Press Room

Must Read News

Politics & Policies: US Must Engage Hamas

By Claude Salhani
UPI
Posted on Monday January 23, 2006

WASHINGTON – They say you fight fire with fire, so why not fight revolution with a revolutionary idea?

The Islamic Resistance Movement, better known by its Arabic acronym Hamas, is set to come out ahead in this week’s parliamentary elections in the West Bank and Gaza. Pre-election polls conducted by the Palestine Center for Public Opinion give Hamas 35 percent of the vote, and Fatah, the backbone of Mahmoud Abbas’ Palestinian Authority, 42 percent. Seven percent remain undecided with the remaining 16 percent divided between five other lists.

Assuming this poll is representative of the final outcome, it places Fatah slightly ahead, and with a bit of arm-twisting here and there Abbas, who is also known as Abu Mazen, could garner enough of the independent votes to claim the majority and form a government.

Then again, it may not turn out this way at all, and Hamas could come out ahead. In either case, the Islamic Movement comes out as a new reality that needs to be taken into consideration. Sidelining Hamas, pretending they don’t exist, will be a return to the ostrich game, that of hiding one’s head in the sand.

But what these elections tell us is that nearly half of the 1.3 million eligible voters in the Palestinian territories favor Hamas over Fatah. Why is that? Barring some exceptions, the vast majority of Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza never tended to be overly religious. In fact, since the early days of the Palestinian resistance, most groups (again, with the exception of Fatah) tended to lean more towards the left.

Groups such as George Habash’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Nayef Hawatmeh’s Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Ahmad Gibril’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command had adopted Marxist-Leninist ideas.

In one of the first interviews I had with an official from Hamas about five years ago, the official admitted that he believed Hamas would never win the majority in the Palestinian Authority.

“I am very realistic about the situation,” admitted Usama Hamdan, during several hours of conversation in Beirut. “I know that the Palestinians are not all going to turn suddenly religious. The most we can hope for is to win about 40 percent of the vote, and have our say in running the government.”

And at a later meeting, he added: “The best we can ever hope for is to win enough votes in the Palestinian parliament, allowing us to have a minister or two in the government so that we can have our say in the way things are run, particularly in matters of importance to us,” said Hamdan.

“In short, we want to become in the Palestinian government what the Orthodox Jews are in the Israeli government,” Hamdan said.

This new victory at the polls for Hamas will upset the established order (and I use the term ‘order’ very loosely in this case.) However, how can the United States, which is calling for democratic reforms in the Middle East, refuse to recognize the legitimate call from the people in a free and fair election?

Unfortunately, democracy is not a chose by numbers game. You take it all, plusses and negatives, in one pill.

So the worst outcome for Israel and the United States becomes a reality: Hamas enters the government and is on its way to metamorphose itself from a guerrilla movement into a political party. Once in government they will unavoidably start to change. They will feel the responsibility of governance, and, just as importantly, they can be held accountable for future terror attacks in Israel. In fact, give the Security portfolio to a Hamas minister and hold him responsible, and watch how things change.

But Israel, too, says it will not negotiate with Hamas because they are terrorists sworn to the destruction of Israel. Time to open a parenthesis for the sake of history. The region is filled with deals and handshakes made between former terrorists and those who once wished to hang them.

Menahem Begin, one of Israel’s most noted prime ministers, negotiated with Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and President Jimmy Carter the return of the Sinai peninsula to Egyptian rule. Both Sadat and Begin shared a Nobel Peace Prize for their peacemaking efforts at Camp David in Maryland, talks that resulted in a peace deal between the two countries. Yet Begin began his political career as a member of the Irgun Zvai Leumi, an outlawed Jewish underground unit. The Irgun was considered a terrorist organization by the British in Palestine. Had Begin been arrested by the Brits at the time, he would have been hanged.

Yet Begin, who had participated in terrorist attacks, most notably one against the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, became a statesman and knew how to make that difficult transition from underground guerrilla leader to a respected national leader.

Yasser Arafat, who until recently was the unchallenged head of the Palestine Liberation Organization, found it harder to make that transition. Although in practice he was the elected president of the PA, in essence he remained the eternal Fedayeen. Abu Mazen, on the other hand, has the natural instincts of a political leader. He seems to have no nostalgia for the “old days,” except that his Fatah party is riddled with corruption and bureaucracy.

If Hamas, invigorated by its electoral victory, can learn to make the same transition from militancy (read acts of terrorism) to joining the political process in helping rebuild the PA, it should be encouraged and engaged in dialogue by both the United states and Israel.

In a last ditch effort to give Fatah (the PA) a better chance in Wednesday’s elections, the Bush administration has funneled some $2 million through USAID projects to buy Abu Mazen’s Fatah party some credibility among all the corruption the party has become synonymous with. Ironically, while Hamas remains on Israel’s and the United States’ terror lists, they are the ones who have instituted more health clinics, schools and other social services in the absence of any real state infrastructure.

While last minute efforts by Washington to prop up Fatah are seen by Washington as a viable way to counter Hamas’ popularity, once again, it will be seen by the people concerned as Washington, once again, backing the wrong people—those who are known to be corrupt.

Instead of falling back into the old cycle of refusing to negotiate with this or that party, why can’t the U.S. administration show that it is thinking outside the box, preempt the situation and invite Hamas to the table?

Israel will object at first, but for its own security having Hamas sitting across a negotiating table—no matter now much disdain the Israelis may have in being forced to negotiate with a member of Hamas—it remains far better than having Hamas on the other side of the barrier/wall/fence plotting the next attack.

After all, it was not too long ago that U.S. diplomats were banned from talking to the PLO. Think how many precious years were wasted then? Here is the opportunity not to repeat the mistakes of the past.

Following their electoral victory Hamas should also demonstrate it has matured by renouncing violence and encouraging dialogue.