Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Hamas Getting on Board Peace Train
The most important developments in the Middle East peace process are often the ones that get the least notice in America's mass media. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak's visit to Washington this week got a bit of notice, even though there wasn't much news to report. In a joint statement Barak and U.S. envoy George Mitchell said "they had discussed the full range of issues ... constructive and would soon continue," blah, blah, blah.
Meanwhile the more important events, which got even less coverage in our mass media, were happening in Palestine. The major political parties there are once again struggling to create a unified government that can negotiate with Israel. It's too early to be overly optimistic, but the signs may be encouraging.
The two major Palestinian parties, Fatah and Hamas, have been doing a delicate negotiating dance for weeks now. Reports of the talks are hopeful one day, disappointing the next. That's not surprising, given all the blood that's been shed between the two sides. It's kind of like the old joke about how two porcupines make love: very carefully! The two parties are hardly going to rush into an unreserved embrace.
But actions speak louder than words. Palestinian Authority President and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas recently released over one hundred Hamas prisoners from Fatah jails. A few hours later he gave a cordial reception to a top Hamas leader, Abdel Aziz Dweik, the speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, who had just been released from an Israeli jail.
Dweik came out apparently in the mood to promote peace. "We have to grasp this opportunity ... so that there will be a generation which will put aside any kind of dispute and reconcile,"," he told Reuters. Does he mean it? Watch this video interview with him and decide for yourself if he fits the picture of the "bloodthirsty Hamas terrorist" so common in our mass media.
According to the Jerusalem Post, the Dweik-Abbas meeting reflects a growing Palestinian move toward peace: "The meeting, as well as the release of the Hamas men, is seen in the context of Abbas's goodwill gestures toward Hamas designed to boost the prospects of ‘national reconciliation.'" The Palestinians know that Israel has stalled peace talks for years, claiming they have no "partner for peace," because no one set of negotiators could speak for all the Palestinian people. The reconciliation process may aim to deprive the Israelis of that excuse.
So somebody involved in the negotiations came up with a smart idea. Rather than take on the arduous task of creating a full national government run by both Hamas and Fatah, start with a relatively easier project: a joint security force for Gaza. The two sides are scheduled to meet in Egypt in late July to try to work that out.
Of course none of this is really easy. There are strong factions in both Hamas and Fatah trying to block progress. The same Jerusalem Post article also noted: "Fatah representatives said that despite Abbas's goodwill gestures, Hamas's security forces had arrested hundreds of their supporters in the Gaza Strip over the past three days." Fatah may well do the same to Hamas operatives in the West Bank any day. But the movement is clearly in the direction of reconciliation.
An even more surprising and encouraging sign is that Hamas is bringing another group into the process: the once militantly rejectionist Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine. Israelis know about this too, from the newspaper Ha'aretz, which reports an "overall effort by Hamas and senior Jihad officials to merge the two movements and create a joint leadership coalition in preparation for the possible reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah and the formation of a national unity government."
According to Ha'aretz analyst Zvi Bar'el, the move "attests to the new direction Hamas adopted following the Cairo speech of U.S. President Barack Obama and the deepening ties between Syria and Washington. [Islamic Jihad Secretary General Ramadan Abdallah] Shalah and Khaled Meshal, the Hamas political leader in Damascus, are already preparing the organizational foundation for the next stage, and judging by Meshal's declarations it is moving closer to the positions of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas with regard to a negotiated solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict."
What has Meshal declared? "Hamas has accepted the National Reconciliation Document," he recently told the New York Times. "It has accepted a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders including East Jerusalem ... This is Hamas's program regardless of the historic documents. Hamas has offered a vision. ... It's not logical for the international community to get stuck on sentences written 20 years ago."
Should we believe him? Two scholars from the United States Institute of Peace (one Jewish and one Muslim) think it makes perfect sense: "Although Hamas, as an Islamic organization, will not transgress shari‘a [Islamic law], which it understands as forbidding recognition [of Israel], it has formulated mechanisms that allow it to deal with the reality of Israel as a fait accompli. These mechanisms include the religious concepts of tahadiya [short-term calming period] and hudna [longer-term truce] and Hamas's own concept of ‘Palestinian legitimacy.'"
A Jewish scholar at Israel's top-ranked Institute for National Strategic Studies gives a deeper look at what's going on inside Hamas: "The supposed split between Damascus-based radicals and Gaza Strip-based moderates is a false distinction. There are apparently moderates and radicals in both places, and Mashal himself is not necessarily aligned with the radicals. ... Hamas is willing to accept a process of negotiations with Israel, as it was when it endorsed the National Reconciliation Document."
Though they won't come out and say it, Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders must know the profound import of right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent conversion to support for a two-state solution. The peace train is leaving the station. Like all big clumsy trains, it starts moving very very slowly.
But eventually it gathers speed and gets going so rapidly that anyone not on it has no chance to catch up and jump aboard, no matter how fast they run. Hamas leaders know that. They want to make sure they've got a seat on the train -- that is, at the negotiating table -- when the deal is cut. Ditto for Islamic Jihad. Barack Obama and his administration deserve a significant part of the credit for this movement.
Of course there is no guarantee that the peace train will ever move very far down the track. Some powerful leaders in Hamas and Islamic Jihad their movements are resisting the change. Perhaps they fear that their organizations will be swallowed up by the new unified government. Perhaps they also fear that their own power will be diminished, and with it maybe even their source of income.
Money is bound to be a key issue here. In Palestine, a new state will mean new money coming from around the world, including the U.S. When Egypt and Israel made peace in 1978, the U.S. agreed to shell out something like $5 billion a year in aid to the two countries, which we are still paying regularly. A similar deal (though with more modest numbers) is likely to come out of the Israel-Palestine peace process. Someone on the Palestinian side will be receiving and then disbursing a sizeable chunk of cash.
