|
bitterlemons-international.org
Middle East Roundtable /
Edition 35
An Israeli View:
Recognizing Hamas is irresponsible
by Yossi Beilin
The Oslo agreement was signed in 1993 on the basis of a mutual agreement
that political negotiations would replace the use of force. An exchange of
letters between Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin ensured mutual recognition
between the two sides in accordance with this agreement. Negotiations over
two years then led to an interim agreement, signed on September 28, 1995,
that enabled elections to be held for the Palestinian Legislative Council.
There was concern at the time lest parties not obligated by the Oslo
principles would seek to participate in the elections. The principal worry
was Hamas. In order to ensure that such parties do not participate in
elections and do not abuse the democratic process, it was determined that
"The nomination of any candidates, parties or coalitions will be refused,
and such nomination or registration will be canceled, if such candidates,
parties or coalitions (1) commit or advocate racism, or (2) pursue the
implementation of their aims by unlawful non-democratic means."
There can be no doubt that participation by Hamas in elections held in the
Palestinian Authority in January 2006 is a gross violation of the
Israeli-Palestinian interim agreement. Hamas is a movement that has, through
its covenant, raised the banner of incitement to hate and kill Jews. That
this military organization, appearing as a political party, is allowed to
abuse democracy is a prize for terror and violence.
In a world seeking to combat terrorism and still looking for the right way
to do it, it would be surprising indeed if Israel, paradoxically, were to
acquiesce in the legitimization of a terrorist organization under its very
nose, while the world encouraged it to do so and even encouraged and held
secret contacts with that organization. The unilateral withdrawal from Gaza
genuinely strengthened Hamas; now its integration into the Palestinian
political system would crown it as the most important Palestinian
organization.
The leadership of the Palestinian Authority is not integrating Hamas
enthusiastically, but out of necessity. Now, with the end of the intifada,
the PA is weakened, much of its infrastructure destroyed, and it is unable
to act forthrightly against Hamas. Since PM Ariel Sharon demands that the PA
fight terror while withholding the means to do so, Palestinian President
Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) has been impelled to reach a ceasefire with Hamas.
In return for Hamas' agreement to a ceasefire, Abu Mazen has agreed that the
organization can participate in the PA's political system by means of
elections.
Instead of assisting the PA to fight Hamas, as it did in 1996, and instead
of insisting on invoking the relevant provision of the interim agreement in
order to prevent Hamas' participation in elections, the government of Israel
remained silent for many months. It was only a few days ago that Sharon
finally declared he would "not assist" the holding of elections in the PA if
Hamas participated. For Sharon, invoking the Oslo agreements is apparently
so abhorrent that he avoided the simplest and shortest way of preventing
Hamas from participating in elections.
Israel is paying a heavy price for this policy. By now it is too late to
declare that we will not recognize the Palestinian bodies chosen in January
because Hamas is participating in the elections: the ceasefire depends on
this participation, and we have no interest in canceling it. Now that
Israel's silence has facilitated the legitimization of Hamas in Europe and
the United States, we apparently cannot admit our mistake. Hamas' entrance
into PA institutions is liable to cast a veto on future peace moves, without
eliminating the option of violence. I certainly hope and pray that the
situation we have gotten ourselves into under the direction of Sharon and
Shimon Peres is simply a case of folly rather than a premeditated step
intended to prove that there is "no one to talk to".
For long years we conditioned the PLO's entry into negotiations with Israel
on the demands for an end to terrorism and acceptance of UNSCR 242.
Ultimately these conditions were adopted. Awarding legitimacy to Hamas
unconditionally, while that organization continues to embrace its lunatic
covenant, is an irresponsible act on our part. There is a debate as to
whether Sharon has turned to the left or adheres to his old ways. Indirect
recognition of Hamas is not part of a turn to the left; rather, it
faithfully maintains a policy whose primary characteristics are
superficiality, instinctive responses, and shooting from the hip.-
Published 26/9/2005 (c) bitterlemons.org
Yossi Beilin is chair of the Meretz-Yahad Party.
Bitterlemons-international.org is an internet
forum for an array of world perspectives on the Middle East and its
specific concerns. It aspires to engender greater understanding about
the Middle East region and open a new common space for world thinkers
and political leaders to present their viewpoints and initiatives on the
region. Editors Ghassan Khatib and Yossi Alpher can be reached at
ghassan@bitterlemons-international.org
and
yossi@bitterlemons-international.org, respectively.
hagalil.com 28-09-2005 |
