Great editorial in today’s New York Times asking the obvious question: If Benjamin Netanyahu can cut a deal with Hamas of the magnitude he did to win the release of Gilad Shalit, why can’t he pursue a more comprehensive deal with Palestinian moderates such as Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad over the West Bank? Money quote:
One has to ask: If Mr. Netanyahu can negotiate with Hamas — which shoots rockets at Israel, refuses to recognize Israel’s existence and, on Tuesday, vowed to take even more hostages — why won’t he negotiate seriously with the Palestinian Authority, which Israel relies on to help keep the peace in the West Bank?
The answer, of course, is that the Israeli right has always found it preferable to deal with Hamas than Fatah because the former are less of a threat to the Iron Wall/Greater Israel project.
Israel looked the other way, perhaps even encouraged the rise of Hamas, during the first Intifada as a counterweight to the PLO. Sharon’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2004 was, in the words of his advisor Dov Weisglass in Ha’aretz, designed to put the peace process in “formaldehyde” and take the pressure off of the settlements in the West Bank.
“And when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda. And all this with authority and permission. All with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress.”
And now, this deal with Hamas after Netanyahu’s sustained campaign against Abbas’ bid for United Nations recognition of the State of Palestine.
Bottom-line: The Israeli right would rather have Greater Israel and war than a two state solution and peace. Netanyahu’s deal is fully consistent with that historical pattern.
Israel is running out of time to play off Hamas against Fatah. The world is sick of the charade. It’s pointless and the neighbours are getting uppity. Israel can’t run a deception based on bad faith indefinitely.
Israel has succeeded militarily/politically by a divide and conquer strategy, dancing between perceived threats.
Netanyahu regards the political threat as more compelling for a while, and instead has endeavored to divide Hamas from Fatah.
If they sincerely do not seek partisan advantage over the other, and instead focus on their unity, and pursue an agenda non-violently but coherently, they will eventually succeed.
There will be no divide and conquer strategy that works.
The dissing of Abbas by self-appointed and very vain political partisans, is a disaster for Palestine. Whereas, he gathered and controlled the momentum of history until the more militant efforts of the flotilla, then BDS accompanied by single-state agitation, it took away that control of history, dismissed it.
Replacing a proposal with the prospect of anarchy (in the ruckus, chaotic sense, not in the mutual aid sense).
Israel would rather have war than a 2SS (or 1SS) peace? But it would really rather have neither, and the tickles it sometimes gets from Gaza are not “war”, not even close. No war and no peace means continuing siege and apartheid. THAT is what USA and Israel love.
The NYT editorial was mostly fatuous. Netanyahu isn’t interested in a two state solution that Palestinians could accept, so it is silly to ask Abbas to sit down with him when the US government acts as Israel’s lawyer and won’t exert any pressure on Israel to be reasonable. If the NYT wrote about that then we’d be getting somewhere.
And they wrote the usual Israelo-centric crap. They feel joy for the Israelis–obviously Palestinian feelings mean nothing. They feel concern for the Israelis worried about Palestinian violence–again, no concern at all for Palestinians worried about Israeli violence. They don’t care whether any of the Palestinian prisoners should have been in prison. They don’t care whether any Israelis should be in prison. But that’s our “liberal” press at work.
Netanyahu cut a deal with Hamas, because Hamas had something he wanted. Abbas has nothing Netanyahu wants.