The Skeptic الشكاك

43 Palestinian Elections

I’ve been digesting Hamas’ victory at the polls for the past few days. I’m still digesting. Based on the few conversations I’ve had with folks here, it seems the concensus is that it’s a good thing. A Palestinian friend tells me Egyptians have been spontaneously congratulating him when they hear his accent.

It first seemed to me that Hamas were probably not the best people to capitalize on Sharon’s death. I initially worried about the repercussions with international funders, and the EU’s threats, repeated today, to cut the aid that allows the Occupied Territories to function at all if Hamas does not repudiate violence.

If Hamas takes over the internal administration of the nascent country—maintaining roads, running schools, collecting the trash—then their victory will be a good thing for the Palestinians. Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, to some extent Hamas in the Occupied Palestinian Territories: All have proved less corrupt and more effective in providing services to the people than the governments. Hamas’ refusal to recognize Israel suggests that they might leave those posts that would require dealing with the Israelis to Fatah. And Hamas is increasingly looking like a pragmatic group. They even ran Christian candidates in Bethlehem and other Christian villages in the West Bank (Granted it’s a different situation, but can you imagine Maronites running on a Hezbollah ticket?). While I’m sure they stand behind their rhetorical bluster, I can see them working quietly with the Israelis behind the scenes out of sheer expediency. The reality of the occupation is that no Palestinian government has any choice but to work with the Israelis. It’s not like you can escape Israeli presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It would be childish to pretend it’s not there.

But how long can the Palestinian leadership sustain the tensions between Abbas’ conciliatory, money-for-peace stance, and Hamas’ militant rhetoric? Can Hamas credibly renounce violence without losing its identity and its appeal? Can international donors credibly fund a group widely labeled terrorists, even were Hamas to repudiate violence? And how will their victory affect the Israeli political landscape at this crucial juncture?

One friend noted over sheesha late one night that Hamas’ victory is the one real change in the situation in a long time. He said he hoped that this is the harbringer of new times in the region: “Plainspoken Ahmadinejad in Iran, a Hamas government in Palestine…are people here finally ready to stand up and be men after decades of humiliation?”

I doubt it. This is heady cafe talk. My friend, even at this unguarded moment, hadn’t forgotten Israel’s military strength and lack of compunction about using it.

I’m reminded of Mubarak castigating a terrified young interviewer on state television at the beginning of this most recent Intifada. “You know, oh President,” the kid asked him, “Many people think we should go to war…”

“How old are you?” Mubarak snapped.

“Thirty,” the interviewer responded, turning red.

“What do you know about war?” Mubarak asked, “You were still shitting your diapers in ’73.”

The only reason anyone goes to war is that he’s too young to remember what it’s really like. Granted, that applies to most people in this neighborhood. But the rulers are old, pragmatic, and greedy. A Saudi sheikh once told me privately he wished this whole problem would go away so they could start doing business with the Israelis.

So if an Arab Great Patriotic War in the Desert isn’t a realistic option, where is this going? Will the US and the EU really cut funding? Would a less corrupt government in Palestine be able to make up the difference with community service projects? And how will western governments square their rhetoric about wanting to encourage democracy in the Middle East with their tough talk on terrorism?

I suspect Hamas looks to Hezbollah as a successful model, and, like Hezbollah, will continue to seek to enter mainstream politics. The question is whether Hamas, Israel, the US, and the EU will be able to strike a pragmatic compromise in time to avert even more suffering.
[tags]Hamas, Palestinian elections, Israel, Palestine[/tags]

3 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

1. […] For another insightful commentary see The Skeptic ??????   […]

   Pingback by tygerland » Scott Adams on the Hamas election victory — January 30, 2006 #

2. […] For another insightful commentary see The Skeptic ?????? […]

   Pingback by the gasworks » Scott Adams on the Hamas election victory — January 30, 2006 #

3. I believe seriously that the elections of Hamas was a good step forward for Palestine, for the entire region. I agree that we should not overestimate the prospects of what Hamas would actually do. But consider the terrible state of the Fatah movement, which is now, and has been for a while already, turned against eachother in the lack of leadership after the passing away of Chairman Arafat. These people are running that country to Hell. Secondly, remember that one of the strategic problems of the 2nd intifada was always the problem of (lacking) leadership. Now the Palestinians have a government that represents their struggle. That actually gives a room for a solution. For, how could the Israelis or anyone else actually negotiate with someone, as the FATAH-PA, who did not actually represent the intifada?

   Other observations available at my blog as well.
   L.

   Comment by Lars — February 1, 2006 #

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

I'm Reading: