UPDATED ON:
Friday, January 23, 2009
02:59 Mecca time, 23:59 GMT
News Middle East
Gaza conflict 'remains unsettled'
Crooke warns that conflict in the region could grow "more bitter and more
uncompromising"
Hamas and Israel are observing separate ceasefires after a 22-day Israeli
assault on the Gaza Strip.
Alastair Crooke, founder of the Conflicts Forum think-tank,
shares his thoughts on the conflict, the region and what Obama might
bring to the mix.
Al Jazeera: Can Israel be said to have achieved its aims through its offensive
on Gaza?
As time goes on, it will become more and more clear that Israel has
not achieved the aims that it set for itself. The intended aim - that
by an overwhelming show of force it would make people both docile and
deterred - has not been achieved.
The core of the conflict itself – the rockets and the issue of the
opening of the crossings [into Gaza] – remains completely unsettled.
And Israel has not defeated Hamas in a military sense, despite massive
destruction of property and people's lives.
Inside Israel, there was enormous support for this operation. It
wasn't the same with the Jewish community outside Israel, where we have
seen very clear differences of opinion about it, but in Israel there
was a strong sense of the righteousness of what was being done in Gaza.
There was a desire to see Hamas emerge defeated and humbled, and
there is some sense among the public that this is what has been
achieved, but, I think, as they observe the anger and they see how much
the recent Israeli successes in the Arab world – handshakes and
meetings and attempts to widen their support base and their legitimacy
within the region - have been swept away, I think they will re-assess
it in a very different light.
Was Israel likely to defeat Hamas militarily?
I think you could see different voices emerging in Israel. Many of
them would have said it was impossible because Hamas is not a Western
military structure. It doesn't really have command centres and military
formations in the conventional sense.
Equally, there were others who were arguing very strongly to take
this forward to a "complete victory", and that envisaged going
house-to-house through places like Gaza City and Rafah, clearing every
house room by room.
That is laborious and it would have taken far longer than a week or
two. I think, in the end, the cabinet declined to go down that route -
probably realising it wouldn't be able to inflict this kind of damage
on Hamas's military formations - which is probably why they decided to
withdraw and claim a political victory.
Qatar and Syria have called for Arab states to take a firm
stance on Israel over the conflict and suspend the 2002 Arab peace
initiative, while Saudi Arabia and Egypt want to take a softer line.
How has the Gaza conflict changed relations in the region?
I think relations have become extremely polarised by this conflict.
Egypt has, to some extent, used this conflict, certainly seen it, as
a means to weaken Hamas and bring Mahmoud Abbas [the Palestinian
president, also known as Abu Mazen] back to a position in Gaza. At
least two Arab states have been seen, whether fairly or unfairly, as
taking a contrary view [to Egypt].
We've also seen many states and countries supporting the resistance – not just
Hamas.
If you like, it has reignited the Palestinian issue as an Arab cause
across the region - which it hasn't been for some time. Hence the
division we are seeing in the Arab world.
How will this affect regional relationships in the future?
Hamas is asking to be engaged in the political process [AFP]
We're moving into a new era in the region. What we see is that the
United States and Europe are ebbing out of the region and there is
going to be no colonial power that is going to step in. Russia and
China may play a role in a trade sense, but they are not stepping in to
play a political role.
What is being revealed by Gaza is the skeleton of the internal
struggle over the future of this region – of those who are committed to
the status quo and those who are committed to change. And it is a
struggle that may become more bitter and more uncompromising as time
goes on.
Khaled Meshaal, the Hamas political leader, has called for
Hamas to be engaged in the political process. Do you see the West
engaging with Hamas in the future?
Well I don't think there is a conference room in Washington with a
chair 'Hamas' written on it. I think it will be a slow process.
Clearly all of the Europeans are operating on the old mode - they
haven't pressed the re-set button on their policies. They are perhaps
waiting to see which way the [new] US administration will go.
They're trying to re-launch Abu Mazen, almost holding reconstruction
and humanitarian assistance as hostage, almost trying to force Hamas to
re-mandate Abu Mazen [whose term of office expired on January 9]. Not
surprisingly, Hamas has expressed great anger at that.
If the Europeans try to hold the opening of the crossings hostage to
Hamas re-legitimising Abu Mazen, I fear we might end up with another
round of conflict in Gaza.
Meshaal also said that Hamas 'gained legitimacy' as a result
of the conflict. With ceasefires in place, how has Hamas emerged in a
stronger position subsequent to the conflict?
Yes it is. It's stronger because of this.
You can look at it through a Western empirical frame and say 'there
have been so many houses destroyed and so many people killed, so it
must be a victory', but if you look at it in terms of a narrative of
images and symbols - particularly coming against the backdrop of Ashura
[the Islamic festival commemorating the events of the battle of
Karbala] - it is the image of a small Muslim stand against overwhelming
odds pursued in the interests of justice. That's an image which will
bring out huge emotional and religious sentiment - a sense of
re-establishing dignity.
I think what we're seeing is a strengthening in two ways.
Symbolically Hamas sat in the Palestinian chair at the informal summit
in Doha [held on January 16 and boycotted by Egypt and Saudi Arabia].
Secondly, they have achieved enormous depth in terms of public
opinion. Millions have mobilised – in Europe too – in support of the
concept of resistance against occupation. These things may seem a
little intangible but they are nonetheless real assets.
To what extent do you think Barack Obama's presidency will affect the peace
process and developments in the Middle East?
It's still quite early, but I think generally we will see Obama
being quite cautious. From his perspective, at the top of his list is
going to be Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran.
There will be advisers who will be saying to him, 'just be careful of your
political capital'.
The Israeli-Palestinian issue is one where you can expend your
political capital very quickly and there are elections in Israel coming
up. I think he'll be cautious and things will take some time.
Obama looks set to appoint Senator George Mitchell, a man
you've worked with in the past, to be the US special envoy for the
Middle East. How would his appointment advance the peace process?
I think Senator Mitchell is one of the few Americans who has
credibility in the region and in the West. He's probably now almost the
only one, which is a reflection of the scorched-earth diplomacy of the
past eight years.
What's important is to see who he is a special envoy for. Only when
we see the confirmation of his appointment will it be clear if he is a
presidential envoy or if he is a super-envoy or a delimited envoy - in
other words, whether he will stay within certain limits.
He does depend on what is the mandate that is given to him. He's a
good listener and he actually hears. He will change the language and he
will introduce changes, but unless he has a mandate, he can do nothing.
You also have to ask if he is being appointed too late. One of the
signals that can be seen in Gaza - where there was almost a suspension
of certain moral considerations in terms of civilians - is the
suggestion that we are not entering an era of politics and compromise.
Gaza was a message of uncompromising military absolutism, not of
openness.
Source: Al Jazeera
---------------
Jusfiq Hadjar gelar Sutan Maradjo Lelo
Allah yang disembah orang Islam tipikal dan yang digambarkan oleh al-Mushaf itu
dungu, buas, kejam, keji, ganas, zalim lagi biadab hanyalah Allah fiktif.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : [email protected]
List owner : [email protected]
Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
