campaignspressjoinchaptersstore
The Nakba, Palestinians, and Organizations Working on Palestinian Issues
Gaza Downloadable Posters
Gaza Action and Information Center
Watch video of the JVP National Conference
Important new book on Jews and Palestinians: Broken Promises, Broken Dreams
JVP In-Depth: After Lebanon
Downloadable posters
Listen to audio of Gaza Invasion Briefing
Watch JVP videos
Israeli Palestinian Conflict 101
Booklist
Untitled Document
JVP Newsletters
Jewish Peace News
Hot Topics
JVP News Roundup June 29


Email this article
 Printer friendly page

Here is your weekly JVP news roundup for June 29, 2007. Click on the highlighted links for news articles that expand on the summary here.
In addition to the articles linked below, you might be interested in checking out the recent article in Middle East Report on the "Israel Lobby." Click here for the article by Mitchell Plitnick and Chris Toensing.

JVP News Roundup, June 29, 2007

Hamas' establishment of their exclusive rule in Gaza has caused ripples that are echoing throughout the region. It's clearly a major development in the ongoing horror/tragedy story that is the Israel-Arab conflict. In some ways, it has also turned back the clock and brought old and generally useless ideas back to the fore.

In The Washington Post, Robert Malley and Aaron Miller argued that the US-Israeli strategy of cutting off Gaza under Hamas from the world while strengthening Fatah in the West Bank was a doomed strategy. Indeed, anyone remotely familiar with the politics of the region would see that clearly, and this is another indication that the Bush Administration does not have such people at their disposal.

The UN recently raised, albeit indirectly, the question of what is actually being left to Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah in the West Bank. This map shows the areas that are devoted to settlements and bypass roads and other areas of the West Bank that are cut off from Palestinians. Many are arguing that such an intricate network of Israeli control and development has already rendered the two-state solution moot. The split of Gaza and the West Bank would, in that line of thinking, be the clincher. For those of us who believe that the point of no return has not yet been reached, it is undeniable that it is coming and that every day that Israeli presence is allowed to remain and expand brings it nearer still.

Sectors of the Israeli right are certainly thinking about reviving the idea of Jordan taking control of the Palestinian cantons on the West Bank. The Jordanians are surely worried about this, as was reported in the Arabic-language al-Hayat (no link available) on June 26: "The Jordanian official said that the US Administration and Israel must give the Palestinians their rights in the Palestinian territories and not in Jordan. Jordanian officials warn that the Kingdom could go to war to halt plans to adjoin the West Bank to Jordan... For the Hashemite rule, the mere acceptance of the principle of confederation means linkage with a people-without-land, which the officials here consider to be 'certain political suicide.'"

As in 1967, when Israel and the US both failed to properly analyze the ramifications of events that seemed to give them a big advantage but led to deeper problems in the future, the current strategy seems to give Israel the chance to divide the Palestinians and work only with their favored group. But that group has lost its legitimacy among the Palestinian population. And, while Hamas also has lost much of its popular strength because of the Gaza takeover, among other things, the need still exists to engage all of Palestinian society.

The point that is being missed here is that, with Fatah and Hamas both having been proved to be failures in many eyes, the Palestinians living under crippling economic conditions are not going to turn to more moderate voices, but to more violent ones. The view of Fatah was well summarized by retired General Shlomo Gazit, once the head of Israeli military intelligence and the first military coordinator of the Occupied Territories in Ma'ariv this week, as quoted by the Israel Policy Forum: "The current Israeli policy (toward Fatah) is a failure... The Palestinian population of the West Bank and Gaza Strip will not support Fatah; a movement that has passed its prime. It will certainly not support a leadership that has the backing of Israel and the United States. This is surely the time for Olmert and Israel to reevaluate the situation."

While Fatah members, in the wake of the defeat in Gaza, not openly rebelling against Mahmoud Abbas and the old guard, the public refusal to disarm by the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade demonstrates the limits of his authority even within his own party. The al-Aqsa Martyrs have always been beyond the control of the Fatah leadership (a point that was frequently misrepresented in the Western and Israeli press while Yasir Arafat was alive), but they are still Fatah, and their refusal and more importantly, the impotence of the Fatah leadership in the face of that refusal speaks volumes about the amount of authority anyone in Palestine has.

