hear the fascistic words of several European leaders and when other leaders who should have the courage to oppose follow and accept solutions that are absolutely contrary to the international law and European law. I’m thinking of going underground. Today, I tell you that if I have to take up arms to defend democracy, I will do it. It is terrible to say, but it shows how desperate I am about the state of the European Union.
Do you think that the European Parliament must turn a blind eye to Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people?
No, I can not accept it and that’s what I’m fighting against, this way of going against the Palestinian people and any other people, but the Palestinian people have suffered so much and Europe has so much of responsibility. Many European countries have heavy responsibilities to the Jewish people first and the way the Jewish people have been brought to occupy Palestine, as well as the fact that we still do not have peace when coexistence was quite possible between the two States and the two peoples. I am very disappointed with the role of Europe.
You mean it does not play a big role?
No, I think that today Europe is not audible. It is the payer which pays all the time for Israel to destroy without the Palestinian people having hope. What worries me a lot is that I do not see hope anymore among the Palestinian people. Many young people tell me that they no longer want the two-state solution; they want to exist with their rights as citizens, liberals, their human rights, in the state that is there, which is the occupying state.
They are resigned. They gave up.
Yes, and it is this annihilation of hope that worries me the most and which should be of great concern to Europe. And I think that Europe has a lot of responsibility because in recent years, it has been very shy, very absent, very dominated and intimidated by Israel and by all the European forces that play the game of this reactionary far-right in Israel.
You are a diplomat and a convinced anti-colonialist activist. Whether on the Palestinian file or the Western Sahara issue, do not you think that the European Parliament should play a decisive role in resolving these two issues related to colonialism?
Yes, it is. Indeed, I was an anti-colonialist militant at the time when my country was waging a colonial war and I am quite committed to the anti-colonial fight. That’s why when I see in countries that have freed themselves from colonialism like the former Portuguese colonies, governments that are oppressive and kleptocrats, I also speak against them because I have no complex and I believe that their peoples did not fight the weapons in their hands to be exploited by their own governments. With regard to Western Sahara, as I have also worked very hard for the independence of East Timor, I see a great parallelism between the case of East Timor and Western Sahara. And since I have been here in the European Parliament, I am a member of the group of friends of Western Sahara, I work with other colleagues, and I have always seen from the Commission an attitude incredibly subject to the French interests which are those who support Morocco in its claims on Western Sahara. I have alerted the Commission several times that it should not take that route. I have heard several apologies such as « Oh! It is a matter that is in the hands of the United Nations.” As if there were no other cases that are also in the hands of the United Nations on which Europe could dispense with not having a position.
Does not having a position is a position?
Absolutely, but I think that at the level of Parliament, we are making the difference. We have these decisions from the European Court of Justice on the fisheries agreement and the agriculture agreement. And I think that in Parliament we will soon have a lot to say because there is no way for the Commission to go beyond the decisions of the Court of Justice and whatever the decision, it will have to come here to Parliament.
That is to say that you will decide on the fishing agreement?
Yes, and there will be no new fisheries agreement or new agriculture agreement without Parliament. And Parliament today is more aware of this than ever. I took part in the meeting of the Joint European Union-Morocco Commission and I told our Moroccan colleagues that they do not have any illusions, that what the Commission is selling by claiming that it will find a solution that surpasses Parliament is not possible. I have made it clear to my Moroccan colleagues and to the Moroccan authorities that they should not cherish any illusions.
Do not you think that more should be done at the level of the European Parliament for the people of Western Sahara who are suffering the oppression of Morocco?
Yes absolutely. As I told you, I am a member of the group of friends of Western Sahara and I have many frank interviews with Sahrawis but also with Moroccans – authorities, parliamentary colleagues and civil society. I would like the situation to be solved because it is very detrimental to the cooperation that does not exist between Morocco and Algeria, which could be so productive for the peoples of the region. This situation is poisoning the reports. And I sometimes think that Sahrawis and Polisario are too dependent on Algeria, much more dependent on Algeria than the guerrillas of East Timor have ever been from Portugal. Portugal was their lawyer but it did not tell them what was in their interests.
How do you explain it?
I think the Polisario has become too dependent on Algeria.
Do they have a choice?
I still think they would have a choice if they were more autonomous. I know what it is and I have some ideas (she laughs). Anyway, I think it’s a real problem. There is a people of Western Sahara which is asking for self-determination and it is incredible that the European Union has not more clearly affirmed the Sahrawi people’s right to self-determination and help invisibly Morocco to consolidate the occupation. But it turns against Morocco, because I have already visited Laayoune and I have even seen Moroccan transmigrants which, when they can express themselves freely, are contrary to military domination. I also visited Tindouf.
What do you think of Morocco, which cut its ties with Iran on the pretext that Hezbollah would have armed the Polisario Front? Do not you think this is a crude maneuver of Saudi Arabia, an ally of Israel and the United States?
Yes, I think it’s clearly related to the financial dependence of Moroccans on the Saudis.
You who are an experienced diplomat, how do you explain that France and Spain are unconditional supporters of Morocco against the Western Sahara people, knowing that the Saharawi file is classified by the UN as one of the last files of decolonization?
I believe that Morocco is a colonial heritage of France and that Morocco puts itself in a position of dependence of France in this domain. I do not think it serves the people of Morocco like any other people in the region. And it does not serve the French people either. There are also many captured people who are paid in France and I know a few cases.
Especially in the media.
And in the Parliament itself.
So in the European Parliament, there are people who are paid by Morocco?
Yes. There is clearly a pro-Morocco lobby here in the European Parliament.
Is not the Israeli lobby that you denounced an unwavering support for the regime of the Moroccan Makhzen that oppresses the population of Western Sahara?
I do not know, but Morocco often talks about Israel’s abuses against the Palestinian people.
