By Ron Bousso
Tribune Israel Correspondent
The radical Islamic movement Hamas swept to a shocking victory in last Wednesday’s Palestinian parliamentary elections, doing something that no Israeli government has ever been able to do: win an absolute majority of the house seats and leaving Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah movement in shambles.
PA Chairman Mahmoud
Abbas has no reason to
smile after Hamas defeated
his Fatah party last week.
Shortly after the unofficial results began trickling in, Hamas officials said they would seek to form a coalition government with the Fatah and other movements. Ismail Haniyeh, who tops the Hamas election list, said last Thursday: “We want to meet with him to consult about the shape of the political partnership that we can achieve.
“Hamas will cooperate with everybody for the benefit of all the people,” Haniyeh told reporters in Gaza. He also called Abbas, requesting a meeting to discuss the future of the Palestinian government.
But even before the official results were released, the Fatah government, led by Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia, announced its resignation. Following an emergency meeting, Fatah leaders said they would not enter a coalition government led by Hamas.
Abbas said in a televised speech last Thursday evening that despite the elections’ outcome the Palestinian Authority remained committed to “reaching a peaceful peace agreement with Israel,” based on the “Oslo Accords, the Arab League decisions, the road map, the two-state principle and a solution to the refugee problem.”
Abbas, who will continue to act as chairman, has to appoint a member of parliament to form the next government, although the law does not indicate a specific timeframe by when a new government must be formed.
Hamas won 74 seats in the 132-member parliament, while Fatah, which had dominated Palestinian politics since the creation of the Palestinian Authority, won a mere 45 seats. The remaining seats were shared between four other lists and four independent candidates.
Hamas won nearly all of the seats in the district vote, which counts for half of the 132 parliament seats. In the Gaza Strip, Hamas candidates took 16 of the 21 available seats. Fatah candidates fared slightly better in the national vote, which composes the remaining 66 seats.
To many Hamas officials, the huge victory was as much a surprise as it was to others. The party that ran on a platform concentrating on internal issues, mainly fighting corruption and internal chaos, now also needs to address the question of the peace process with Israel.
Haniyeh, a moderate among the Hamas leaders, said that his party will remain loyal to the principles of building a state with Jerusalem as its capital, resisting occupation and keeping the Palestinian refugees’ right of return.
As for the Oslo Accords with Israel, Haniyeh said that they “have become a fact and we do not intend to try to achieve the impossible. The agreements are a done deal and we need to accept them without recognizing their legality, and so we shall do.”
Senior Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar said that Hamas was ready to extend the cease-fire with Israel, in place for almost a year, if Israel reciprocated.
“If they are going to continue commitment to what is called quietness, then we will continue,” he said. “But if not, then I think we will have no option, but to protect our people and our land.”
Members of the Fatah, which polls predicted would win the elections by a 5 to 10 per cent margin, blamed Israel for their defeat. Senior Palestinian official Jibril Rajoub, who lost his seat in the Hebron district to his brother, who ran on the Hamas list, said, “Israel has done everything to hurt the Palestinian Authority and sabotaged the chances to negotiate and reach an agreement. Hamas has reaped the fruit of this policy.”
The news of the results spread quickly in the Palestinian territories, as Hamas supporters staged parades through city centres. In Ramallah, Hamas loyalists clashed last Thursday evening with Fatah supporters outside parliament, later breaking into the building and raising Hamas’ green flag on its roof.
Last Friday, Hamas and Fatah gunmen exchanged fire in the Khan Yunis refugee camp in the Gaza Strip, a long-standing Hamas bastion.
There were no violent incidents in the Palestinian territories on Election Day, as Israeli forces kept a low profile and allowed almost free movement of Palestinians in the West Bank.
Reactions to the Hamas victory were united in their stand against catering to a Hamas-led PA that wouldn’t renounce terrorism nor recognize Israel.
In Israel, the results were received with no less shock, but the government did not issue any statement before late last Thursday evening, following an emergency security meeting between Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz.
