So, building on the solid reputation it has won by its provision of basic services in the Palestinian localities, Hamas has now won an outright victory in the Palestinian parliamentary elections. In this AP report, Sarah El Deeb writes,
- on Thursday morning, Hamas officials said the group had won up to 75 seats — giving it a solid majority in the 132-member parliament.
Interestingly, the Hamas win– which was achieved under the name of the “Change and Reform” list that it created for the election– was not predicted by exit polls. The pollsters’ error probably has to do with two factors: the quite legitimate reluctance of some voters to describe their choices accurately to an official-looking personstanding outside the polling place with a clipboard, and the fact that the Hamas win was scored mostly through the filling of the district-based seats which were far harder for pollsters to collate.
Ahmed Qurei (Abu Alaa’), the ineffectual old Fateh boss who has been Prime Minister for the past year (not that anyone really noticed) has resigned. Now, the newly elected legislators need to be able to take their seats in the parliament. (Will Israel let them all get to Ramallah, anyway? Even Marwan Barghouthi?) Then they need to agree on a new PM, though technically the PM choice is first made by President Abbas and then ratified by the parliament.
My money’s on Ziad Abu Amr. Not just because he’s an old and dear friend, but also because as a smart independent MP from Gaza who has acted as the major intermediary between Abbas and Hamas in the past, he’s a natural choice for the job. You can read a bit of an account of a long conversation I had with him in 2004, here.
If Ziad does get the job, I will really need to get on down to Palestine and do some reporting from there. (But I need to finish this work on the Africa book first. Hurry up, Helena, already!)
Actually, I’m a little bit hopeful about the way things may be going. Hamas is a steady, disciplined force that has a strong record on keeping its commitments. (Unlike Fateh.) Okay, so they’re not in “the peace camp” yet. But there have been some signs that could change. And the news from Ehud Olmert in Israel is also fairly encouraging. Olmert has declared himself in favor of negotiations to resolve the conflict, rather than pure, bullying unilateralism as favored by Sharon. He’s said some interesting things about Palestinian rights in Jerusalem. He’s continuing to crack down on the inflammatory extremists amongst the settlers.
Maybe it’s just because I’ve been reviewing the portion of my book dealing with how the negotiations between de Klerk and Mandela got underway, and how those two bitterly battling parties finally made it to a negotiated, politically egalitarian settlement…. But why should such a settlement– whether of two equal states, or of political equality within one state– not emerge in Israel/Palestine right now?
Who would have thought, in the harshly violent days South Africa experienced in the late 1980s, that they could have basic civil peace and a definitive end to the conflict by 1994?
I intend to write a lot more about this… I do think the South Africans– Afrikaners and ANC people– could be hugely helpful right now if they found a hundred ways to share the record of their experiences with both Jewish Israelis and Palestinians in the Holy Land.
I’ll just note here that when de Klerk and the National Party entered into negotiations with the ANC and the other Black-led parties, they did so on the basis of a ceasfire only, and not on the basis that the ANC should disarm, beforehand.
Why should Israel think it could stand out for “complete disarmament” of Hamas before it will talk to them?
Why should Hamas’s people be expected to have any trust in a process that requires that their side disarm while Israel remains quite free to continue its offensive military and land-grabbing operations? That defies human logic.
Yes, Hamas has used some vile and anti-humane violence. But as the Algerian nationalist leader Larbi Benmahidi told the French officer in the very reality-based movie “The Battle of Algiers”– “Yes, we sent women to French cafes with bombs in their shopping baskets. But I’ll happily give you all my women with bombs in their shopping baskets in return for your airplanes and tanks.” (The French later tortured Benmahidi to death… But the Algerians won their independence from French colonial rule.)
I imagine the Hamas leaders would be prepared to make a similar offer to Israel.
Anyway, let’s see what happens…
Mandela‘s rise was in the liberal 1990-ies, now situation is completely different.
Also, it is well known that in the 1990-ies, there was a hope that Arafat will be Palestinian Mandela. The problem is, E.Said never believed that this is the case. Unfortunately, the collapse of the Oslo process proved that he was right and Oslo was just ME mirage # 10001.
Finally, IMHO, it is clear that if current situation in the ME has anything to do with S.Africa, it is not S.Africa in the late 1980-ies – early 1990-ies!
Finally, both black and white revolutions in S.Africa were mostly local to S.Africa, regional at most, but not global. On the contrary, both green Islamist and neoconservative revolutions are regional at least and actually global. No, it looks like a completely different story.
2006-01-26 The R word
Helena,
I did speculate this morning that Hamas win will it allow to be in a strong negotion position. Kadima could win a similar position in the coming election.
