Palestinian Elections

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Like I was saying, there is a de facto recognition of Isreal (accepting negotiations) even though there is no official recognition.

[Sandman]

It's difficult to see Hamas launching a wave of suicide bombers on the back of being elected on an anti-corruption platform, although I suppose it's not impossible.

If a right-wing Israeli government is elected, there's not much hope. Back to the same old 'war'.

[Arrian]

Blah.

Hamas supporters raised their flag over the Palestinian parliament and rushed into the building amid clashes with Fatah loyalists a day after winning parliamentary elections.

The two camps threw stones at each other, breaking windows in the building, as Fatah supporters briefly tried to lower the green Hamas banners. The crowd of about 3,000 Hamas backers cheered and whistled as activists on the roof of the parliament raised the Hamas banner again.

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
actually reports are we're coordinating our position with the Euros.

And how long will that last? Europe has always been more receptive to the Palestinians and their cause.

Hell, we made a mistake by pushing for the conditions that made Hamas win. It'd be another mistake to say "screw you guys, we're going home". It may be nice to say maybe they'll fight a bit more and then realize what needs to be done, but the US kind of has a VERY big interest in having things be civil in Palestine. There is that whole Iraq thing that could be affected.

[Arrian]

Article about the election from Slate:

You Asked for Democracy
What Hamas' election victory means for the peace process.
By Shmuel Rosner
Posted Thursday, Jan. 26, 2006, at 1:08 PM ET

The scheduled London meeting of the United States-European Union-United Nations-Russia quartet next Monday—and a telephone conversation involving its principal members later today—will provide the first glimpse of how the world will respond to the challenge the Palestinians chose to present to the world. "We will have to see what approach the different representatives take in the meeting," an Israeli official told me. The working assumption is that there will be "minimalists," who continue to reject a dialogue with Hamas but in practice validate most of the organization's representatives, and "maximalists," who demand broader and more binding definitions that will place some of the Palestinian Cabinet ministers beyond the pale. Still, everyone understands that there must be some communication between the United States and the Palestinian Authority.

Palestinians weren't happy "with the status quo," President Bush said this morning, trying to put a positive spin on Hamas' success in yesterday's parliamentary election. Islamist, anti-West, anti-Israel, anti-United States, terror-promoting Hamas was the victorious party in the election, defeating Fatah, the ruling secular party of Yasser Arafat and his successor, Mahmoud Abbas. Sen. Joseph Biden, the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, gave me a similar explanation in a telephone conversation yesterday from Ramallah. "My impression," he said, just a few hours after the polls closed, "is that those who are voting for Hamas [are doing so] because of the corruption and inefficiency of the PA and not as a vote against the peace process." Nevertheless, the senator advised Abbas not to invite Hamas into the government, as "their representatives, unlike their voters," are interested in an agenda that "will not be productive." Of course, that advice is no longer relevant since Hamas won the elections so handily.

Bush presented the election as a successful process, and to some extent he is right. He talked about "the power of democracy" and said that he liked a good "competition of ideas." But the usual problem arises over the definition of "success." Bush succeeded phenomenally in getting the Palestinian Authority to conduct a lively and nonviolent election campaign with high voter turnout. But where will that success lead? The Israeli establishment has always been suspicious of all this talk about the "democratization" of the Middle East and chose to pursue a more "realistic" approach: Let them have their stable dictator so we can have our reliable partner. That's why Israel didn't push for regime change in Syria. That's why it was worried about Hamas' participation in the election—which Israel originally opposed vehemently but had to agree to when the United States made it clear that it would not interfere with the "internal politics" of the Palestinians.

Visiting Washington a couple of months ago, Abbas convinced President Bush that bringing Hamas into the political process would enable him to moderate them. He also said that after the election he is going to ask parliament to enact new legislation outlawing militias and enforcing his "one law, one gun" policy. It's very hard to see him doing so now, with the "many guns" party in the majority.

With Hamas democratically elected into power, a peace process leading to the formation of a Palestinian state is no longer a viable option—unless the organization completely changes its ways. Speaking this morning about the future Palestinian state, Bush seemed to emphasize the word "vision"—meaning something we can look forward to—more forcefully then he has in the past. For right now, though, we can expect Israel to consider further unilateral steps, encouraged by a U.S. administration that has no other options left.

