News Can Hamas and Fatah reconcile for peace in Palestine?

[Art]

The US position seems to be definitely shifting. Indirect acknowledgment of Hamas by accepting a unity Palestinian body is a big step forward. The $900 million the US are pledging to rebuild Gaza is another indication of a major policy change. It is difficult to see the Obama administration using all this US taxpayers money to build Gaza back up and then allowing Israel to destroy it again using weapons supplied by US taxpayers money.

Obama's special envoy George Mitchell has said in the past he wants the economic blockade on Palestinians lifted, a halt on settler expansion and the closure of so called outpost settlements. Since his appointment he has already dismissed Netanyahus so called 'Economic freedom for Palestine' plan

How Israel will react is uncertain. Undoubtedly they will try to delay and circumvent these measures and although they absolutely need US monetary and military support they will probably try to do as little as possible without actually seriously teeing off the US. There were unusually massive shipments of arms in the last weeks of the Bush administration which suggests maybe Israel has been stockpiling in case of a cooling of Israel/US relationships with the new US administration.

With the war raging in Gaza, news reports earlier this month about the routing of an extraordinarily large shipment of arms from the United States to Israel through the private Greek port of Astakos caused an uproar among Greek bloggers. They used Twitter to investigate the matter and put pressure on the government to halt the transfer.

Delivery of the munitions was suspended, just as the Greek government was coming under fire from opposition parties, and Amnesty International was calling for an arms embargo.

http://globalvoicesonline.org/2009/01/18/greece-outcry-over-arms-shipment-to-israel/

George Mitchell has also told all parties to the conflict a ceasefire is a priority of the Obama administration which again seems to put the US at loggerheads with the Israeli gov't who do not appear to want a ceasefire at this time. The Israeli chief negotiator was suspended by Olmert last week for his public criticism of his own government when at the last moment they added a new demand which effectively killed the Egyptian brokered peace talks.

"I don't understand what it is that they're trying to do. To insult the Egyptians? We've already insulted them. It's madness. It's simply madness. Egypt has remained almost our last ally here," he was quoted as saying.

He said the soldier Shalit would be freed quickly if Israel approved a list of names of prisoners to be released in return.

"Did they submit a list?" said Gilad. "Did they submit names? They're only busy insulting Egypt all the time. At first we submitted 70 names, and that's it. Since then, we've disappeared. Is that how they want to bring Gilad [back]? Because if they decide tomorrow to release the prisoners, that very same day we'll get Gilad."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/23/israel-suspends-ceasefire-negotiator

A good analysis of the current state of affairs

After weeks of shuttling back and forth to Cairo, Hamas and Israel had agreed to a halt in hostilities – a source of considerable relief to the international community, which was ready to get on with the business of rebuilding Gaza, reconciling the Palestinian factions and looking for new pathways out of the impasse that has frozen the peace process for the past eight years.

Then, at the 11th hour, the Israelis backed out. There could be no Gaza truce, they said, until Hamas agreed to release Corporal Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier held prisoner in Gaza since the summer of 2006. President Hosni Mubarak was livid: Shalit’s release was being negotiated by the two sides on a parallel track, and it was expected to come soon after a ceasefire agreement, in exchange for Israel freeing a large number of Palestinian prisoners.

The Israeli retreat is an ill-advised gamble, using the leverage of their chokehold on Gaza to press for the release of a captive whose continued detention is a symbol of humiliation in Israel. But it may be something even more alarming than a reckless roll of the dice: it could be a sign of just how dangerous Israel’s growing domestic political incoherence could become.

In the absence of a formal truce the outlook is grim

In the West Bank, meanwhile, many in the rank and file and the younger generations of leadership in Fatah view the Israeli election as having put the final nail in the coffin of the strategy pursued by President Mahmoud Abbas, of relying entirely on US diplomacy to coax the Israelis into ending the occupation. Plainly, there is no reason to believe that is going to happen in the foreseeable future, and the lesson has not been lost on Fatah members that Hamas’s confrontational strategy has actually forced the Israelis to make concessions that they wouldd never have dreamt of making to Abbas (the list of prisoners Mr Olmert had been planning to release to win Cpl Shalit’s freedom bears that out). Many in Fatah believe the only way for the organisation to redeem itself and begin to reverse its loss of support to Hamas is to return to the path of struggle, by confronting the occupation in the West Bank.

http://www.thenational.ae/article/20090222/OPINION/161849754/1080

 

[kyleb]

I am not backing one side over the other...

Not intentionally it seems, but your comments do condemn the extremists on one side while ignoring those of the other and such is effectively doing just that.

Gandhi was a pacifist who believed that every international conflict could and should be solved by pacifism …

That is a gross generation of his ideology, as most obviously evinced by his efforts recruiting Indians for WWI. You are also belittling the violence he stood against, taking his comment out of context to slander him as a racist, and apparently confused into believing he was from South Africa. I recommend looking deeper into his position rather than reflexively dismissing it as it seems you are compelled to do.

Given that the policies and actions of Israel and the United States have been the main obstacles to peace in the Mideast and to a just, two-state Palestine-Israel solution, then ... what?

The solution is in overcoming the inability of the populations in Israel and the United States to come to terms with this fact. As it stands, our governments are under massive pressure by a small yet vocal faction which vigoriously opposes all but the most delicate criticism of Israel, and are fiercely critical of Palestinians and Arabs in general. That lobby has effectively created a giant self perpetuating mass delusion which keeps us from bring an just solution to this conflict, and we simply have to build the critical mass to tear that illusion down. There are many grass-roots movements doing just that, but no unified front to take on AIPAC yet. As it stands, you can find lots of information from people working to resolve this conflict and much relevant information though http://kibush.co.il/" .