Would this not be an ideal configuration to go for a one state solution analog to the south african process.
A state Palestine with the west bank and the gaza “ghetto” and under Israeli supervision can never be a political and economical viable state.
Why not take the chance to solve the problem once and for all?
More thoughts here:
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2006/01/hamas_win_makes.html
Thanks
Bernhard
“So, building on the solid reputation it has won by its provision of basic services in the Palestinian localities…”
…and with a charter and platform that can only be classified as racist and genocidal.
A hate group won the election in Palestine, pure and simple. And you can’t wait to get down there to visit your “good friend” who may be the PM.
Will Hamas change its stripes? Let’s hope so. If not, God help the Palestinians, because that’s the only one who could.
Joshua, in South Africa the ANC had a an enlightened, anti-racist agenda. The PAC did not. Its main slogan was “One settler– one bullet!” But the PAC was also included in the peace negotiations on the basis of abiding by the ceasefire, like all other participants, and thousands of the guerrillas of its APLA army were subsequently folded into the post-apartheid armed forces.
There is hope for the transformation of all parties if we can all calmly start thinking about how an egalitarian future might be designed.
It sounds as though what Joshua is proposing is genocide. “If not, God help the Palestinians, because that’s the only one who could.” What else, ethnic cleansing, perhaps?
At any rate quite an appalling threat, and he ought to be banned from this site.
My money’s on Salam Fayyad for PM, assuming that Hamas continues to follow the Hizbullah playbook.
And Alistair – what the hell? I’m not Joshua, but it doesn’t seem that he was making a threat, only suggesting that Hamas would lead the Palestinians to disaster. Reasonable minds can differ about that opinion, but your reaction is way over the top.
Congratulations to Hamas for its stunning victory in the Palestinian elections. In a dramatic gesture, this party has worked its way up from a purely ideological fringe group to take on the deeply important tasks of meeting the everyday needs and desires of the Palestinian people. It gained the trust of the masses by cleaning the streets, opening food shelters, and not giving in to Israeli bullying.
It also showed that it was free of the political and moral corruption that had infected the senescent Fatah Party, the empty shell of Yasser Arafat’s elderly megalomania. …
Of course, there are many in Israel and the US who will run around like Chicken Little and say the sky is falling. It does not need to be so. If the US takes a rational approach to Hamas, realizes that it does indeed have the Palestinians’ interests at heart, and that it is a rational entity, then the US should realize that Hamas can indeed be reasoned with.
If Israelis scream about Hamas’ violent past, they should consider how leaders like Menahem Begin rose to power from the terrorist who bombed innocent Bristish and Palestinians and gained recognition as a legitimate leader within Israeli society and the world at large.
There’s no reason why Hamas cannot transform itself in a similar way. This is what democracy does–it brings with it its own set of accountability procedures and rationales. Most within the Palestinian population want the stand-off with Israel to end. But they want it to end with some shreds of dignity attached. Hamas can bring with it a huge amount of “street credit” thereby enabling it to negotiate with Israel without appearing to be kissing ass.
At the same time, Hamas’ leaders appear to see the writing on the wall about Israel’s right to exist. They will no doubt eventually backtrack on their hard-line calls for the destruction of Israel, but only after Israel pays it the respect that a sovereign nation and people deserve.
Charles, how can you be so sure that they will backtrack? I don’t think they’ve indicated that they’re planning on backtracking. Until they actually do I don’t think you’re being fair in branding people who are troubled by Hamas ideology as “chicken littles”. If Hamas really was a rational entity it wouldn’t need to “transform” in the first place, would it? And I still all this praising of Hamas’s community-service bribery is vile, especially if people are going to slam pro-U.S. groups for doing the same thing but not Hamas.
Does it take a totalitarian fundamentalist ideology to make people free of political and moral corruption?
I’m not proposing genocide.
Only on this site would the failure to cheer a racist hate group’s victory be considered a bannable offense.
Did any pundits wager that Hamas would win such a majority? I know that some closely contended races were hard to predict in advance. But this sweep seems to exceed any forecasts I recall. Was “wishful thinking” the principal impetus for the sense that Fatah would retain a slim majority? Another flat-out intelligence failure?
A Hamas victory is actually better than a Fatah 51% majority against a 49% opposition that would spoil or sabotage any initiatives. Now the movement must at last deal with issues rather than rhetoric. It cannot possibly govern / colaborate and destabilize /resist at the same time. It will have no choice but to work with Israel.
But what of W’s announcement that he has picked Abbas to remain as PM and will veto the creation of any Hamas government that fails to abjure the elimination of Israel?
