In the Mideast, a Giant Step Back 

Editorial, The New York Times, January 26, 2006

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/opinion/27fri1.html?_r=1&th&emc=th


For 20 years Ariel Sharon and other Israeli hard-liners have claimed 
that they had no negotiating partner interested in or capable of 
securing peace between Israelis and Palestinians. That always seemed 
a debatable point, until now.

There are many reasons to explain why Palestinians voted to hand 
over their government to Hamas, an organization that revels in 
terrorism and is sworn to destroy Israel. The inability of President 
Mahmoud Abbas's party, Fatah, to run its affairs is first on the 
list, if pre-election polls of Palestinians were accurate. Fatah has 
been corrupt and inept, and it represented the status quo, not a 
happy position given the lawlessness in Gaza, the unemployment rate 
in Nablus and the despair among young people in Jericho. Mr. Abbas 
didn't help matters much, proving weak and incapable of imposing 
control over the battered Palestinian Authority. 

Israeli hard-liners can blame themselves as well. Even though most 
reasonable people have recognized Mr. Abbas as a far more pragmatic 
negotiating partner than Yasir Arafat was, Prime Minister Sharon 
failed to give Mr. Abbas any concession that he could point to as an 
achievement. Instead, Israel has busied itself with carrying out Mr. 
Sharon's doctrine of unilateral separation from the Palestinians, a 
doctrine that is sure to gain more favor now that the Palestinians 
have chosen Hamas.

But all of this is peripheral to two central facts. Hamas grew out 
of a terrorist organization that has undermined every small step 
toward peace with mass murder. And on Wednesday, Palestinians voted 
almost two to one to put Hamas in charge of running their 
government. For there to be any hope of getting out of the impasse 
in the Middle East, one of those two things must change.

It would be nice to believe that Hamas, now that it is assuming the 
reins of power and the burden of actually having to govern, will 
renounce its call for the destruction of a sovereign state, disarm 
its private army, get into the business of making life better for 
Palestinians and try to negotiate the creation of a real Palestinian 
state. While we're not hopeful, we are reminded that the Palestine 
Liberation Organization of the late Mr. Arafat, of which Mr. Abbas 
was once second in command, was born in terrorism. For many years 
Mr. Arafat and his gunmen were hunted by Israel, much as Hamas has 
been in recent years. 

President Bush was absolutely right when he urged Mr. Abbas to 
remain in office as a sign of stability and set Secretary of State 
Condoleezza Rice the task of seeing whether the shards of the peace 
process could be reassembled. But he was also absolutely right when 
he said, "A political party that articulates the destruction of 
Israel as part of its platform is a party with which we will not 
deal." 

Hamas has a choice between governing and terror. Is the party more 
interested in making sure that the electricity and water stay on, 
that Palestinian boys and girls make it to school, and that these 
battered people finally get a state of their own? Or is it more 
interested in continuing its campaign to destroy Israel? If Hamas 
chooses the latter, it's more than likely that it will not be around 
for long, and rightly so.









--
This is ZESTGlobal. Post articles on international affairs to 
[email protected]

If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTGlobal by sending a blank 
mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/join/ 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/

<*> 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/
 


Reply via email to