Wrongly or rightly, this is the way many Arabs see the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
Don't help Israel by undermining Mahmoud Abbas' peace moves
By Khatoun Haidar
Special to The Daily Star
Thursday, February 10, 2005
The effort to use the Sharm el-Sheikh summit on Tuesday to impose a measure of stability on the tentative calm prevailing in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict paid off. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas met in what must be remembered as a moment of truth in the recent history of the Palestinian tragedy.
The meeting was short and dignified. The results could best be summarized in a statement common to both the Israeli and Palestinian post-summit declarations: "Palestinians will stop all acts of violence against all Israelis everywhere; and Israel, in parallel, will cease all its military activity against all Palestinians anywhere."
Many Palestinians, including some in the Fatah and Hamas leadership, believe that Sharon, by convincing Abbas to impose security on Israel's behalf, remains intent on keeping as much of the West Bank as possible and is reluctant, at least for now, to move toward a resumption of negotiations based on the "road map." Perhaps; however Sharon in his summit speech conceded: "We in Israel have had to painfully wake up from our dreams." He twice mentioned a Palestinian state, though he avoided any mention of the West Bank, while stressing disengagement from the Gaza Strip.
Whatever Sharon's intentions, the fact remains that Palestinians are facing today, more than ever, a struggle for their very existence. It is high time for all factions, including Hamas, to adopt a clear-cut strategy of national unity that sidelines internal power struggles. By voting for Abbas and what he represents, Palestinians indicated that they were ready for sacrifices as well as compromises on the road to a fair peace, and that they aspired to a dignified life in their own independent Palestinian state.
The policies advanced by Abbas are based on an assumption that, faced with overwhelming Israeli force and the unconditional support of the United States for the Sharon government, the Palestinians had no other choice but to fully align themselves with the demands of the Bush administration and the international community, and hope for the best.
Hamas chose to boycott the presidential election in early January. This failed to significantly affect voter turnout, however, and Hamas did take part in partial municipal elections. It lost to Fatah in the West Bank elections of Dec. 23, despite some gains, but it scored a major victory in Gaza last Thursday. Nevertheless, this victory should not be read as a clear endorsement by voters of the Hamas strategy. Municipal practices affect the livelihood of people. When the parochial interests of inhabitants are at stake, they tend to choose those whom they believe best serve the community - irrespective of their political affiliation.
It was natural, then, that corruption being rampant in the ranks of the Palestinian Authority in Gaza, people turned to the candidates of Hamas, who were chosen for their integrity. After the voting Moushir al-Masri, the spokesman for Hamas, told the press: "[T]his demonstrates that the Palestinian people refuse corruption and hope that change will safeguard its interests. This result means also that democracy has been vindicated."
That said, one ought not to underestimate the fact that the strategy of violence and confrontation adopted by Hamas has served it well on the domestic Palestinian front. According to United Nations statistics, in Rafah alone the Israeli Army has destroyed 1,728 buildings, and about 17,000 people have lost their homes since September 2000. Revenge is a natural human reaction to being hurt and humiliated and Hamas has won the hearts and minds of many Palestinians by promoting itself as the only faction able to inflict harm on a cruel enemy.
It is also true that a Hamas aim is to win over all of those, regardless of their political affiliation, who see Abbas as too willing to make concessions to the Israelis without any clear gains. At least this is how one might have interpreted the words of Mahmoud Zahhar, the head of Hamas in Gaza, who dedicated the municipal elections victory equally to Yasser Arafat and Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who are popularly regarded by Palestinians as having been steadfast defenders of Palestinian rights.
The fact remains that according to international law people living under occupation have the right to use any means available, including armed struggle, to resist occupation. However, today the best present that Palestinians could give Sharon would be to undermine Abbas' standing as a peace partner in the eyes of the world.
In the view of Ephraim Inbar, the director of the BESA Center for Strategic Studies at Bar Ilan University near Tel Aviv, Sharon aims to prove to the world that Abbas cannot dismantle Palestinian "terror groups," thus creating a dynamic to bring into the negotiations new partners for peace, namely Egypt (in Gaza) and Jordan (in the West Bank). Israeli journalist Akiva Eldar goes further and writes: "Sharon does not want a partner because he knows what a partner means: giving up the West Bank."
In his speech in Sharm el-Sheikh, Abbas, while stressing the need to end violence and unequivocally adhere to the road map, remained steadfast and uncompromising on the issue of Palestinian rights. This included his demand for the need to respect the 1967 borders, the right of return for Palestinian refugees, and agreement on the final status of Jerusalem as capital of a Palestinian state.
At this juncture, Hamas must put aside its drive to dominate the Palestinian political scene and work together with all parties on a national resistance strategy. National unity at this stage is key; through it Hamas and others can play an important role in consolidating Palestinian gains. Failure to achieve this due to military adventurism could have dire consequences.
Khatoun Haidar is a Vienna-based Lebanese journalist. She wrote this commentary for
dailystar.com.lb |