I think the point is that Hamas, whatever it says, is incapable of eliminating Israel, or even of doing much damage, whereas Israeli forces are certainly capable of ethnically cleansing, or committing genocide on, the Palestinians. It is a real threat, whereas the projection of a threat from Hamas is fake, intended to bulk up support for Israel.
I don’t agree with Jonathan Edelstein that the electoral success of Hamas is a disaster for the Palestinians. Or only if Israel is actually and really intent on genocide or ethnic cleansing, which anybody would agree is a real danger.
Actually, I think that the election result is a political success for the Palestinians. It may well tempt Israel into moves towards themselves inflicting those horrors which Jews suffered from in the Second World War. And Israel will find that those moves are not supported by the outside world. After all, there’s very little difference in the images between the wall around the Warsaw Ghetto and the wall around the West Bank. Everybody has seen this. So Israel will discover that it is not so easy to go ahead with what many in Israel would like to do. Or alternatively they may go ahead and do it anyway.
In either case, it is a defeat for Israel.
Alastair, who the heck is “anybody”? I sure DON’T agree that your warped idea is a real danger. There’s nothing fake about the Hamas threat; it’s deluded to think otherwise so long as Hamas doesn’t renounce its pledge.
Joshua just said he wasn’t talking about genocide, and you don’t apologize to him for defaming him. It IS ironic that he insists what he was doing was refusing to cheer on a hate group’s victory but you try to make the hate group out as some kind of victim.
Well Inkan, I wasn’t defaming him so there was no need to apologise. He could easily be described as defaming Hamas (see my comment on Helena’s later piece on the election), though I don’t accuse him of that.
In any case, I talked about Israel’s and Hamas’ capability of doing damage. Israel has the capability of eliminating the Palestinian people, but Hamas does not have the capability of eliminating Israel. To suggest that Hamas does, is a fantasy.
Intentions are different. One group (Hamas) may have something in their constitution which doesn’t sound too good, but they don’t do anything serious about it, because it’s not that important. There are lots of cases in World History like that. I can cite some if you like. Another group (Israel) may not have similar texts directly in their constitution, but have a large minority, including members of recent governments, who do believe in these things. And that entity has the power to do it. Is that not a real danger?
So what about other cases? If it’s not that important why have it there? And why do you try to downplay it by using such a mild description as “not that good”?
If there are Israeli government members with genocidals intentions they should be identified, outed, and ousted. But if you instead me a minority of the populace at large then Israeli society needs to treats these Kahane types with disdain. And there should also be pressure applied against the Palestinian equivalents to the Kahanists, but no one seems to want to do that because that part’s only “not that good”.
Inkan, you are being disingenuous. I would remind you that no Palestinian has ever actually carried out a genocidal act against Israelis, whereas there are two proven events where Israelis were involved in genocidal acts against Palestinians: Dair Yassin and Sharon’s involvement in Sabra/Shatila (though I don’t deny that it was fascist Phalange who physically carried out those killings in the latter case, but Sharon’s involvement was accepted by the court).
Talk and act are two different things.
But if you want an example where official policies are not carried through to execution, think of Spain’s claim to Gibraltar. A claim existing since 1798. They haven’t invaded.
Four words: Kfar Etzion and Mount Scopus. Genocidal Palestinians.
Don’t pretend Palestinians didn’t massacre Jews in the 1948 war on the two occasions they got the chance.
NB Please read that as “genocidal acts by Palestinian militias.”
Also, please note that the foiled mega-attack at Pli Glilot in 2001 would have resulted in tens of thousands of deaths in the the Tel Aviv conurbation had it succeeded. But diesel won’t explode from a detonator alone, or even a small charge strapped to the fuel tank (not the cargo tank) of a tank truck.
EuroSabra:
77 killed in the Mount Scopus attack is not genocide. You’re exaggerating. In any case the Scopus attack was in reaction to Dair Yassin, not deliberate genocide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadassah_medical_convoy_massacre
157 dead at Kfar Etzion. Again not really a lot. Certainly not genocide. And again the result of a military operation. If you mentioned 157 dead to the US Army in Iraq, they would say, no problem.
http://www.zionism-israel.com/Gush_Etzion_Massacre.htm
The third event mentioned by EuroSabra is a potential event which might or might have not happened in the end, and didn’t in fact. Where are the facts here?
It’s not much of an argument.
Alastair: So Palestinian incompetence in committing genocide absolves them? I’d like to nominate Israel as a non-participant in expulsion then, since 150,000+ Israeli Arabs remained!
Alaistar
More people died at Kfar Etzion than at Dir Yassin. Yet you desribe the latter as “genocidal” and the former isn’t? And the dead at Kfar Etion weren’t the result of a military operation, except in he loosest term – you would be correct if they were killed in battle, but most of them were killed after they surrendered.
