David Hale: Arab Spring could oust Hamas

[oberliner]

The popular uprisings of the Arab Spring could sweep Hamas from power, the US Ambassador for Middle East Peace David Hale was quoted as saying Thursday by AFP.

"The Palestinians are no more immune to the currents of change and demand for democratization, reform and freedom than any of the other people in the region," Hale said.

"I think you will see those same forces affect Hamas because clearly their leadership is not characterized by any of those words."

The envoy went on to say that the Palestinian people are more likely to throw their support behind the Palestinian Authority if it provides a clear alternative to violence.

MK Amir Peretz (Labor) called on Tuesday for Israel to release senior Fatah-Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti from prison.

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=243567

What do folks think? Should Barghouti be released from prison?

[leveymg]

1. The only thing that will end Hamas is an end to the Israeli occupation

Regime change has to come to Israel, as well, and the settlements have to go.

[oberliner]

2. Or maybe holding elections?

We are already long past the date when they were supposed to have been held.

Polls indicate that Hamas would be voted out of office in short order were elections allowed to take place.

This is probably the main reason why Hamas is doing everything possible to prevent this from happening.

[Fumesucker]

3. Didn't Israel support Hamas at one time?

Something about Fatah was the worst blight on civilization since well, ever..

[oberliner]

5. Before they took up the terrorist attacks

Not so long ago in a galaxy not so far away, it was Arafat and the PLO who was the primary Palestinian actor behind terrorists attacks against Israeli civilians.

In those halcyon days, the group that eventually came Hamas was more focused on charity work and spreading the word of fundamentalist Islam.

Later, Hamas decided that violent resistance was the way to go and the PLO and Arafat decided to abandon that approach (for the most part) and look into a more peaceful approach.

Of course, elements within the PLO were not completely on board with this approach.

The transformation of Hamas, however, was pretty total.

Perhaps they will transform again into an organization that rejects violence against civilians.

[Fumesucker]

7. Isn't it odd how Palestinian leaders always eventually turn to violence?

It would seem that Palestinians are a uniquely uncivilized people, yes?

[shira]

10. Extreme rightwing leaders have that tendency. n/t

[oberliner]

11. They don't

In fact there are many more examples of Palestinian leaders who eventually turn away from violence than who do what you describe.

Arafat being one of the most prominent historical examples.

[shira]

12. Arafat? Really? Arafat never turned away from violence. n/t

[oberliner]

14. Israel-PLO Recognition - Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat - Sept 9- 1993

LETTER FROM YASSER ARAFAT TO PRIME MINISTER RABIN:

September 9, 1993

Yitzhak Rabin
Prime Minister of Israel

Mr. Prime Minister,

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.

The PLO accepts United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

The PLO commits itself to the Middle East peace process, and to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides and declares that all outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations.

The PLO considers that the signing of the Declaration of Principles constitutes a historic event, inaugurating a new epoch of peaceful coexistence, free from violence and all other acts which endanger peace and stability. Accordingly, the PLO renounces the use of terrorism and other acts of violence and will assume responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel in order to assure their compliance, prevent violations and discipline violators.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Guide+to+the+Peace+Process/Israel-PLO+Recognition+-+Exchange+of+Letters+betwe.htm

[shira]

15. Terror attacks increased exponentially after that, under Arafat who was in control

Of course, he denied responsibility - pointed over there to those guys, who he was too weak to control and who were released from his jail cells within days and treated like heroes in PA controlled media, mosques, schools, etc..

The incitement to terror only got worse under Arafat's watch.

And then there was Intifada 2 as he rejected a peace deal without making a credible counter-offer.

=====

You're pointing to words on paper.

Actions trump those.

Arafat was an unrepentant terrorist who signed a peace of paper promising he had changed.

[oberliner]

16. I'd love to see Hamas sign such a piece of paper

They can't even bring themselves to say that they renounce violence and wish to peacefully coexist with Israel as Arafat did.

[leveymg]

4. The Hamas-Fatah split dates to the '07 civil war and Israeli intervention on the side of Fatah

That continues to poison Palestinian politics. A comprehensive withdrawal of Israeli settlements from the West Bank on terms consistent with the 1968 borders would tend to favor whichever party was able to effect such an outcome. Fatah is viewed as too close to the Israelis, and the "Bantustan" patchwork deal negotiated by them was unacceptable to many Palestinians. On the other hand, elements of Hamas still cling to illusions that the Israelis can be forced to vacate the formerly Arab sector of Jerusalem, which my gut tells me won't ever happen.

The issue of what to do about the 600,000 Israelis who occupy Palestinian areas is the most intractable obstacle to peace, and that can only be settled by a change of heart and a change of politics within Israel. I don't see that happening, any time soon, either. While the Israelis still forcibly occupy a sizable portion of Palestine, Hamas (or whichever party embraces a militant position) will remain viable.

The Ambassador's comment shows some biases and limitations in his thinking, perhaps wishful thinking on his part.

[oberliner]

6. It goes back well beyond that

Hamas and Fatah, be definition, have been "split" since Hamas came into existence.

There has been animosity between the two groups for decades. As you noted, their attempt at reconciliation was short-lived and resulted in something not entirely unlike a civil war.

Palestinian politics has plenty of poison without any help from Israel. In fact, Israel is one of the few unifying factors that bring the diverse Palestinian political factions together. They all agree that the occupation should end.