As for the conflict between Fatah and Hamas, it is primarily one of how Palestinians should respond to our rejectionism, with Fatah severely corrupted by indulging it, and Hamas having arose though opposition to that. They know this well enough, as do they know that such discord is only further harming Palestine, hence the reason they are actively working towards reunification.

 

[tiny-tim]

Corporal Gilad Shalit

Then, at the 11th hour, the Israelis backed out. There could be no Gaza truce, they said, until Hamas agreed to release Corporal Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier held prisoner in Gaza since the summer of 2006. President Hosni Mubarak was livid: Shalit’s release was being negotiated by the two sides on a parallel track, and it was expected to come soon after a ceasefire agreement, in exchange for Israel freeing a large number of Palestinian prisoners.

http://www.thenational.ae/article/20090222/OPINION/161849754/1080

Israeli insistence on the release of Gilad Shalit is not surprising …

in any international peace conference after a war, it is normal for the losing side to give up something to the winning side …

and for the "outside" countries at the conference to put pressure on the losing side to do so …

this is usually territory or compensation or trade concessions … but since Israel does not seek territory, and Hamas has no money or economy to trade with, it is difficult to see what Hamas can offer other than Gilad Shalit …

indeed the return of just one person is an extremely small demand for Israel to make.

The only alternative which would presumably satisfy Israel is a change of regime in Gaza.

From the same UAE website, we see the importance of this both to the new Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition …

Mr Netanyahu has long made clear his belief that there can be no stability as long as Hamas rules Gaza, while Ms Livni opposed any move to end the recent confrontation through a formal truce: she believes that Operation Cast Lead restored Israel’s “deterrent” power, ie, the idea that fear of further Israeli attacks will deter Hamas from resuming hostilities. She argued that Israel should not therefore allow its freedom of action to be limited by a formal ceasefire agreement.

If I may be forgiven for bringing this thread back on-topic … if Fatah regains some control in Gaza and is able to assure Israel that there will be no more rocket attacks from Gaza on civilian targets, then maybe Israel will regard that as a change in position enabling them to lift the economic sanctions without the return of Galid Shalit.

 

[kyleb]

Israeli insistence on the release of Gilad Shalit is not surprising …

Throwing in the condition at the last moment isn't surprising either, it is just another round in the the same old carrot on a stick game which has been used to perpetuate this conquest for decades.

in any international peace conference after a war, it is normal for the losing side to give up something to the winning side …

and for the "outside" countries at the conference to put pressure on the losing side to do so …

To an extent, but keeping the conquered under a state of siege for decades while colonizing their homeland out from under them isn't normal at all.

this is usually territory or compensation or trade concessions … but since Israel does not seek territory, and Hamas has no money or economy to trade with, it is difficult to see what Hamas can offer other than Gilad Shalit …

indeed the return of just one person is an extremely small demand for Israel to make.

Rather Israel has crushed Palestine's economy though decades of siege, and Israel takes whatever territory it likes with Palestinians being powerless to stop them ( http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1067319.html" ), leaving Palestinians with little but hostages and terror to bargain with, which are levied as excuses to further smother Palestine's economy while taking yet more territory.

The only alternative which would presumably satisfy Israel is a change of regime in Gaza.

From the same UAE website, we see the importance of this both to the new Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition …

If I may be forgiven for bringing this thread back on-topic … if Fatah regains some control in Gaza and is able to assure Israel that there will be no more rocket attacks from Gaza on civilian targets, then maybe Israel will regard that as a change in position enabling them to lift the economic sanctions without the return of Galid Shalit.

Great, still arguing for Fatah control, the terrorist group who shot rockets from Gaza while Hamas was attempting to maintain a truce, just as was done when persuading Fatah to attempt to coup Hamas, but only supporting them enough to try and fail. What goal do you hope to accomplish though such continuing such shell games, eh Tim?

 

[kyleb]

On the subject of Fatah and Hamas, http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1235859721/" . I highly recommend reading the whole article, but most notably the conclusion:

MANY PEOPLE around the world believe in the anti-Semitic myth that we Jews are immensely clever and that all our actions prove our diabolical cunning. Therefore, the ascent of Hamas must be the result of a shrewd Zionist conspiracy. The existence of Abbas (and Arafat before him) hinders the Jews from taking hold of the whole country, because the world demands a compromise with the “moderate” Palestinian leadership. But the world accepts that there can be no compromise with the murderous Hamas, and therefore the clever Jews are interested in a Hamas victory.

On the other hand, many Israelis believe that our governments are composed of exceedingly stupid politicians who do not know what they are doing. These Israelis believe that the series of actions that have weakened Fatah and reinforced Hamas are just a march of folly, the result of Israeli stupidity.

I propose a compromise between the two perceptions: Israeli policy is indeed foolish, but there is method in this foolishness. It can go on only because it conforms with a deep-seated desire, which most people are not conscious of or do not want to admit: to hold on to all of Eretz Israel and not to allow a Palestinian state to come into being.

If we want to change this, we must drag the unconscious motivation up to the level of consciousness: what do we want? Peace or more territory? Co-existence between two states or occupation and eternal war?

It is too late to turn the wheel back. Hamas is now a part of reality. It is in the Israeli interest that a Palestinian unity government be set up, a government with which we can reach an agreement that will be kept. If we have already played such a pivotal role in turning Hamas into a central Palestinian power, by all means let’s talk with them!

This way we can also free Gilad Shalit in a prisoner exchange – before his 1000th day in captivity.