Fatah-Hamas Deal Calls Israel's Bluff

 If Prime Minister Netanyahu were more interested in the security of Israel’s citizens, particularly those in Sderot who have been exposed to Hamas’ rocket assaults, than in holding on to Israel’s colonial project in the West Bank, he would have welcomed the reconciliation of Fatah and Hamas and their decision to rely henceforth on diplomacy and nonviolent resistance to the occupation for the achievement of a Palestinian state.

As pointed out by Akiva Eldar in Ha’aretz, the unity agreement provides for a Higher Security Committee that will determine the integration of Palestinian security forces under the new government. This committee of experts is to be formed by President Mahmoud Abbas, whose commitments to nonviolence and to close collaboration with Israel’s security forces have been tested by Israel these past four years. The agreement also allows the Palestinian president to continue peace negotiations with Israel.

Given the history of Fatah-Hamas relations, skepticism about the ability of Abbas and Khaled Meshal to successfully implement their agreement is justified. But an Israeli government that is sincere in its proclaimed desire for a two-state solution—and that has been publicly dubious about concluding a peace agreement with Abbas, who represents only a part of the Palestinian people—would have waited to see the details of the Fatah-Hamas accord which are not yet fully known, holding off its judgment of the new Palestinian unity government until it had a chance to prove the seriousness of its proclaimed commitment to democracy, the rule of law and nonviolence in its relations with Israel.

That Netanyahu rushed to discredit the Fatah-Hamas accord even before the ink dried on the unity document tells us that what he and his government fear is not that the agreement will not be implemented. Were that to happen, Israel’s capacity to counter resumed Palestinian violence with its overwhelming military superiority would have remained undiminished. What they fear is that the unity government will adhere to its commitments and expose Israel’s rejection of a two-state solution that it has sought to hide behind the cover of its rejection of Hamas.

Netanyahu and his government see the Fatah-Hamas reconciliation as an extraordinary gift, for it not only provides them with a pretext to refuse to make concessions to Abbas but also enables them to counter the Palestinian intention of gaining the UN General Assembly’s recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.

Netanyahu knows that Palestinians are likely to obtain the necessary votes in the General Assembly for their resolution, but what he cares about is retaining U.S. support for Israel’s refusal to deal with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas. That support, he believes, will facilitate Israel’s continuing defiance of the international community’s will.

However, it may well turn out that the formation of a unity government will actually strengthen support for the Palestinian UN initiative in September and make it more difficult for the U.S. to vote against it. The participation of Hamas in a Palestinian unity government that eschews violence and adheres to the rule of law is likely to soften the party’s image sufficiently to allow Western powers, including the U.S., to deal with it.

Since the new Palestinian unity government remains under the authority of the PLO—which explicitly recognized Israel’s legitimacy—Hamas’s membership in that government constitutes an implicit repudiation of its own founding charter. It also calls into question its previous refusals to accept agreements with Israel.

In fact, changes in the policies of Hamas were underway well before the unity accord was signed. In May of last year, Khaled Meshal said on the Charlie Rose program that his organization will renounce violence against Israel if it agrees to a Palestinian state within the pre-1967 borders. As noted by the independent Palestinian politician and analyst Mustafa Barghouti, Fatah and Hamas no longer have major differences: “[I]n practical terms both sides are ready to accept non-violent resistance.”

True, Hamas leaders have stated even after their reconciliation agreement that they will not recognize Israel. But does that disqualify a unity government in which Hamas participates as a partner for peace? The answer is clearly no.

Because state-to-state recognition is the responsibility of governments, not individual political parties, Hamas’ refusal to recognize the State of Israel does not prevent a Palestinian government of which it is a part from granting such recognition. An exact parallel is Israel’s current government.

Although Netanyahu declared his support for a two-state solution in June of 2009, his own Likud party remains officially opposed to a Palestinian state in any part of the West Bank. Not long after his two-state announcement, senior members of the Likud and Likud ministers in his government announced the formation of a thirty-nine-member “Land of Israel Caucus” in Israel’s Knesset, the largest of the caucuses in that body. The cochair of the caucus is Ze’ev Elkin, who heads the Likud’s parliamentary delegation, and includes the Likud’s Reuven Rivlin, the Knesset Speaker, and Likud minister Benny Begin.

More by

Comments

Jack Davis (May 13, 2011 - 2:56pm)

Here’s a peace plan for you. This one begins with leaning on the Palestinians and the Arabs. For starters:Full and unconditional diplomatic recognition of Israel.Full and unconditional recognition of Israel’s right to exist within secure borders.Full cessation of all acts of war against Israel, including but not limited to: full cessation of all economic boycotts and embargoes against Israel; full cessation of military action against Israel by independent states (Syria, Iran) AND their proxies: Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Al-Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade, ET. AL. (that is, EVERY single proxy).If the Palestinians and their Arab enablers are serious about peace, let them forswear all acts of violence against Israel and all calls for Israel’s destruction.Until then, no deals.

adam101 (May 13, 2011 - 4:18pm)

Mr. Siegman, your analysis of events and the status quo is full of mistakes. 1. Benjamin Netanyahu does not have a colonialist project in the West Bank but an ability to protect the lives of both Israelis and Palestinians. By being in the West Bank, Israel has the ability to preempt any Palestinian terrorism that would occur otherwise. Israeli security is premised on the ability to go anywhere at anytime and stop terror before it reaches the homes and buses of Israelis. If you take the IDF out of the West Bank, you allow terrorism and its infrastructure to grow and set up a formidable power that will cause nothing but pain and suffering for Israel. It is of utmost importance for the IDF to be in the West Bank. Want proof? PA-IDF security cooperation. The PA cannot do it themselves. And why would the PA need security cooperation with Israel? Maybe to stop Hamas and other bad guys? So the PA is in a "unity agreement" with Hamas but a security agreement with Israel to stop Hamas? Your whole logic that unity will lead to peace is wrong. 2. How did the last PA-Hamas aggrement work out? The one they had in Gaza? I think all the fatah memebers were slaughtered and thrown off homes or expelled. The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over despite the same results. What makes you think Hamas wants a reconciliation now? Isnt it more likely their backs are up against a wall and they want a way out to get strong again? Yet once again, the "scholars" who get articles on journals fall for it. Hamas will be empowered, they will utter cute little sentences that appeals to the West and gives hope but the reality is, its the same Hamas that murders and kills. Just last month they shot a missile at a school bus! You say that a sincere Israeli government for peace would "take risks" with Hamas for the sake of peace. Well, your risks lead to Israeli deaths. Did you know 70 percent of the Israeli population lives within 10% of the land which is situated right under the noses of the West Bank? Did you know from Ariel, a settlement in the middle of the West Bank, you can see individual buildings on the Tel Aviv coast? This is the risk at state that you are so willing to take.3. You also asked does this disqualify Hamas as a partner to peace? You said no. Uh, Yes, yes it does disqualify them as a partner to peace! They preach murder, killing, and destruction of Jewish people and their country. Its evident in their media, charters, statements, and every day to day raison d'etre. A partner for peace is a partner for peace! Dont belittle what peace means. Peace means mutual respect, recognition, a desire to live in dignity and calm. You cannot be a peace partner and want the destruction of the other side. Peace is not signed agreements. It is a true desire to live side by side with your ex-ennemy and accept them. I do not understand this ideological attachement to the Two state solution when all the signs point to disaster. You have a fractured Palestinian political spectrum (there is no unity), you have no desire to live next to Israel or accept it as a Jewish State. The only ones who will be calling a bluff is Israel and they will pay for it with their lives.

StrangerMo (June 18, 2011 - 9:59am)

Why would Zionists want to discuss any peace agreement with the Palestinians when they have overwhelming military supremacy, seemingly ultimate power, and apparently bright future? Because the future is completely opposite and Zionists know it.

1. All military powers in history with no exception ultimately came crashing down. Someone stronger always comes, and it does not take a rocket scientist to see (just look around you) this coming and not ending well for the current military power in Palestine. Forward-seeing Jewish people under the Zionist regime already started packing up and leaving for Australia, South America, and the U.S. before this occurs.

2. It is obvious that the Zionist regime survives mainly because of its external allies who so far provided it with money, weapons, political support, access to markets, etc. After countless U.N. human rights violations, killing of its allies’ citizens (search on youtube for American “Rachel Corrie” video of Zionist bulldozer crushing her to death), forging of its allies’ passports in acts of murder, etc. its former allies are increasingly turning against the Zionist regime. Who would want to be remembered in history as an accomplice in international murders and especially of their own citizens.

3. Not only that the list of remaining supporters is growing thinner, but an international coalition is formed and growing larger of countries that are cutting all economic and diplomatic relations with the Zionist regime.

4. No country ever survived a complete isolation from its neighbors. No person of the area currently under Zionist occupation can obtain any type of visa from any of the surrounding countries for any reason – a complete land lock.

5. Well attended speeches take place almost weekly at colleges and universities across the U.S. and the world condemning the Zionist regime, their remaining supporters, and companies that do any business there. These speeches are often lead by moral Jewish people, church leaders, business people, etc., in addition to traditional peace activists.

6. The West where most of the traditional supporters of the Zionist regime are located is loosing global influence. China, the Middle East, South East Asia, Russia, South America, etc. are emerging as new pockets of economic and political power where the Zionist regime has angered most of the population.

7. Not only that the West is declining, but Zionists are loosing political control in the declining West. Diversity is bringing minority groups into politics, groups that are actively opposing the Zionist regime.
In conclusion, the Zionist regime is negotiating now because its future is changing for much worse. It knows that it temporarily exists now only through the force of its arms and this will be short-lived. It knows that it is at its peak and a downturn has come. It is a mistake to negotiate with the Zionist regime at the present time. But, if you have to negotiate, do not accept anything less than a single region in question (single state) where all who live there are equal. Any other “solution” would just reward the Zionist regime at the time of its demise. If the Zionist regime wants true piece, let’s not make it dependent on Zionist political and land acquisition goals, but on democratic vote for all who live there and making everyone equal (something we Americans cherish so passionately).

Western72 (June 18, 2011 - 10:42am)

 We Americans speak of freedoms, tolerance, and diversity, yet our government makes the Zionist occupation possible against our will, with our tax money, and making us accomplices in constant murders that the Zionist regime is committing including murders of our own American citizens (search on youtube for “Rachel Corrie” video of Zionist bulldozer crushing her to death). I am ashamed as an American that our politicians are controlled by the Zionist regime to such a terrifying extent. Tens of senators, state representatives, and ambassadors to foreign countries are Jewish. While I recognize that many are honest and against the Zionist regime, I am concerned about the fair representation of our will at the highest levels of our government. Just look on Wikipedia for “List of Jewish American politicians,” and visit prince.org/msg/105/271100 to discover that all five Federal Reserve chairmen/chairwomen are Jewish, and almost all (9 out of 12) regional Fed chairmen/chairwomen are also Jewish. I never like to generalize, but Jews comprise only 2% of our population and they have so much power in the government and almost absolute power over our money supply and economic polices. I am just not comfortable that all Americans are being represented properly especially not on the Palestine occupation issue that I know most people do not support judging by the comments against the Zionist regime I hear everywhere. Urge your state representatives and senators to immediately stop any remaining support for the Zionist regime.  Much of the support already stopped because of the increasing pressure on this issue, but we Americans need to completely distance ourselves from this oppressive regime and stop being accomplices in its murders! The world is also reacting. Who would want to be remembered in history as an accomplice to ruthless occupation? Many countries, companies, and countless moral individuals have already successfully implemented no relations with the Zionist government and others are implementing the same policy as we speak. Not travel there, not buy anything from it, not trade with it, not communicate with it, etc. Also do the same with any country that supports it because the Zionist government only survives because of its external supporters.

EmilyBow (June 18, 2011 - 12:59pm)

 If it is ever reached, the current and any other artificial “peace agreement” will be illegitimate before it is ever signed because (1) all people living in Palestine regardless of religion, race, origin, etc. (hereinafter “All People of Palestine”) were never given a choice on how they want their land to be governed, and (2) all contracts signed under duress are null and void.The biggest problem in Palestine is that the Zionist regime never offered a choice to All People of Palestine on how they want to govern their land because the Zionist regime cannot exist as a democratic entity. If there was ever any democratic process in Palestine, Zionists would have been outvoted and the Zionist regime would have never existed.  That is why the Zionist regime is the occupier because it does not offer choice (i.e. democracy), but instead imposes its regime (i.e. occupies). Imagine if Russians would simply occupy a town in the U.S. where they are in significant numbers and attempt to create a Russian state there without giving the rest of the Americans living there a choice.  Imagine then if they would try to institute a “peace agreement” that would attempt to legitimize their occupation. The “peace agreement” would logically and legally be illegitimate because the Americans were not given a choice. Under all countries’ laws, any contract is null and void if it is signed under duress. The current Palestine “peace agreement” process reminds me of The Godfather movie where the mafia boss (i.e. the Zionist regime) made a guy “an offer he could not refuse” by placing a gun (i.e. Zionist conventional and nuclear arsenal) to his head and making him sign the contract. Like the mafia boss’ offer, any “peace agreement” other than the choice for All People of Palestine is a crime, and the contract is legally null and void. The bottom line is that All People of Palestine never wanted to divide their land into artificial two states the way the occupation and this “peace agreement” attempt to divide it. From the beginning of the Zionist regime to its unavoidable end, All People of Palestine and the region never wanted the Zionist regime and they do not want it even more after all the atrocities the Zionist regime committed. I just cannot believe how the Zionist regime can be so ignorant to think that this or any other “peace agreement” that does not allow people to choose how they want to be governed will last and ensure its people’s survival. The Zionist regime fails to realize that no matter if it succeeds in muscling this “peace agreement” by unspeakable historic coercion tens of millions of moral people around the world will oppose it until it is corrected, and until justice and free choice prevail. Also, ever increasing number of Jewish people are realizing that Zionism is becoming a destructive force for them and are leading the global resistance to it.P.S. feel free to copy this comment, email it to other bloggers, and repost it on other blogs, newspaper websites, Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking websites, and include it in any correspondence/lobbying with senators, state representatives and any other public officials so the public learns the truth… 

Follow The National Interest

May 24, 2012