On the numbers of dead at Deir Yassin and Kfar Etzion in 1948. The Wikipedia gives more dead at Deir Yassin than at Kfar Etzion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_committed_during_the_1948_Arab-Israeli_war
Of course these figures have been the subject of a hail of propaganda, and attempts to distort the history, so no figure is really reliable. And much information has been kept concealed.
However, I don’t think anybody denies that Kfar Etzion was a defended position. And nearly everybody says that Deir Yassin was a peaceful village which was not taking part in the war (see Wiki). That is the difference.
If you want to know the real facts, ask the Israeli government to release the photos of the dead at Deir Yassin. There must be a reason they are being kept secret.
On the other hand
Israeli hysteria! Palestinian legitimacy (by the standards of George Bush, nonetheless!).
The Israelis celebrated by killing a 9 year old Palestinian girl after the election. Just shot her dead and left her there. Some reports say she was shot twice once wounded and that good ole Israeli “confirmation”. Eh, Joshua, that OK by you? Who’s out to destroy who?
Israel has been murdering Hamas leaders for several years, the most disgusting murders being that of Yassin in his wheelchair and the dozen or so kids killed in an apartment bombed at night. It is amazing that Hamas people would even think to talk to those hell-bent on murdering them all.
I have a feeling that the unspoken frustration of most Israelis is the realization that they can no longer with impunity murder Hamas leaders without being guilty of murdering the democratically elected representatives of the second democracy in the ME.
“However, I don’t think anybody denies that Kfar Etzion was a defended position”
Uh..Kfar Etzion was defended because it was attacked. Are you seriously suggesting that made it a military outpost?
Yes, Eyal, I do suggest that Kfar Etzion was a military position. The link I gave earlier (which is Israeli) shows it clearly. According to Wiki, there was an external Palmach garrison there. They weren’t just humble Jewish villagers defending themselves.
Even if it were true that they were only local people defending themslves (and the existence of a Palmach garrison denies it), you would be obliged logically to admit that the Palestinians of the West Bank today have a right to defend themselves in the same way. I haven’t heard you say that.
The question is not whether or not Kfar Etzion was a “military garrison”, as you say. The atrocity at Kfar Etzion occurred after the residents and “external” Palmah troops there had surrendered and were disarmed. It was an atrocity and a war crime just as was Deir Yassin.
To state that Deir Yassin was not a “military position” is simply false. I believe that all reputable reports from the time are forthcoming about the fact that Deir Yassin had been hosting (against their will) irregulars from Fawzi al-Qawqji’s Iraqi militia as well as local irregulars. Further, it is important to remember that the purpose of those troops being in Deir Yassin was to enforce a seige on the Jewish quarters of Jerusalem and to prevent supplies of food, water and medical supplies from getting to their inhabitants. (This seige was, in itself, a war crime.)
To get into a comparison of how many were killed at Kfar Etzion and Deir Yassin is irrelevant and counerproductive (although most reports today have the numbers about equal at somewhere around 150).
In any case the Scopus attack was in reaction to Dair Yassin, not deliberate genocide.
Even if the attack at Wadi Joz in which 77 Jews – mainly unarmed hospital staff and patients – were killed had been solely a reaction to Deir Yassin, how does that legitimize the atrocity?
Finally, Alistair asks why the Israeli government has not released photographs of Deir Yassin. I am not sure if their are any photographs other than what the Red Cross or British authorities may have taken there. In contrast, I have heard numerous reports of Palestinian Arabs offering photographs for sale in Jerusalem, showing in graphic detail the mutilation of Jewish men and women in the days and weeks immediately following the Kfar Etzion massacre.
JES, I was quoting Wiki on the photographs of Deir Yassin.
It seems to me that you are largely quoting from memory, about what you think happened. The currently available literature is not the same as your memory.
Also you take no account of what I said earlier:
“Of course these figures have been the subject of a hail of propaganda, and attempts to distort history, so no figure is really reliable. And much information has been kept concealed.”
So please try again when you have taken these points into account. I am perfectly aware you live in Israel, but not all of us have an accurate knowledge of the past of our own country (I certainly don’t of Britain).
Also the point of this debate was not whether atrocities took place in the 1948 war – there’s a whole page in Wiki listing them – but whether they constitute genocidal massacre of innocents.
I maintain that Deir Yassin was a genocidal massacre of innocents, because undefended, and that Kfar Etzion was not, because it was a defended military position with a garrison. No-one approves of post-surrender atrocities.