Olmert said after the meeting, “A Hamas-led Palestinian Authority is not a partner. If a government led by Hamas or in which Hamas is a coalition partner is established, the Palestinian Authority will be turned into an authority that supports terror.
“Israel and the world will ignore it and make it irrelevant,” Olmert said, applying vocabulary similar to that used against Yasser Arafat during the intifada.
Israel has decided not to freeze the transfer of taxes Israel collects for the Palestinian Authority at the border crossings. The international community has announced it would freeze financial aid to the Palestinians as long as Hamas does not renounce terrorism.
Likud Chairman Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank brought Hamas to power. “The state of ‘Hamastan’ has been created before our eyes – an Iranian satellite state in the image of the Taliban,” Netanyahu said. “We need to do some soul-searching, because the writing was on the wall. A policy of unilateral withdrawal rewarded Hamas terror.”
“Senior Hamas official Mahmoud al-Zahar should send a large bouquet of flowers to Ehud Olmert, who opted to give up in the war on terror,” National Union MK Effi Eitam said, suggesting later that Israel assassinate all the Hamas leaders.
Labour Chairman Amir Peretz said that his party would not negotiate with a Hamas-led government. “We will not conduct negotiations with an organization that does not recognize Israel’s right to exist,” he said. “If we have to, we will implement unilateral moves. We will not agree to a diplomatic stalemate. The changes in the Palestinian Authority will not hold us hostage,” he said.
Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa said last Friday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, that Hamas will have to recognize Israel and accept the 2002 Beirut initiative, which includes a full Israeli withdrawal from the territories according to UN resolutions 242 and 338 in exchange for full Arab recognition of Israel.
The international community urged Hamas and the Palestinian Authority to continue efforts toward peace. US President George W. Bush reiterated the administration’s position that it will not deal with Palestinian leaders who do not recognize Israel’s right to exist.
“I don’t see how you can be a partner in peace if you advocate the destruction of a country as part of your platform…. You can’t be a partner in peace if you have – if your party has – an armed wing,” Bush told a White House news conference.
Bush nevertheless hailed the peaceful election in the Palestinian territories, saying that “the results of which remind me about the power of democracy…when you give people the vote, you give people a chance to express themselves at the polls.”
The international Quartet on the Middle East – the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations – issued a joint call for Hamas to renounce violence and accept Israel’s right to exist.
The European Union, the main contributor to Palestinian financial aid, said in a statement that it “stands ready to continue to support Palestinian economic development and democratic state building.”
At the same time, the European Union “expects the newly elected PLC to support the formation of a government committed to ending violence, a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the rule of law, reform, and sound fiscal management.”
Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said that the Hamas victory was a “very, very, very bad result.”
Canadian Prime Minister Designate Stephen Harper echoed the Quartet’s position, saying in a news conference that his government will not accept Hamas as long as it promotes terrorism and remains committed to its strategic objective of destroying Israel.
Jewish groups in Canada and the US were just as vocal about the PA results.
B’nai Brith Canada has called on Harper to refuse to allow any Canadian representatives to meet with Hamas officials.
“The inclusion on the Palestinian ballot of Hamas terrorist operatives is a subversion of the democratic process,” said Frank Dimant, B’nai Brith Canada’s executive vice president, who is currently assessing the situation on the ground in Israel. “The fiction that Hamas is anything other than an armed terrorist group whose avowed aim continues to be the destruction of the Jewish State serves only to undermine any real hope for a genuine process of Palestinian democratization and reform.
“We call on Canada’s Prime Minister Designate, Stephen Harper, to ensure that no Canadian representatives meet with ‘elected’ Hamas officials and to signal strongly that Canada will play no part whatsoever in legitimizing a terrorist group that is outlawed here in Canada and many other countries.
“It is time Western democratic leaders took off their blinders and held the Palestinians to account for their failures to keep their promises to disarm, renounce terrorism, and end incitement against Israel. Terror and democracy are inherently contradictory and a nod to Hamas would only sanction the continuation of violence and terror.”