There is for example the Alpha group, an Israeli paramilitary group, which is present in Morocco.
That, I do not know but I could not exclude it either.
What do you think of Donald Trump’s exit from the Iran nuclear deal? Does Europe have a role to play in this matter?
Yes, absolutely. I think the Iran nuclear deal with Iran is very important. It’s verified by the IEA, it’s a real agreement that works. Europe is very committed to it and even if I have a lot of criticisms to make to the Iranian regime notably in the matter of the human rights, I think that the path of engagement with Iran is the path that can be productive for peace in the region and also for the improvement of the living conditions of the Iranian people, especially in the field of human rights. We can diverge on many issues with Iran, but we can discuss with Iran. It’s an important regional power, it’s a civilization, and it’s a functional power. However, I find that Saudi Arabia is a completely dysfunctional theocratic regime.
For you, efficiency is on the side of Iran?
Absolutely. Even if we disagree, we can discuss with them, and we must engage Iran.
At the same time, the issue of terrorism does not come from Iran. And we keep sanctioning it.
Of course! And in many areas, if you engage with Iran, you have to understand the issues related to the history of Iran as with the Mossadegh regime deposited by the CIA, etc. I think they are much attached to Europe and this one cannot go without having a dialogue with Iran, even to be in disagree. But especially this program which has been negotiated at the global level with a great European and also American contribution is really a guarantee of security at the global level, so we cannot get rid of it. And I hope that now that the deal is threatened by the Trump administration by Israeli will, at least Europe will make the difference. We must stay on this path and not be intimidated to keep this agreement and prove that it is the right way. If one day Mr. Trump achieves at something similar in disarmament compromises with North Korea, I will applaud. But right now, we know very well that it has no coherence. While the agreement with Iran is in place, is verified by the IEA, and we must not shirk this agreement.
Do you think that after the exit of this agreement by the Trump administration, the word of the Americans will still be believed? Will Koreans believe in any agreement?
The issue goes well beyond Mr. Trump, I think. It is not Mr. Trump, it is that it suits China and it suits South Korea. It may work because it suits South Korea which wants a commitment.
Japan, less. It’s rather China and South Korea. And I think it was these two which really worked on this agreement. It’s not Mr. Trump.
What can you tell all the anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist resistance fighters around the world via our newspaper?
I think that more than ever the big fight is the fight for human rights and democracy. This is the great moment of all people who understand that we live in a globalized, interdependent world, that we need to understand each other, that we have to talk to each other, that we must fight for those ideals which are enshrined in the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, that we have to engage, if necessary in a very strong way, to fight this international of fascist, reactionary, xenophobic extreme-right. It is a fight against this international of shame, xenophobia, fascism and we must mobilize.
Do not you think we need a global front to counter its ideas?
I think that already we need a European front, and a European front with a partnership of all the neighbors, and at the transatlantic level, of all those who are fighting for the architecture of civilization that was acquired after the Second World War, and that the Trump, the Salvini, the Putin, of this world are destroying.
Interview conducted at the European Parliament in Brussels by Mohsen Abdelmoumen
Who is Ana Gomes?
Ana Gomes is a Portuguese politician member of the Portuguese Socialist Party, diplomat and MP in the European Parliament, elected in 2004, re-elected in 2009 and 2014. In her current term (2014-2019), she is a member of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Subcommittee on Security and Defense. She is also a member of the delegation for relations with the United States and the delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean. She is an alternate member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Subcommittee on Human Rights. Ms. Gomes was Rapporteur for Libya, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the APC (note: Partnership and Cooperation Agreement) with Indonesia, on “the CBRN Action Plan of EU Report »(note: Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear), the « Maritime dimension of the CSDP report“(note: CSDP: Common Security and Defense Policy), on the « Human Rights and Corruption » report, and other files.
Ana Gomes’ academic background is Law. Career diplomat, she had joined the Portuguese Foreign Service in 1980 and served in the Portuguese Missions at the UN in New York and Geneva and also in the Embassies in Tokyo and London. Between 1999 and 2003 she was Head of the Portuguese Interests Section and then Ambassador in Jakarta, where she played a role in the process leading up to the independence of East Timor and in the reestablishment of diplomatic relations between Portugal and Indonesia. In 2003, she suspended her diplomatic career to enter political life.
Ana Gomes has participated in several European Parliament missions and visited Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, China, United States, Kosovo, Lebanon, Indonesia (and Aceh), Iraq, Israel, Palestine, DRC, Syria, Sudan (Darfur), Chad, East Timor, Turkey, etc.
She has written numerous articles that have been published in Courrier International, Diário de Notícias, Expresso, Jornal de Leiria, Jornal de Notícias, Público and Visão.
She received several awards including Ruth Pearce Award for Human Rights by Human Rights NGOs, Geneva, 1989; Personality of the Year Award – 1999, ‘Expresso’ weekly newspaper, Lisbon, 1999;
Personality of the Year Award – 1999, Association of International Correspondents, Lisbon, 1999;
Human Rights Award of the Assembly of the Republic (Portuguese parliament), 1999; Activist of the Year – 2008, ‘The Parliament Magazine’, Brussels, 2008.
She received the following distinctions: Commander of the Order of Leopold II (15 November 1985); Officer of the Dannebrog Order (15 November 1985); Grand Officer of the Order of Infante Dom Henri (March 18, 1986); Commander of the Order of Merit of Portugal (April 27, 1993); Grand Cross of the Military Order of Christ, attributed by President Jorge Sampaio in 2000.
Published in American Herald Tribune, July 21, 2018: https://ahtribune.com/interview/2380-ana-gomes.html
In Palestine Solidarité: http://www.palestine-solidarite.org/analyses.mohsen_abdelmoumen.210718.htm