The Times has run an Op-Ed today discounting the new peace talks by Ali Abunimah. What a great journalistic moment. We will make no progress toward peace in Israel/Palestine until the right that was demolished in the leadup to Partition– the right of self-determination of peoples–is respected. This is what Arab leaders repeatedly said to our State Department, we want to be consulted. I know enough about Palestinian attitudes to know that Abunimah speaks for many Palestinians. These voices must be included in the discussion, or we will see 62 more years of unrest.
Asked what role Hamas would have in the renewed talks, Mr. Mitchell answered with one word: “None.” No serious analyst believes that peace can be made between Palestinians and Israelis without Hamas on board, any more than could have been the case in Northern Ireland without Sinn Fein and the I.R.A.
The United States insists that Hamas meet strict preconditions before it can take part in negotiations: recognize Israel, renounce violence and abide by agreements previously signed between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, of which Hamas is not a member. These demands are unworkable. Why should Hamas or any Palestinian accept Israel’s political demands, like recognition, when Israel refuses to recognize basic Palestinian demands like the right of return for refugees?
As for violence, Hamas has inflicted a fraction of the harm on Israeli civilians that Israel inflicts on Palestinian civilians. If violence disqualifies Hamas, surely much greater violence should disqualify the Israelis?
It was only by breaking with one-sided demands that Mr. Mitchell was able to help bring peace to Northern Ireland.
