COMPETENCE WOULD BE REVOLUTIONARY:

Talking to Hamas: Hamas official Osama Hamdan explains how US pressure is making it hard to govern. But the organisation, if it can stay on track, is set to change the face of Islamism and then the middle east (Alastair Crooke, June 2006, Prospect)

It seems...that the new Israeli government will aim towards partial independent withdrawal from the West Bank, for the time being at least. And for this, Israel prefers Hamas to Fatah. To engage with President Abbas would undermine the claim that unilateralism is necessary “because there is no Palestinian partner.” Unlike Fatah, Hamas does not want to negotiate on a partial solution, and can be plausibly labelled “a non-partner.” As a result, some Israelis perceive Hamas as sharing a common interest in Israeli withdrawal that could lead to some “understandings.” And as Israel knows, Hamas counts all Israeli departures from Palestinian land as a victory, especially without a quid pro quo.

This prospect would leave Hamas to concentrate over the coming year or two on its core objective of providing competent governance to the Palestinians. Osama Hamdan underlined the importance of bringing law and order to the Palestinians and, specifically, of resolving clashes between Hamas and Fatah factions: “Ismail Haniya [the Palestinian prime minister] has begun working… there are good signs that he will succeed in securing the internal situation. Some of the other groups, such as the popular resistance committees, have begun working directly with the interior minister, and a new co-ordinator of security, who is very popular and commands wide support among all factions, has been appointed.”

According to Hamdan, Hamas’s other priorities are to reform the security services, to create effective judicial oversight over the security agencies and, above all, to make parliament accountable for and the instrument of control of all Palestinian institutions and ministries. Hamas has not perpetrated any direct attack in Israel since late 2003; its military wing has focused instead on targets within the occupied territories. For over a year, Hamas has observed a unilateral de-escalation, or tadiya. The suicide attack in Tel Aviv in April that led to the death of 11 Israelis was mounted by Islamic Jihad in response to an earlier killing of several of its leaders. In a response that was widely criticised, Hamas spokesmen refused to condemn Islamic Jihad, repelling any tentative European feelers towards engagement. But Hamas wanted to signal clearly that it would not be Israel’s policeman in the territories. It had learned from Fatah’s experience that to publicly condemn such attacks was to invite US and Israeli pressure to arrest members of Islamic Jihad, something it was not ready to do given the risk of being outflanked by more militant groups. Hamas also knows that if it begins to arrest Palestinians, Israel will send lists of further Palestinians to be arrested. These lists, which were sent to Arafat as soon as he took office in 1993, proved deeply corrosive to Fatah’s credibility and legitimacy. The language used by Hamas, however, was not well chosen. Israel may have understood the signal, but externally it was damaging.

Hamas and Fatah represent two very different traditions of Muslim thinking. Fatah has looked to the international community to help balance the asymmetrical relationship with Israel, whereas Hamas’s Islamist approach relies on the inner resources of its constituency for the fortitude to persevere. But contrary to the popular view, Hamas does not believe in imposing Sharia law on Palestinians, or anyone else. This has been said publicly. It does not seek a “top-down” Islamic state that imposes norms of Islamic behaviour but has no real Muslims living in it. It prefers the goal of a state peopled by believing Muslims whose freely chosen priorities colour society from below.

If Muslims judge Hamas to have been successful, this approach will change the face of Islamism. It will do more than any other initiative to swing the pendulum away from the revolutionary groups that aim to radicalise and to impose strict Islamic structures. And the commitment to reform will appeal to public opinion throughout the region. It is this that represents the revolutionary nature of the Hamas electoral victory and explains the antagonism of leaders like Mubarak of Egypt and King Abdullah of Jordan, who can see the implications only too clearly.

A referendum could get Hamas off the hook and let them accept reality so that we can help them start building a decent Palestine.

MORE:
President's ultimatum to Hamas: recognise Israel or the people will decide (Stephen Farrell, 5/26/06, Times of London)

The move appeared to wrong-foot Hamas, whose refusal to recognise Israel and renounce violence has led to international isolation and the freezing of millions of dollars in international aid.

Waiting until the last minute of an otherwise turgid address to a “national dialogue” conference broadcast live on television, Mr Abbas, a Fatah leader, called on his Islamist rivals to accept a proposal drawn up by Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad and other prisoners in Israeli jails — foremost among them the Fatah populist Marwan Barghouti.

Hamas may recognise Israel's right to exist (Tim Butcher, 26/05/2006, Daily Telegraph)

Mr Abbas, trying to persuade Hamas to drop its traditional refusal to accept Israel's right to exist, seized on a seven-page document written inside an Israeli prison by Palestinian political prisoners.

The prisoners represent not just Hamas, but all major factions, including Mr Abbas's own Fatah movement and Islamic Jihad.

It was debated inside high-security cells and drawn up under the eyes of prison guards during exercise periods.

In parts verbose and repetitive, the document nevertheless implies an acceptance of the right of Israel by claiming a Palestinian homeland only on land occupied by Israel in 1967 - Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

If he could persuade the Hamas leadership to accept the 18-point prison accord it would mean the movement had dropped its original claim on all the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean.

Mr Abbas gave the parties 10 days to accept the document as a common platform, and said he would call a referendum if they failed to do so.

He is understood to have won tacit agreement for the plan from the Hamas leadership before unveiling it during a Palestinian national unity summit held yesterday to try to halt the slide towards civil war.

Posted by Orrin Judd at May 25, 2006 8:58 PM