July 5, 2007

BECAUSE WE DON"T WANT A CEASEFIRE?:

A Glimmer of Hope in Gaza: Why push Hamas toward collapse when a long-term cease-fire is closer than ever? (Mitchell Prothero, July 5, 2007, Slate)

This tension between armed militancy and good governance is hard to reconcile. Hamas might have won the war to control Gaza, but it also finds itself more vulnerable to outside pressure than ever before in its 20-plus-year history. Hamas officials know that after their violent rise to power, they have to deliver more than rhetoric and martyrs. And Gaza is sick of both. It needs money, jobs, and security. In the past three weeks, despite the awful way they came to power, Hamas has delivered on the security. But to supply more, they need the help of their sworn enemies.

What is often overlooked about Hamas is that although destroying Israel is certainly high on its to-do list, the group represents the much broader agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood, or "Ikwhan," is a Pan-Arab movement out to prove that most Arab regimes are corrupt, brutal, and ineffectual—a point that's hard to dispute when you've visited a few of them. The Brotherhood solution is to combine religious discipline with technocratic know-how to build a better society for the Arab world. Some consider them a moderating influence on the al-Qaida types, others point out that both groups share the same sources of intellectual inspiration, and many scholars make a reasonable argument that the Muslim Brotherhood is just radical Islam in a competent bureaucrat's cheap suit. That debate won't and can't be solved here.

But Hamas now runs Gaza, and it wants to succeed. They've delivered security, but they also know that if the economy doesn't pick up and wages aren't delivered, they're likely to be thrown out of power. If that were to happen, Gaza would descend back into chaos, and the best chance they've had to prove to the rest of the Arab world that they could meld Islam and modern governance will be lost.

Does this mean the United States, Israel, and President Mahmoud Abbas should suddenly embrace Hamas and help them prove their experiment could succeed? I doubt any of the three think that's such a good idea. But they should note that for the first time in Hamas' existence, the group desperately wants to be taken seriously as Palestinian political figures. It might be a risky gambit in light of Hamas' refusal to accept Israel's right to exist—it's not unreasonable that negotiating partners start with a premise that one side has a right to live—but shrewd, or even brutal, negotiations could eventually force Hamas to deliver things that the region certainly needs.

Take Islamic Jihad. The militant group has stayed out of inter-Palestinian politics, preferring to concentrate on killing as many Israelis as it can. Talk to any Islamic Jihad leader and you'll come away impressed—on some level—with their single-minded devotion to fighting Israel. They never negotiate with Israel or anyone else. They also ignore calls to halt rocket attacks against Israel from Gaza.

But since the Hamas takeover, some funny things have been happening. Both Hamas and Islamic Jihad have conducted a few rocket and mortar attacks on Israel, but most of them have been aimed at military instillations or have been responses to Israeli military incursions. At least two top Islamic Jihad commanders have been called into meetings with Hamas officials and told to halt rocket attacks on Israeli civilians. One categorically refused. The next day, his car exploded in what Hamas and Islamic Jihad called an Israeli airstrike. The Israelis—who tend to openly admit killing IJ commanders—denied responsibility. I saw the car, and after years of experience in Iraq, Lebanon, and Gaza, I believe a bomb had been planted under the driver's seat.

Other Islamic Jihad commanders are getting nervous. Every few days, confrontations between Hamas forces and IJ rocket teams almost turn into shootouts. Fatah—for all of its peaceful rhetoric—never actually tried to stop Islamic Jihad or Hamas from conducting attacks; they lacked both the means and the will.


Just as Arafat had no interest i accepting an offer of statehood from Israel, so Israel ands America have no apparent interest in offering statehood if it's to Hamas.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 5, 2007 12:20 PM
Comments for this post are closed.