Marc Gold, chair of the Canada-Israel Committee, said: “Palestinians have a democratic right to choose their leadership, but they must accept the consequences of those choices. As long as Hamas supports terrorism it cannot be a partner for peace. Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with a party that calls for its destruction and pursues a program of terror to achieve its political objectives.”
American Jewish Congress Executive Director Neil B. Goldstein said in a statement, “By choosing Hamas, the Palestinians have punctured the myth that they have elected leaders who reject terrorism – a fundamental requirement of the Roadmap for Peace. Furthermore, by choosing Hamas, the Palestinians have ended the charade that there is a partner with the will and with the authority to negotiate a bona fide peace settlement with Israel. President Bush is absolutely correct in saying, that Hamas is not a partner for peace.”
American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC) President Bernice Manocherian and Executive Director Howard Kohr released the following statement:
“The emergence of Hamas as the majority in the Palestinian legislature is a major setback for peace and democracy in the Middle East.
“Hamas is recognized by the United States and the European Union as a terrorist organization, whose involvement in the political process has not altered its stated goal of destroying Israel.
“A government dominated by a terrorist organization undermines efforts to establish a democratic, non-violent society and jeopardizes efforts to achieve a lasting peace between the Palestinians and Israel.
“The United States must not recognize Hamas as a legitimate party in the democratic process until it agrees to renounce and end violence, dismantle the terrorist infrastructure, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and agree to conduct direct negotiations with Israel.
“AIPAC calls on the United States and its allies to uphold their policy of not dealing with Hamas and other terrorist groups.
“We commend President Bush’s statement…that ‘a political party that articulates the destruction of Israel as part of a platform is a party with which we will not deal.’
“The ultimate responsibility now rests with the Palestinian Authority, which is bound by its commitment to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure.”
Americans for Peace Now (APN) said in a statement that it regrets Hamas’ victory in the elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council because of its likely impact on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
The statement said, “In light of Hamas’ anticipated dominance of the next Palestinian government, the international community (including the US) must make a concerted effort to pressure Hamas into recognizing Israel’s right to exist and to end violence directed against Israel, which could include an extension of the current ceasefire. This should be a precondition for any direct international aid to the new Palestinian government.”
Index | Letters to the Editor | Main Page | Op Ed | Photos
Send Letters To The Editor:
editor@jewishtribune.ca
This site hosted by:
vex.net
By Frank Dimant
Following the Hamas victory, which saw one terrorist organization replace another, it may be opportune to review the public relations strategies and campaigns that have prevailed over the last 15 years.
“We will never negotiate with terrorists” went the refrain, one which sent an absolute, clear and concise message that successfully served as the underlying theme for many years. Yet, Nobel Laureate Shimon Peres undid this strategy by negotiating with Fatah terrorists and resurrecting Yasser Arafat from his near oblivion in Tunisia, to create the infamous Oslo Accords, which are now widely condemned.
“Once we arm Fatah, they will finish Hamas, which we can’t do.” These were the words of the late Yitzhak Rabin who was confident that the strategy of providing arms to Fatah would result in the group’s abiding by the Oslo Accords and disarming Hamas terrorists. We all know this never happened. The false bravado relegated to the dustbin of history.
Enter Bibi Netanyahu, whose demand was simplicity itself: “Reciprocity must be in place for the Oslo agreement to be implemented.” When the Wye Agreement was subsequently signed and large sections of Hebron were turned over to Fatah, there was no reciprocity, no goodwill.
Next was the period marked by the very popular slogan: “Israel will never withdraw under fire.” This was meant to indicate that the strength of Israel would prevail and that one would never see Israel and its forces fleeing before its enemies. Sadly, we all remember the images of the hastily and poorly executed withdrawal from southern Lebanon, as ordered by Ehud Barak. Today, there are more than 4,000 rockets manned by Hezbollah fighters in southern Lebanon, waiting to be unleashed into the hearts of Jewish population centres in northern Israel.