Though both contain flawed and somewhat objectionable points,this article by Alistair Crooke and this one from the Asia Times offer insight into why communication with Hamas is a better option. Danny Rubinstein, Ha'aretz's long-time reporter on Arab and Palestinian affairs points out that: "All the efforts to crush Hamas without undertaking a dramatic step such as pushing for an accord along the lines of the Arab Peace Initiative will be meaningless. The political reality and the living conditions in the Palestinian territories since September 2000 have prepared the ground for a Hamas victory, and without offering a genuine alternative, Hamas will not be defeated - and may even to continue succeed."

Put simply, if Israel continues to deny Hamas, it gives every opportunity for al-Qaeda and similar groups to find the purchase in the Occupied Territories that they have not had to date. Indeed, it is the opposition of nationalist Islamist groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad to al-Qaeda that has prevented this from happening. We have seen the effects in Lebanon already. This is not mere theorizing, it is something that is already budding and threatens to escalate the conflict and cause the deaths of more people on both sides. 

The alternative is dealing with the Palestinians as a whole in a genuine way, something which is absent in both its parts right now. As Dror Etkes of Shalom Achshav (Peace Now) in Israel points out, "The unreasonable gap between the declarations of Israeli politicians in the past decade and a half since Oslo and the acts of those same politicians...is the gap that continues and will continue to feed and escalate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." Even the recent attempts to "bolster" Abbas were not matched in deeds, as an Israeli raid in Nablus was a slap in the face to the ruling Fatah party, and was called such by its leadership.

Even beyond that threat, the status quo is nothing less than a pressure cooker leading to war. Both Syria and Hezbollah are girding for the possibility of conflict and such preparations often turn into self-fulfilling prophecies.

Hamas has been forced into a much closer alliance with Iran, now that Arab sources of support have thinned. While Hamas is too much of a Palestinian nationalist organization to be as tightly linked to Iran as Hezbollah is, the Iranian factor cannot be ignored as part of the Tehran government's bid to widen its influence throughout the region. The so-called "moderate" Arab states, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the Gulf Monarchies are increasingly finding themselves trapped between Israel, Iran, and the fast-growing Islamist movement.

Hope is not in great supply. The appointment this week of Tony Blair as the Quartet's special envoy for Middle East peace shows only that the US, which pushed hard for this in the face of opposition from Russia mostly, but also the UN, still does not recognize the need to convince the Arab world that there is some hope for change. Blair, widely seen as heavily inclined toward Israel and bearing a great responsibility for the destruction of Iraq, does nothing to enhance Arab hopes for the immediate future.

It adds up to looking more and more likely that the best we can hope for in the short term is for the region to simply survive the Bush Administration and hope that Americans can come together to pressure the next administration to behave differently.

 


       

More articles of interest

Olmert should forget about Saudi meeting - Egypt

More beards, less talk about politics: Gazans adjusting to Hamas rule in many subtle ways

ISRAEL-OPT: Some 600 villagers face prospect of new displacement

Lebanon army kills three Palestinians near refugee camp

Israel watchdog calls to lift West Bank roadblocks

 

       

The latest on the blogs

       

Muzzlewatch
         

Finkelstein/Larudee: Chicago Tribune rejects ad, DePaul charged with violating own standards

Democractic National Committee "urged to sack Jimmy Carter"

Stunning moment at screening of Jolie film about Daniel Pearl

     


     

The Third Way

UN Sec. General Makes a Statement for Fairness

The Fall of Gaza: Can Disaster Be Avoided?

A Dearth of Leadership:        The International Community Must Get Involved

     

"Never Again" Means          For Everyone

     

Resolutions in Conflict    and Conflict Resolutions

Stuart Eizenstadt: Rationality That Still Misses the Point




Top of Page