It should not be forgotten that the Arab forces were under very much greater military pressure than the Israelis, who even at that time were provided with much heavier weaponry than the Arab Legion, for example. (though this fact has been conveniently forgotten since). There was even a B24 bomber, which bombed Amman.
Alistair,
First of all, I don’t take Wikipedia alone as an accurate or reliable source of information because of the nature of its inputs. That said, do you deny that there were elements of various militias in Deir Yasin – again against the wishes of the residents of the village or that those troops had placed the western parts of Jerusalem under seige.
It should not be forgotten that the Arab forces were under very much greater military pressure than the Israelis, who even at that time were provided with much heavier weaponry than the Arab Legion, for example. (though this fact has been conveniently forgotten since). There was even a B24 bomber, which bombed Amman.
This is just plain wrong! On May 15, 1948, Israel had virtually no armor and, I believe, two small artillery pieces. Both the Egyptian Army and the Arab Legion, together with forces from Syria and Iraq were much better equipped. The balance did not really change until July, 1948. Israel never had or employed a B-24 Liberator. Israel did smuggle several B-17 Flying Fortresses out of England shortly before the final ceasefire. These planes bombed Cairo, not Amman. (Elements of the Egyptian air force had bombed and strafed Tel Aviv on May 15, 1948.)
BTW, I love the way that you say that Israelis “were provided with much heavier weaponry….” Apart from being untrue, your use of the passive voice here makes the assertion quite interesting. You might want to consult with Dominic about use of the passive!
I maintain that Deir Yassin was a genocidal massacre of innocents, because undefended, and that Kfar Etzion was not, because it was a defended military position with a garrison. No-one approves of post-surrender atrocities.
This is probably the most interesting and original definition of genocidal that I have ever seen. Just for your information, I am not just “quoting from memory”, as you say (which is probably just as good as relying solely on a publicly edited document like Wikipedia). You seem to imply here that the elements of Lehi and EZL who attacked Deir Yasin did so with the intent of massacring civilians. I don’t think that I have seen any reliable reports – either from the time of the atrocity or since – that claim this.
First of all, I don’t take Wikipedia alone as an accurate or reliable source of information because of the nature of its inputs.
OOOOhhhhhh, strange, its common behaviours from Israeli who see some thing not in favour of Israel. All we knew you and other used the internet for you’re stories, so what the reliable sources for you can you tell us?
Then my advice to right to them to correct their information because the site had a feedback link for correcting their site info.
So you telling us all it wrong Israel never had in its bloody history any act of a genocidal massacre!!!! Welcome to truth from the Peace Loving Guy……
Then my advice to right to them to correct their information because the site had a feedback link for correcting their site info.
Correcting wikipedia entries could be a full time job. I don’t think it’s JES’ duty to hunt down and correct every mistake pubished on the web. Its amusing that alastair calls Israelis ignorant of Israel yet imagines wikipedia articles to be authoritative references. This is certainly an eye-opening exchange.
Just a couple points – Concerning Deir Yassin, the most accepted number is a bit lower than 150 – about 100 or so – what lowered the numbers, as the Wiki article says, is interesting – a Bir Zeit study. It’s amazing, but there are people out there (Helena is another one of them) who are more interested in getting at the truth than in providing “their side” with propaganda ammunition. Second, that the GOI has photos they have not released is a well known, unsurprising and undisputed fact that Wiki probably footnotes somewhere. So as far as I can tell, no one has pointed out an error at Wikipedi
Kfar Etzion was a farming settlement/village which was garrisoned by the Palmach because it was attacked. All Palmach troops arrived AFTER the beginning of the assaults by Arab irregulars (the “Lamed-Heh” or “35” were a group of Palmachniks wiped out (because they spared the life of an Arab shepherd who randomly spotted them) on the way to Kfar Etzion) and it appears the generalised slaughter of Kfar Etzion was accomplished by Palestinian irregulars. The few survivors were handed off to the Jordanian Arab Legion, which treated them decently and arranged for their release to the Red Cross.
I love how “tu quoque” constitutes the entire breadth and depth of argumentation on this issue, and suspect that the Israel-Palestine conflict will be resolved as is usual for the Middle East–especially when a non-Islamic population confronts an Islamist one–“Last Man Standing”.
NB Ben M’hidi was apparently hanged in his cell. Ali Boumendjel was thrown from a pedestrian bridge between two buildings of the detention centre. Maurice Audin, however, MAY have been tortured to death–there is also evidence that he may have been shot.
…what lowered the numbers, as the Wiki article says, is interesting – a Bir Zeit study….
No John. What lowered the numbers was that they were apparently “about a 100 or so” in the first place! The Beir Zeit research only exposed the hyperbole.