MERIP
Middle East Research and Information Project
Middle East Report
Middle East Report Online
Newspaper Op-Eds

MiddleEastDesk.org
Press Room
Background

Contact Info
Subscribe
Back Issues
Internships
Giving
Search
Subscribe Online to
Middle East Report

Order a subscription and back issues to the award-winning magazine Middle East Report.

Click here for the order page.


SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS

Primer on Palestine, Israel and the Arab-Israeli Conflict
Click here (PDF)

[Click here for HTML version]

 

 

 

Respect Democracy? Engage Hamas

Richard Falk

Topeka Capital-Journal (3/11/06)
Minuteman Media

The Bush administration is caught in a trap of its own making. Having championed democratic elections in the Middle East, Washington now confronts a politically unpalatable outcome -- a Palestinian Authority led by Hamas, the radical Islamic group.

The choices for the US are stark, but clear. President Bush can either accept Israel's logic of unilaterally imposing a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or he can show some leadership and insist that Israel finally end the occupation.

Israel's years of bypassing negotiations in favor of unilateral actions have obviously not ended the conflict. In fact, the Hamas victory is the ripened fruit of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's style of diplomacy. Sharon undermined the Palestinian Authority and President Mahmoud Abbas by conducting military raids and assassinations in densely populated areas, expanding illegal Israeli settlements, unilaterally disengaging from Gaza and constructing a security barrier on occupied territory that 14 out of 15 World Court judges declared to be illegal.

Ehud Olmert, Israel's acting prime minister, is poised to proceed with the Sharon agenda in the West Bank by incorporating settlement blocs on Palestinian land into Israel and hardening the security barrier in order to establish an expanded Israel that leaves the Palestinians with a fragmented 40 percent of the West Bank -- not a viable state.

Such a unilateral solution never had any chance of resolving the conflict in a sustainable way. It completely ignores Palestinian rights, including the duty of Israel to withdraw from all territory occupied since the 1967 war, as well as those issues on which international law supports Palestinian claims -- refugees, Jerusalem, settlements, water rights and the barrier. If Israel goes ahead with its self-serving agenda it will further deepen Palestinian and Islamic resentments and convince even moderates that only extremist tactics have the slightest hope of advancing the cause of Palestinian self-determination.

Hamas has until late March to pull together a cabinet and it is still unclear what positions the new government will take, but what the outside world does will have an important impact on its course. Inside Hamas's ranks contradictory statements reflect the tension between pragmatic and maximalist tendencies. The pragmatists want to govern effectively and gain the widest possible support among Palestinians. They emphasize their goal of an end to Israeli occupation and are offering Israel a truce of indefinite duration if it withdraws behind the 1967 borders. The maximalists are ideologically driven, insistent that Israel as a Jewish state must be eliminated, that the four to five million dispersed Palestinians must be given the right to return to pre-1967 Israel and that Palestinian armed resistance is their national right.

To encourage the pragmatic approach, Washington, Tel Aviv and Brussels should provisionally respect the election results, establish normal diplomatic relations and maintain desperately needed external aid flows, an important source of Western credibility and leverage.

As of now, they are all pushing in the opposite direction, making the ascendancy of the Hamas maximalists a virtual certainty. Israel has begun imposing sanctions and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice toured the Middle East last week in a bid to persuade Arab governments to do the same. The US and Europe insist that there will be no contact with Hamas and no economic assistance unless its leaders explicitly renounce terrorism, recognize Israel, accept all prior agreements between the Palestinians and Israel, and annul that part of the Hamas charter that calls for Israel's destruction.

The chance of Hamas meeting these political conditions all at once is essentially nil since they amount to a renunciation of struggle and almost a declaration of surrender. As Khaled Meshaal, head of Hamas's political bureau, said in reference to the US and EU demands, " Hamas is immune to bribery, intimidation and blackmail."

It is only through diplomacy based on respective rights that a durable peace can be achieved. Hamas must be persuaded to abandon terrorist tactics and rely on political moves to achieve Palestinian self-determination. For this to work, Hamas must be assured there will be real gains towards statehood. However, first Washington will need to learn two lessons -- promoting democracy involves accepting the outcome of elections and Israeli unilateralism will not solve the conflict.

--

Richard Falk is Professor Emeritus of International Law and Practice at Princeton University and Distinguished Visiting Professor at the University of California at Santa Barbara.

DonateNow

Search MERIP

MERIP OP-EDS

A Country at a Crossroads
The Austin-American Statesman (Austin, Texas)
November 9, 2007
Kamran Asdar Ali

"A very frank discussion"— so President Bush described his Nov. 7 telephone conversation with Pervez Musharraf, four days after the Pakistani general imposed a state of emergency and dissolved the high court expected to rule his continued presidency unconstitutional. And frank the discussion probably was: In the face of spirited protest in Pakistan, and a querulous press in Washington, back-channel pressure succeeded in persuading Musharraf to promise parliamentary elections. Yet the generous U.S. aid earmarked for Pakistan — on top of nearly $10 billion since 2001 — is quite evidently not at risk.

What may be at risk is Musharraf's tenure as head of the military government. Full story>>


Waging Peace, Step by Step
Garden City Telegram
October 2007
Chris Toensing

The war debate in Washington is bogged down. Partisan rancor is one reason why, and bipartisan desire for US hegemony in the oil-rich Persian Gulf is another. But many Americans are vexed by a nobler concern: that a “precipitous” US departure from Iraq would leave intensified civil war, ethnic-sectarian cleansing and massive refugee flows in its wake. This concern is legitimate. Unfortunately, the sad fact is that Iraq’s civil war and humanitarian emergency have grown steadily worse as the US military deployment there wears on. Full Story>>


Israel's Military Court System Is the Model to Avoid
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

October 28, 2007
Lisa Hajjar

Should the United States, seeking to recalibrate the balance between security and liberty in the "war on terror," emulate Israel in its treatment of Palestinian detainees? That is the position that Guantanamo detainee lawyers Avi Stadler and John Chandler of Atlanta, and some others, have advocated. That people in U.S. custody could be held incommunicado for years without charges, and could be prosecuted or indefinitely detained on the basis of confessions extracted with torture is worse than a national disgrace. It is an assault on the foundations of the rule of law. Full Story>>


Israel's Occupation Remains Poisonous
The Mountain Mail
July 26, 2007
Lori Allen

There is an oft-told Palestinian allegory about a family who complained their house was small and cramped. In response, the father brought the farm animals inside -- the goat, the sheep and the chickens all crowded into the house. Then, one by one, he moved the animals back outside. By the time the last chicken left, the family felt such relief they never complained of the lack of elbow room again. Full Story>>

 

  Home | Contact/Intern | Background Info | Middle East Report | MER Online | Newspaper Op-Eds | Giving

Copyright © MERIP. All rights reserved.