Is it too cynical to assume that one reason for moderation in Hamas is fear of being left off the gravy train if they don't jump on the peace train? Is it too cynical to assume, too, that Fatah's resistance to Hamas is motivated in part by the mouth-watering prospect of controlling all that money itself? Is it too cynical to assume that the same prospect of lavish rewards is a big carrot leading all the Palestinian factions toward the unity that is the prerequisite for independence?
For whatever reasons (and they surely go beyond the money), Hamas is clearly moving toward peace, while Fatah, Hamas, and now even Islamic Jihad are moving toward a unified Palestinian government. Jewish scholars and readers of the Israeli press know it. It's about time that Americans who get their news from the mass media know it too.
But before we get our hopes up too high, let's keep in mind how much bad blood there still is among the Palestinian factions -- and how consistently Israel (sometimes with U.S. help) has worked to break up Palestinian unity by provoking violence, which strengthens the hand of the Palestinian hard-liners and blocks the path to peace. If these latest Palestinian moves provoke Israel to some kind of attack, our mass media will no doubt put that news on the front page, without telling us the motive that lies behind it.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



9 Comments so far
Show AllAnd the Dweik interview referred to? Link, please?--thanks.
"Though they won't come out and say it, Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders must know the profound import of right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent conversion to support for a two-state solution. The peace train is leaving the station. Like all big clumsy trains, it starts moving very very slowly."
Is Prof. Chernus serious? Is he a Candide-style optimist or merely a disingenuous apologist for Israel? I'm grateful for the info. he provides on attempts by Hamas and Fatah to reconcile and unite, but I don't believe Netanyahu has experienced a recent conversion of any kind, nor is he capable of ever experiencing such. As Chomsky said recently:
"... the right-wing in Israel prefers to have a Palestinian State so that they can then have inter-state relations, but they want it to be a Palestinian state which is derisory. An array of small cantons that can be administered under Israeli control. In fact, the first recognition of the possibility of a Palestinian state, the first one I can find, was by the ultra-right Netanyahu government in 1996; its information minister answering a question said that the Palestinians can have a state if they want, or they can call it 'fried chicken'..."
I believe what Netanyahoo actually said was that the Palestinians could have a demilitarized "state" with no control over its own airspace, and that, of course, Israel would not negotiate with Hamas.
Palestinians must recognize the state of Israel and renounce violence, conditions never ever asked of Israel. They must suffer another 40 years, if not 400, of occupation, and they must LIKE it.
But no worries. Our fab new Vice President has informed us from on high that "Israel has a right to determine what's in its interests, and we have a right and we will determine what's in our interests," and if Israel needs to attack Iran, the world's only super-power is certainly not going to stop it, and the rest of the planet, well, let them eat fried chicken.
I read the US official stance to Israel is if you attack Iran, you fix it.
Desmoulins: your post is definitely right on! "Peace" on terms dictated by Israel and its international sponsors has always been available to the Palestinians were they only to accept meekly the occupation of their homelands and all the "security" arrangements that Israel makes in its own interest. Your description of the kind of crypto-state of Palestine that Netanyahu supports is quite accurate. When Chernus states that the peace train is about to leave the station and both Hamas and Fatah figure they had best get aboard, he may be expressing a true but tragic fact: that this parody of "peace" and Palestinian "sovereignty" is all they can get when all the power of Israel and its external allies will surely be driving the engine of that "peace train." Problem is, Hamas and Fatah can be as "reconciling" and accommodating to Israeli dominance as they like, the Palestinian people will eventually rise up and pull from the train those accommodating leaders who always appear when the people are abandoned by their leadership.
I don't think Chernus is an apologist for Israel, but it is as important that Netanyahu accept at least the idea of a two-state solution as it is for Hamas and Islamic Jihad to do the same. The Likud party platform, up until very recently, has never recognized the right of Palestinians to their own state and in fact boldly stated that all of "historical Palestine" belongs to the Jews. And the peace process cannot move forward without Israel agreeing to move it in that direction. So while Netanyahu's idea of a two-state solution is certainly different than your idea or my idea, it is very important symbolically. Everybody involved is going to have to give up a lot if they are ever to acheive real peace and Netanyahu's vision for the future is surely not what will bring peace. But baby steps in the right direction are still steps and from the Palestinian political strategy point of view (not yours or mine), Netanyahu's statement is very crucial.
When the Palestinians unite, they can win their freedom.
Finally a good plan.
Does anyone really believe a two-state solution,with a real, sovereign Palestine within the 1967 borders, including east Jerusalem, is, at this point, possible? The idea of Israel giving up their security wall, their settlements, the water resources, and the modern Jew-only highways linking the settlements simply isn't credible.
Yes, a "peace train", with Israel as the sole conductor, is leaving the station, and to mix the metaphor, Israel will make sure that it is "my way or the highway".
I'm not sure it qualifies as a "Peace Train" if Israel rides first-class, with dining and club car privileges, while Palestinians are jammed into boxcars, or hang on for dear life from the rear of the caboose.
· Yr Obd't Servant
pjd412 hit the nail on the head. There is no possibility of a two-state solution that both sides would find acceptable. An interesting article in Ha'aretz:
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasen/spages/1081400.html
describes an alternative path. The two-state solution with a truly viable Palestinian entity is the Zionists' only hope of maintaining a Jewish state in the Middle East in the long term but they don't seem to get it. Israelis should read Aesop's fable of the boy and the filberts.
Chernus is his usual self: half truths and misinformation. Hamas were always more on the peace train than Israel was. It was Israel that broke the last ceasefire not Hamas - and they did it on US election day so Americans wouldn't read about it.