And who can possibly forget the statements of Arik Sharon, as late as 2002, when he said that there will never be unilateral withdrawals since there must be a partner for peace on the other side. He even went so far as to say if anyone tells you that we will abandon Gush Katif, make sure to buy a second home in Gush Katif, for there is no chance that this will ever happen. We all have, however, seen the exile of the Jewish inhabitants of Gaza and the destruction of their communities.
We all recall the loud and thunderous voice of Ehud Olmert when, as mayor of Jerusalem, he clearly proclaimed to the world in a slogan that has been repeated a million times by every advocate on behalf of Israel that “Jerusalem will forever remain the undivided eternal capital of the Jewish people.” Echoes of this persist to this day, with the refrain of “a United Jewish Jerusalem, the capital of Israel forever” the rallying cry of Jews the world over. One cannot help but worry about this line too being crossed, and wonder if it is just a matter of time before the dominant question will come to be asked as to what kind of partition is called for and when the walls will be built.
The diplomatic red lines that once existed as absolute determination of the Jewish people have been transformed into pink lines and subsequently into invisible lines.
What workable slogan is left to us that can offer a strong definitive motto that cannot be altered or rescinded and which can be shouted from rooftops everywhere? The best slogan might be one that speaks of “A greater Tel Aviv forever.”
It would be easy to defend the notion that Tel Aviv represents the centrality of the liberal Jewish people’s cultural values, especially if we are seeking to find a universal message and commonality. Tel Aviv is a centre for secular Israeli culture. It hosts Habima, the world famous theatrical group. The cafes on Shenkin Street, where the left-wing intellectuals gather to discuss philosophies of internationalism, can certainly be appreciated by the liberal Europeans. Similarly, who would not afford us the right to have the night clubs and discos that abound in Tel Aviv? It also serves as the headquarters for the Histadrut, the National Federation of Labour, as well as the headquarters for the Likud Party and the Labour Party. Certainly an accommodation could be arranged with the ultra-Orthodox community, whose members were silent throughout the Oslo Accords and became invisible during the Gush Katif withdrawal. On the table could be the incorporation of Bnei Brak into the greater Tel Aviv concept, and of cour
se, appropriate funds could be dangled for additional yeshivot.
For those who still had a nostalgic feeling for Jerusalem and areas such as Hebron, Rachel’s Tomb and other spiritual sites, visits could be arranged to the newly established amusement park known as ‘Mini Israel,’ where one could gaze and think back to the good ole days when sacred Jewish values were the guiding principles of the day.
It will be much easier to present to the world, a secular liberal, cultural, westernized Tel Aviv rather than the spiritual, religious, traditional Jerusalem. We will have common ground and share the same interests with the Europeans and North Americans. We will not have to resort to looking for historical references or bringing forth the Bible as our defence for our yearning for Jerusalem and the return to Zion.
No, it will be the clearest, most articulate possible motto, “A Greater Tel Aviv Forever,” although one obstacle does hinder this absolute truth and that is the question of the Tel Aviv suburb of Jaffa. Perhaps, in order not to upset the Europeans, the Islamist dictatorships and all those who seek to appease tyranny, a disengagement could be undertaken from Bat Yam Holon, Ashkelon and Ashdod, which will enable Jaffa to be linked directly to Gaza. Thus we would avoid any criticism from the world. However, should that operation be undertaken, the slogan would have to be changed to “Tel Aviv Forever” and “the greater” would, of course, have to be removed.
While the public relations firms work on presenting this new slogan, it would be wise, at the same time, to dust off the old proposal for a Jewish Uganda.
May the Almighty have mercy on his people.
One can only hope that we awaken from our slumber before today’s delusions become tomorrow’s realities.
Index | Letters to the Editor | Main Page | Op Ed | Photos
Send Letters To The Editor:
editor@jewishtribune.ca
This site hosted by:
vex.net
