While Hamas is considered a terrorist group, it did win a plurality (44%) though not a majority of the popular votes in the recent Palestinian elections. While our policy prohibits us from negotiating, or in this case, funding terrorists, it is becoming more apparent that we must make an exception in the case of Hamas.
The irony in this situation, which has probably got a lot of Washington officials scratching their heads, was that in our quest to support democratic elections, the Palestinian people voted in a party we didn’t approve of, the outcome of which had always been a risk in the democratic process. But now that Hamas has legitimately won authority, Washington and its allies must now proceed carefully in its dealings with Hamas.
In this post, I argue that the United States, Europe, the UN and Russia (the Quartet) should trust Hamas. While the Quartet should still be wary of Hamas’ extremist views which call for the dismantling of Israel, it must look forward to the possibility of building a more stable Palestinian government. Ironically, despite the Quartet’s (and the media’s) concerns over Hamas’ victory, Helen Cobban from the Christian Science Monitor argues that it may have brought us closer to peace.
Before I lay out some recommendations, it’s probably wise to give a brief background to explain why Hamas won and Fateh didn’t.
Fateh and the late Yassir Arafat had their chance to resolve their disputes against Israel under the Oslo Peace Accords and the subsequent “road map” to peace. Regrettably, Arafat’s stubbornness and poor leadership that prevented him to control his party led Fateh to ultimately fail in its goal to establish a free and independent Palestinian state. Furthermore, years of corruption and graft instilled by Arafat have only left the Palestinian people in poorer states and the situation with Israel at a standstill.
While Arafat exhausted all his means to stay in power, the Islamic Resistance Movement or Hamas, on the other hand, became a positive social force for all Palestinians. Hamas’ internal discipline allowed them to build hospitals and provide care for ordinary Palestinians. What Fateh couldn’t provide, stability and welfare, Hamas did. Thus, the election last week was not an aberration. The Palestinians believed it was time to change the status quo. They had had enough of the corruption and nepotism of Fateh, and as a result, they elected a new party who they believe would bring about real change.
As the media reports escalated violence between Fateh and Hamas’ respective supporters, it is incumbent upon the international community to intervene. Now that Hamas has legitimized itself as the majority party, it must be able assert itself in the political process. In order to do this, the Quartet must fund Hamas or face the repercussions of a Palestinian civil war.
Washington, while willing to support the secular Fateh, cannot turn its back on Hamas. The fact that Hamas only won 44% of the popular vote means that the party must cooperate with Fateh and other groups to actually get things done. Encouragingly, Ms. Cobban reports that Hamas’ leaders are in favor to form a national unity government, to work closely with President Mahmoud Abbas, and push for a cease-fire with Israel. Therefore, it would be in Washington’s best interest to fund Hamas, to muster all of its diplomatic resources to encourage all the parties involved (primarily Fateh and Hamas) to stop the violence and to take the battle into the political arena. This would be the first step to build a new, more stable and viable Palestinian government; a strong government that may be the key to move the peace process along.
The following are my recommendations that the Quartet should undertake:
1.) Recognize Hamas. The Quartet must eventually recognize Hamas. To not do so would undermine the election process and the will of the Palestinian people. The fact that Hamas only won 44% of the popular vote should reassure Washington that the party might moderate their views as it is forced to cooperate with other parties, including Fateh.
2.) Continue funding. The Quartet cannot afford to take sides between Fateh and Hamas. It must eventually fund all sides (all parties) that have a stake in building a stable and strong Palestinian government.
3.) Support dialogue between all parties, especially Fateh and Hamas. The Quartet should encourage all sides to end the violence and enter into negotiations in the building of a stable Palestinian government.
4.) Persuade Israel to recognize the new Palestinian government. Israel must also recognize Hamas’ victory. While this may remove Abbas as the key negotiator in the peace process, negotiating with a unified and stable Palestinian government is in Israel’s best interest as it will guarantee security during peace talks.
I encourage readers to read Helen Cobban’s article entitled "Hope for a Mideast resolution could grow with Hamas leadership.” There, Ms. Cobban eloquently describes the context of Hamas’ victory and outlines her own recommendations on international intervention.
While most of the media raises questions about Hamas' victory, I share Ms. Cobban’s optimism that it might actually be a step in the right direction. The key for the international community is once again patience and support.
Technocrati Tags:
Hamas
No comments:
Post a Comment