Five Questions for an Israeli-Palestinian Future

[ProgressiveMuslim]

(snip)

4. How can you build a viable state by negotiating only with the weakened representative of one Palestinian faction?

Even if the obstacles outlined above were to miraculously disappear, George Mitchell's work could be badly crippled by an outdated American strategy of dealing only with Fateh and its leader, Mahmoud Abbas. Long backed by Americans as a Palestinian "moderate," in the wake of the recent Israeli offensive in Gaza Abbas has lost virtually all credibility among his people. (As of January 9th, he also technically ceased being the Palestinian president.)

Despite the death and destruction of these last weeks, Hamas is increasingly seen by observers in the region as gaining strength in the West Bank, while firmly holding power in Gaza. "The Islamist movement is going to come out of this war strengthened politically vis-à-vis its rival Palestinian factions, including Fateh, and the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah," wrote the shrewd political analyst and former Palestinian labor secretary Ghassan Khatib in a commentary for bitterlemons, a website run by Israeli and Palestinian analysts. He added, "The Israeli war on Gaza, which increased public sympathy with Hamas… further shifted the balance of power against Fateh in the West Bank and left the Palestinian Authority politically very vulnerable."

Indeed, some West Bankers, who hold no brief for Hamas, are echoing the words that many Lebanese said of Hezbollah in the wake of the 2006 war in Lebanon: "They put up a resistance for 22 days -- Fateh leadership did and said nothing," the Palestinian-American journalist Lubna Takruri wrote me from Ramallah this week. "People in the West Bank are still smoldering that while they were watching all these worldwide protests here, Fateh forces were preventing the Palestinians from protesting against the Israelis at checkpoints. This was huge. It made people feel like the PA was doing Israel's work for them, while Israel handled business in Gaza."

Early signs strongly indicate that the Obama team will continue the strategy of propping up Abbas, with credibility-destroying "help" from the CIA, while refusing to deal with Hamas until it recognizes Israel. Clearly the Hamas charter is despicable: It describes the Jews as aspiring to "rule the world," and declares that the elimination of Israel would be a historic parallel to the defeat of the Crusaders by Saladin.

American and Israeli officials have, however, ignored more subtle signals from Hamas -- which was, after all, brought to power in free and fair elections -- that it would abide by the expressed will of the Palestinian people for coexistence with Israel. One of the strongest signals was the 2006 "Prisoners' Document," initiated by leaders of Hamas and the imprisoned former Fateh leader Marwan Barghouti, that called for negotiations with Israel in pursuit of peace. The Bush administration, siding with the Israelis, who insisted that there was "no partner for peace," chose to ignore such signs and so undermined any efforts toward a Fateh-Hamas unity government.

read on for the other questions...

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175026/sandy_tolan_five_questions_for_georg

Sandy Tolan is the author of The Lemon Tree: An Arab, A Jew, and the Heart of the Middle East, and associate professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California.

[cali]

1. this is a really good article that details why the 2 state solution

is a dim prospect. A couple of things however: The author misrepresents the Hamas charter- that's minor, but she also speaks of the one state solution as a possibility when it's even more unlikely and seeded with more obstacles than the 2 state solution.

[pelsar]

2. i think he forgot question 6

what would it take for the Palestinians to elect a leader who can not just control its own violent factions but demand that the foreign influences that are egging them on "to continue the struggle, no matter what, be stopped.

[cali]

3. honestly, I think that comes after Israel does something concrete

about the settlements that demonstrates good faith.

[pelsar]

4. it will never be enough......to be "their turn"

that whole "good faith" concept was destroyed with gaza........before gaza your statement held a lot of a water and i agreed 1000%. Someone had to make that first move, not just a small step but a large one, and it was israel that did it.....and i dont think there could have been a better one that pulling out of gaza....it was as concrete as it gets, nothing fuzzy about it.

(btw before the gaza pullout your words were written a billion times.....finally israel actually followed through)

it wasnt perfect, there was no ribbon cutting, no farewell speeches,borders controlled etc. but then nothing is ever going to be perfect for everyone......still israel actually destroyed the settlements as per the agreement with the PA and left,...the Palestinians for the first time in their history had a real chance at self rule.....borders were clear, rules were set....and a solid future of promise was there....

shooting rockets was probably the most incredible stupidest thing they could think of to do......and then hamas took over......at this point there is no leadership that can actually point the Palestinians in a single direction and have them move there....