I don't see the occupation as the most intractable obstacle to peace. As you are no doubt aware, there have been lots of proposals made whereby some of the settlers would stay and that land from within Israel would be "swapped" with land within the West Bank where there are high concentrations of such Israelis. It seems like eventually such a bargain will be struck.

I do agree, however, that the current regime in place, both Israeli and Palestinian, are not especially well-suited towards making such a bargain.

I look forward to elections on both sides.

Interestingly, the Palestinian territory that is filled with settlements (the West Bank) is where Fatah, not Hamas is most popular. Whereas Gaza, which has no Israeli settlements, is where Hamas rules.

As I mentioned, though, in my other post, they aren't all that popular there either and would lose handily in an election, should one be permitted to take place (though it's possible their one for a thousand prisoner trade might have boosted their popularity a bit).

[leveymg]

8. As pointed out above, Israel was accused of giving Hamas covert assistance as a way to

undermine and split Arafat's PLO. That tactic clearly backfired on the Israelis over time. There is nothing unusual about bloody infighting among factions in what is essentially a revolutionary or anti-colonial struggle. That will likely continue until there is some sort of dramatic consolidation in the Palestinian's diplomatic, economic and territorial situation.

I can't see islands of settlements linked by restricted roadways through Palestinian territory, a sort of Cold War Berlin or Apartheid arrangement working out. Land swaps should be contiguous territories along clear and distinct borders, but there are local interests on both sides opposed to that.

We both agree that no side is particularly well served by their present political regimes.

[oberliner]

13. Makes sense

Arafat and the PLO were working on orchestrating terror attacks on civilians. Hamas - or what would become Hamas - was just a loose confederation of Islamic charity groups.

Any kind of revolutionary or anti-colonial struggle would have long pre-dated the existence of Israel as the Palestinians had been under colonial rule for centuries prior.

What you see is not anything that anyone is interested in. Island of settlements, restricted roadways, none of this is what is proposed.

Maybe check out the Geneva Accords - I think that would serve as at least a foundation for an agreement that may eventually be agreeable to all parties (assuming some changes in leadership - which I do think is inevitable).

[shira]

9. What a load of crap. Hamas will brutally suppress any uprising against them.

And the Left will remain silent as masses of Palestinians they purport to care about are slaughtered. Just as the Left is silent WRT Syria for example.

Neither Syria or Hamas will just allow themselves to be taken out of power (just like Gadafi). They will do whatever necessary to remain firmly entrenched in control and the Left will have no problem with these extreme Rightwing dictatorships doing their thing well into the future.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

17. In the same way Ben Ali, Mubharak and Gadhafi did?

I'm sure you're right that that Hamas would respond to any attempt to remove them from power with extreme violence; I'm not sure you're right that they'd succeed. I'm not at all optimistic about the chances of it happening - Hamas have an external enemy to rally the people against and blame problems on in a way that wasn't present in the countries the Arab Spring has been successful in - but I think you're wrong to assume that they'd succeed.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that the left is silent about Syria. One can only assume that you're choosing not to listen, because what you would hear would contradict your prejudices. The left is mostly opposing *intervention* on Syria, and limiting itself to ineffectual handwringing, but that's because there's no obvious course of action that would probably do more good than harm, but hands are being ineffectually wrung left, right and centre, and especially left.

[oberliner]

18. More like in the way they did in June of 2007

There was an attempt to remove them from power and they did respond with extreme violence - and they did succeed. And that was with them still having an external enemy.

Edit to add:

With respect to how the left views what is happening in Syria, take a look at the responses to this thread:

Syria onslaught kills 40 protesters

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x5041607

Insomuch as DU can be said to represent the left in any way, note the replies.

[LeftishBrit]

19. 'Insomuch as DU can be said to represent the left...'

Well, overall it does; that's why I belong to it. However, people join DU for all kinds of reasons. And that's probably all I should say, before I risk getting into trouble for calling out individuals.

Certainly there are many organizations that might be called 'left' that support the Syrian protesters. Avaaz for example has had a few petitions, signed by many, on this topic. Some here might wish to sign this one:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/stop_the_horror_in_syria_a/?fp

[oberliner]

21. Yes, I agree

I don't know that "the left" has any kind of unified position on Syria.

I will say that here on this particular website, which is affiliated for the left, I have seen more than a few posts expressing some "concerns" about the Syrian protesters.

[shira]

22. Ben Ali and Mubarak were nowhere near as brutal as Syria, Iran, and Libya...

...and with Libya it took NATO intervention.

The far Left has to their shame been far more vocal WRT Palestinian rights than Syrian for the past half year.

[LeftishBrit]

20. I hope so

Though I think Hamas will not go willingly. They are certainly not showing great enthusiasm for the concept of elections, for example.

And yes, I think that Barghouti should, and eventually will, be released. Certainly it would seem more appropriate than releasing a lot of the other people who were exchanged for Shalit.

[oberliner]

23. Thanks for actually responding to my question!

I appreciate it.

Personally, I was surprised he was not released as part of the exchange.

[azurnoir]

24. you were surprised about Barghouthi not being released?

I wasn't, the last thing Hamas wants is someone who could challenge them politically to the extent Marwan could freed, Hamas is already behind in the polls but with his release what little support they have left could evaporate

[oberliner]

25. If Israel offered to release him, Hamas wasn't going to say no

In spite of the items you mentioned, it would've looked very bad for Hamas if Israel made the offer and Hamas turned it down.

No way they could've gotten away with that one.