The Victory of Hamas and the Miseries of Bush's Policies
My article about the victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections is out at Salon.com.
Excerpt:
' Hamas, or the Islamic Resistance Movement, a branch of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, has come to power in Palestine. In his press conference on Thursday, Bush portrayed the Palestinian elections in the same way he depicts Republican Party victories over Democrats in the United States: "The people are demanding honest government. The people want services. They want to be able to raise their children in an environment in which they can get a decent education and they can find healthcare." He sounds like a spokesman for Hamas, underlining the irony that Bush and his party have given Americans the least honest government in a generation, have drastically cut services, and have actively opposed extension of healthcare to the uninsured in the United States.
But the president's attempt to dismiss the old ruling Fatah Party as corrupt and inefficient, however true, is also a way of taking the spotlight off his own responsibility for the stagnation in Palestine. Bush allowed then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to sideline the ruling Fatah Party of Yasser Arafat, to fire missiles at its police stations, and to reduce its leader to a besieged nonentity. Sharon arrogantly ordered the murder of civilian Hamas leaders in Gaza, making them martyrs. Meanwhile, Israeli settlements continued to grow, the fatally flawed Oslo agreements delivered nothing to the Palestinians, and Bush and Sharon ignored new peace plans -- whether the so-called Geneva accord put forward by Palestinian and Israeli moderates or the Saudi peace plan -- that could have resolved the underlying issues. The Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, which should have been a big step forward for peace, was marred by the refusal of the Israelis to cooperate with the Palestinians in ensuring that it did not produce a power vacuum and further insecurity. '
The rest is here at Salon.com
posted by Juan Cole @ 1/27/2006 12:35:00 AM
|
Facebook
6 Comments:
Bush allowed then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to sideline the ruling Fatah Party of Yasser Arafat, to fire missiles at its police stations, and to reduce its leader to a besieged nonentity.
Slate does not care about Macbeth story. From this prospective, discussion of who allowed whom and what is meaningless.
Z.Brzezinski has a theory that US is supposed to put pressure on Israel to achieve ME peace. The problem is, this theory makes no sense in Macbeth model.
It's interesting that you don't mention the fact that Sharon and Likud didn't want Hamas taking part in the election. Nor did the Fatah Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei. But Bush listened to Abbas and allowed them to participate.
I agree with you that Bush and Sharon were largely responsible for Fatah's loss, because they didn't give Abbas anything to show the Palestinian people. However, no doubt Bush-bashers would have mocked Bush had he excluded Hamas from the elections. Damned if he does, damned if he does't.
What's the problem? Iraelis elected and reelected a man (Sharon) who has made it clear that he does not believe that a Palistinian state has a right to exist in any sense that the word "state" is understood. So in a quid pro quo the Palistinians have elected a party that does not believe that Irael has a right to exist.
Of course Israel has been more up front. It showed the sincerity of its beliefs by annexing any portion of the potential Palistinian state's territory that it wanted - backed up by its own enormous militia. Unfortunately for the Palistinians, their puny militia cannot back up annexation of Israeli territory and is limited to "terrorism".
What's the problem? We can't deal with Hamas because they do not accept Iraels's right to exist but in Iraq we support the Kurds who don't believe Iraq has a right to exist. We applaud the recent elections which empowered the Shiites who would like to form their own oil rich autonomous state - not really concerned about the future of the Iraq. And last but not least we are fighting the Sunnis, the only faction that sincerely believes that Iraq has a right to exist.
In the world of Bush everything is ok as long as he says so. Why worry?
Juan,
It seems that Israelis have a more accurate view of Hamas than the one presented in Washington
Hamas platform mentions armed struggle, but not Israel's destruction
I also found this rather interesting summary of what Hamas stands for and why.
Hamas stands its ground as West demands change
I totally agree with you that the rise of Hamas is mostly rooted in failure of the aggressive policies of the Bush/Sharon. Both in "Peace Process" and more recently in EU3 negotiation with Iran on its nuclear issues, the message seems to be that west is not going to work with them. Thus weakening moderates and strengthening the radicals.
It seems that every one really wants it to go there.
What is rather amazing are the people that were advocating the hard line policies are now asking
“what do we do now”.
Nearly all sources suggest the Palestinian Authority is out of cash. Without new aid injections, a new Hamas government can barely function. This could force the leadership to "modulate" some of its actions, if not its core credos, well within the truce period. If not, I cannot see the donors underwriting them.
J.C. writes in Salon:
"But no one has ever put Hamas to the test. Neither Bush nor Israel have ever made good-faith efforts to resolve the underlying issues, preferring to issue moralistic denunciations that ignore the reality on the ground."
But Hamas itself insists the the underlying issues are:
"Why are we going to recognize Israel?" said the leader, Mahmoud Zahar. "Is Israel going to recognize the right of return of Palestinian refugees? Is Israel going to recognize Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital?"
It would seem there is zero chance that any elected Israeli leader could concede to these demands. Exactly what would be the compromise? J.C. does not say.
One can think WaPo author came to these conclusions just by himself.
1. WaPo. Glenn Kessler. U.S. Policy Seen as Big Loser in Palestinian Vote
2. Juan Cole. How do you like your democracy now, Mr. Bush?
3. YNet. Yossi Ben-Ari. Hamas wins; America loses
Post a Comment
<< Home