Palestinians re-united, and it feels so good

Strenger than Fiction-Israel News – Haaretz Israeli News source.


Research shows that all successful peace processes at some point included the radical parties that had previously rejected any compromise. The classic example is, of course, the case of Northern Ireland. The IRA went through a gradual transformation from an organization committed to terror to a legitimate political party that was a central player in the subsequent peace agreement.

There have been indications that Hamas may be readier for an analogous change than their public statements show. Khaled Meshal has reportedly not excluded peace (rather than just a long-term truce) with Israel as a possibility.

Of course the rapprochement between Fatah and Hamas raises serious questions. Have Abbas and Fayyad used their current position of strength to force Hamas to cross their Rubicon: to recognize Israel’s right to exist and to renounce terrorism?

It is to be hoped that Fatah has clear indications for such a change. Abbas and Fayyad surely are aware that if Hamas does not change its official policy in the near future, Fatah may jeopardize their greatest achievement so far: the looming UN recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. The international community is unlikely to grant such recognition if Hamas does not change its basic stance of rejecting Israel’s right to exist and forgo armed struggle.

If Hamas does make the historic move of accepting Israel’s existence, chances for Israel-Palestine peace will increase dramatically. Israel’s citizens have been wary of any peace deal for the simple reason that if Hamas does not see such an agreement as binding, Israel’s security will be severely compromised. Hamas might win again win Palestinian elections, and then Israel would be open to rocket attacks not only from Gaza but also from the West Bank. Hence, Israelis conclude, there is simply no use in a peace deal. An official change of policy by Hamas would dramatically change this constellation.

What about the Israeli side? I wish I could believe the reports that Netanyahu is about to make a grand and daring move in his planned speech to the U.S. congress; I wish I could believe that he is indeed about to offer the Palestinians statehood including East Jerusalem as their capital. If Netanyahu does do so, I will gladly retract many of the things I have written about his weakness of character; his inability to rise above small-time coalition maintenance and to see the grand historical picture.

So far, Netanyahu’s reaction has been quite predictable: he has lambasted the Fatah-Hamas rapprochement, and warned Fatah that the deal with Hamas will end the Israel-Palestine peace process. Since there is no such process anyway, I doubt that Fatah will take Netanyahu’s threat seriously, as it has nothing to lose. Netanyahu’s endless foot-dragging and bickering about settlements has only given the advantage to the Palestinians, whose credibility on the international scene has risen compared to that of the Netanyahu-Barak-Lieberman troika.

The Palestinians’ fate is now in their own hands. If Abbas’ gamble on reconciliation leads Hamas to modify its position, international recognition of a Palestinian state is likely to go ahead. This might further encourage Palestinians to stick to their moderate policies of the last few years, as they will now have a clear political horizon.


4 comments on “Palestinians re-united, and it feels so good

Commenting at CK MacLeod's

We are determined to encourage thoughtful discussion, so please be respectful to others. We also provide a set of Commenting Options - comment/commenter highlighting and ignoring, and commenter archives that you can access by clicking the commenter options button (). Go to our Commenting Guidelines page for more details, including how to report offensive and spam commenting.

  1. The Economist purty much agrees with Strenger, Peaches, and Herb:|wwp|04-28-11|politics_this_week

    Israeli governments have viewed Fatah as a relatively moderate bunch with whom business may at a pinch be done, since it recognises Israel and espouses a two-state solution, whereas they tend to see Hamas as an irredeemable terror group that must be repeatedly clobbered, since it says Israel should be destroyed and a unitary Palestinian state established on the entire territory occupied by Israel. Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, says Mr Abbas’s PA must “choose between peace with Israel and peace with Hamas…Peace with both of them is impossible.”

    In the past Hosni Mubarak’s government in Egypt strongly favoured Fatah, since Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, which the Egyptian authorities loathed. But Egypt’s new foreign minister, Nabil el-Araby, has made it clear that the new government will be strenuously even-handed. Among other things, it may well loosen the siege of Gaza, which Mr Mubarak’s government tacitly enforced.

    If—and it is still a big if—a Palestinian unity government does emerge, Hamas is likely to move towards an acceptance of the two-state deal. And Israel, amid a growing sense of isolation in the face of the winds of Arab change, may drastically have to alter its calculations.

  2. gee…..

    If Hamas does make the historic move of accepting Israel’s existence, chances for Israel-Palestine peace will increase dramatically.

    if the one party of the three that’s committed to war changes it’s mind, things will be less war-like.

    As there’s not evidence of such a change, what the deal does is block any peace deal by moving the PA into a deal with Hamas that moves the government away from the center and also imposes a requirement that the Pal government doesn’t undertake any negotiation for more than a year.

    hard to tell what the not-yet signed deal might mean.

  3. fuster wrote:

    hard to tell what the not-yet signed deal might mean.

    On this I agree with you. I would find the rest more persuasive if it was backed by a 1970s Top 40 hit.

    If something else, less obvious, is moving Hamas or comes to move Hamas, then at the very least the deal gives their moderates, and they do exist, a venue or path to meet Israelis coming from the other direction.

    I have no idea how likely it is, but it’s likelier, in both directions, than when the Israelis could claim absolutely that they had no potential partner, or at best a partner totally incapable of delivering. It also puts to the test all the MW types who’ve been claiming that Hamas had already come off their rejectionist maximalism.

Commenter Ignore Button by CK's Plug-Ins

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *