Apr 16th, 2008
What’s wrong with engaging Hamas?
Email This Post
Print This Post
The American and Israeli government are now upset that former US president Jimmy Carter has “embraced” Hamas.
A paragraph from the Associated Press’ report read:
Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said Carter’s meeting with Hamas “dignified” a group committed to Israel’s destruction. “One cannot but wonder how this attitude is supposed to promote peace and understanding,” he said.
Well, I cannot help but wonder how the attitude of the Washington and Israeli hawks would fare any better. Will isolating a “terrorist” group solve the problem? I think that Jimmy Carter is right in reaching out to Hamas. If there is no talk, people will just construct their own ideas about the “other”, leading to misunderstandings and sustained conflict. It’s far better to get people to thrash things out by talking.
Of course, the issues surrounding Israel and Palestine are complex and I’m don’t have clear solutions to the problem. However, I do think that the Americans and Israelis should reconsider their policy of isolating Hamas. It is more prudent to talk to Hamas and understand them.
If the Americans and Israelis don’t even want to talk to Hamas, they won’t understand why Hamas behaves the way it is behaving now. It is perhaps much more convenient to label Hamas as a terrorist group because the military can then be sent in to “clean up” the problem. The Washington hawks seem to love the idea of a military solution to everything.
However, this will only make Hamas appear even more legitimate in the eyes of Palestinians because Hamas can easily employ the rhetoric of being the real defenders of the Palestinian leaders. By not talking to Hamas, the Americans and Israelis are just weakening the domestic support for the Fatah party, which is obviously not the desired outcome.
I’ve read reports that Hamas actually does alot of humanitarian work in Palestine and they are popular with ordinary Palestinian folks as compared to Fatah, which has been viewed as a corrupt organization. Of course, I am painfully aware of the violence that Hamas perpetuates and I most certainly do not condone that. However, I do think that people (especially the neocons) should try and understand why Hamas is resorting to violence. Are they resorting to violence because they like wanton destruction, or is it because they have no other recourse against groups that are much more powerful?
Seriously, the Americans and Israelis should stop vilifying Hamas. They are no saints themselves.
Loading ...
People often create the idea of “same” and “other” in their lives. How often people just create stereotypes of people, especially of those who belong to a culture different from their own. And often, these stereotypes have a derogatory base.
http://whoisaracist.blogspot.com/
If US and Israel talk to Hamas, it will destroy whatever little credibility Abbas has as leader of the Palestinians. If I were Abbas, I would beg the US and Israelis not to talk to Hamas.
The Saudis tried to play a leadership role (by brokering the Makkah Accord between the Palestinian factions) and recently Yemen tried to do the same but to no avail. Notwithstanding all this, I think the Arabs should keep trying.
The US-sponsored Annapolis was a breath of fresh air but now the Middle East is complicated by too many concurrent problems entangled together in a mess. Apart from the Israel/Palestine issue, Iran has its nuclear issue, Iraq remains unstable, Lebanon is politically uncertain and Syria still leans towards the Iranian camp.
No easy solution in sight but perhaps a new US administration can come up with a better policy and vision for the region.
I believe that your view is rather short-sighted.
You would have to understand that since the formation of the state of Israel, they have been condemned and threatened with annihilation, not just plain destruction.
Events such as the six-day wars as well as when all the surrounding countries invaded Israel at one shot. The yom-kippur war which is a jewish holiday. Not to mention the various terrorists infiltrating their borders.
All this combined has created a constant state of war and under seige mentality within Israel and not to mention the thousands who died defending their loved ones.
If you were jewish and having to suffer for simply being a jew for decades, I can understand that it would be anathema for them to engage people who in the first place chose violence and spill blood of innocence people.
Hamas being a terrorist outfit still engages in the primary business of causing death and fear. Most of the people could simply be mercenaries that are trigger happy. I find that you comparing the merits of terrorist outfits and arriving that one should hold talks with them on the argument that they are more “compassionate” kinda misses the fact that these are terrorist outfits from the start.
Your comment that us and israel are not saints either is true but if you are under threat will you sit and wait for it to strike? Sometimes you get the bear and sometimes the bear gets you. But if you sit there doing nothing, the bear will keep coming all the time fo you as he is emboldened.
Sadly as Israel has proven, counter -terrorism is best when the same tactics are taken to the terrorists themselves resulting in innocent blood split. The common people always loses.
Willis,
I believe that you are not thinking critically. Why is it that when Hamas carries out bombings, they are deemed terrorists but when Israel carries out bombings, it is legitimate self-defense? You are already harbouring a bias that prevents you from seeing things from another perspective.
And, since you say that when we are under threat we should not sit there to wait to be struck down, then why can’t Hamas be said to be under threat and taking pre-emptive strikes of their own? Again, I see that you are harbouring a deeply entrenched bias.
I am not trying to put a judgment on who is right or wrong but I am deeply disturbed by the rhetoric employed. Why is it that one party is always being labelled a terrorist? Should we not question this labelling and ask if there are alternative interpretations to the issue? Is it more convenient to call someone else terrorist and then have a blank cheque to deal with these people through violent means?
Aaron,
It’s hard to speak in absolutes on both sides here, so it’s all relative at the end of the day. The suffering of Palestinians deserve sympathy, and one of the problems is that desperation and poverty breeds extremism. That said, Israel, despite being the dominant power in the region, has actually demonstrated restraint in many ways to secure itself. Partly out of necessity and partly out of principle.
When Hamas’ official charter is to seek the destruction of Israel and does not want to compromise, how should Israel respond? When extremists within the Hamas leadership call for people to blow up innocents, learn to hate from young, etc. how do you deal with that? To be fair, you don’t see the same diatribe from the Israel.
Hamas does support, breed and encourage actions that are terrorist in nature because its whole ethos calls for the destruction of a nation and people. That said, it doesn’t mean that in principle parties should not engage in dialogue, therefore Carter’s unofficial visit should be lauded. However, while any dialogue that can ultimately bring sides closer is good in general, no party should be forced to compromise with an organization that seeks the destruction of one’s very existence.
Thanks Francis, you managed to explain my thoughts.
I believe that there should be engagement since the bloodshed on both sides serves no purposes and violence only begets more violence in a never ending cycle.
Successful cases include the IRA in Ireland as well. If Hamas is serious about the welfare of the people, it is now in a position to do so. Israel has been carrying out acts of violence as well but it would mostly be in response to the large number of attacks carried out by its own citizens or as pre-emptive strike such as operation Spring of Youth carried out in the past.
I mean I find it hard to believe that any government would be supported in engaging a group which operates its own militancy wing instead of thru diplomacy.
If Hamas is really interested in peace, why its refusal to dismantle its militancy wing?