And as for Israeli politics, the new Kadima Party, formed by Ariel Sharon and now headed by his successor Ehud Olmert, indirectly benefited from yesterday's vote. Benjamin Netanyahu, the right-wing leader of the Likud Party, started to attack Olmert even before the Palestinian results were publicized, claiming that Hamas' success was the result of the Israeli disengagement from Gaza. Netanyahu will probably win some votes with this argument, but it's hard to project a Likud victory over a party that preaches unilateralism. Olmert will have the upper hand since he can say: We told you there was no partner for peace; we told you that now is not the right time for a negotiated settlement; we told you we need to decide for ourselves what to do—so let's keep at it. The world will have to encourage him and give him all the help he needs. The only alternative is war.

-Arrian

[Az]

You have to be high on something to think that this will actually help Kadima.

[Arrian]

That's the part I didn't really follow, yeah. Seems like wishful thinking...

-Arrian

[Pekka]

So what.. Hamas is officially I guess very peaceful, but de facto violent.


I'm glad to see ... united front, very united front against this problematic and difficult issue.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Az
You have to be high on something to think that this will actually help Kadima.

It doesnt help Peretz. If Kadima picks up more votes from Labour, and doesnt lose that many to Bibi......

Though from what I hear Peretz is making unilateralist noises too.

In general it raises the importance of the security issue.

What exactly is Bibi's answer, other than blaming the Gaza withdrawl and talking about Hamastan?

IF the west, including the Euros, stand firm, that makes Israel less isolated - maybe makes Likud paranoia less salient?

[lord of the mark]

JP:


"Kadima MK Haim Ramon said Thursday that he failed to understand the consternation that Hamas' seeming victory in the Palestinian Authority parliamentary elections caused among right-wing politicians in Israel.

Ramon told Israel Radio that right-wing politicians had said "over and over" that "Abbas was the same as Hamas," and had called the PA leader "even worse" because he and his Fatah party "hid their true intentions." "

[Agathon]

This is funny. Hamas is basically the equal and opposite of Likud.

Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel: Likud is basically committed to the effective destruction of Palestine.

Likud uses the weapons of the strong (tanks, etc): Hamas uses the weapon of the weak (terrorism).

Yet our media continue to broadcast that Hamas' stance on the destruction of Israel somehow puts them in a different class than twits like Netanyahu, who was just on CNN.

Good for the Palestinians for voting for the government they want.

[Az]

It doesnt help Peretz.

I didn't say it does, and currently, it surely doesn't. It is possible to turn this around.

The reaction, lotm, isn't a simple move to the left, or to the right, since the difference between Peretz and Bibi is seriously miniscule. What you could have is fallout over the incompetence of the current government in dealing with the situation on both the strategic and diplomatic fronts. The votes could go all over the place - to Labor, the Likud, and the far right. Right now, Kadima is somewhat pinned down. They never saw it coming. and as the government, they should have.

[Arrian]

Hamas is basically the equal and opposite of Likud.

Seek help.

-Arrian

[Az]

Good for the Palestinians for voting for the government they want.

@the rest of it.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Az

It doesnt help Peretz.

I didn't say it does, and currently, it surely doesn't. It is possible to turn this around.

The reaction, lotm, isn't a simple move to the left, or to the right, since the difference between Peretz and Bibi is seriously miniscule. What you could have is fallout over the incompetence of the current government in dealing with the situation on both the strategic and diplomatic fronts. The votes could go all over the place - to Labor, the Likud, and the far right. Right now, Kadima is somewhat pinned down. They never saw it coming. and as the government, they should have.

I dont think anyone else saw it coming, either. The US didnt see it coming, Israeli Intell didnt see it coming - from what i can gather HAMAS didnt see it coming. And I dont know how they could have stopped it. Maybe propped up Bargouti, but what would Bibi have said about that?

I dont deny that voters will initially blame the govt. But at some point they have to ask what the best policy really is.