The
spectacular Hamas victory in the Palestinian parliamentary
elections of January 25 has given rise to a new era of politics
in Palestine and the Middle East as a whole.
The
implications of Hamas’s sweeping win in Jerusalem, the West
Bank, and Gaza cannot be limited to the geopolitical boundaries
of the Occupied Territories. Indeed, it goes beyond to include a
region trapped in an outdated political process, neither
meaningful, nor equitable.
But
in the eyes of the West, the Middle East in not the Ukraine, and
its popular revolutions — even through the ballot box — are
by no means a cause for celebration. To the contrary,
Hamas’s democratic triumph will most likely conflict with the
West’s grand plans for the Middle East and might in fact
torpedo the once touted US Middle East democracy project.
I
have argued for years that the US push for democracy was
intended mostly for an American audience, disillusioned with
their government’s utter failure in inducing any serious
change in the Middle East’s political map, as they were once
promised. The military setbacks in Iraq — which are fated to
culminate into decisive military defeat and eventual withdrawal
— have driven President Bush to seek alternative
“achievements” that can be attributed to his supposedly
foresighted policies.
To
back up rhetoric, some action, even if symbolic, was needed.
This well explains the exaggerated enthusiasm displayed by the
Bush administration — and its pundits in the media — over
the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon and the Egyptian and Iraqi
elections. In all of these events, the outcome seemed indicative
of a seemingly true popular and democratic process, one that is,
nevertheless, harmless enough to ensure that US interests and
policies in the region would be safely guarded as ever.
As
the prospect of Hamas’s victory loomed, double-dealing
and intimidation quickly replaced the rosy US promises
about democracy. |
|
Then
comes Hamas’s decision to take part in the second ever
Palestinian parliamentary elections. As the prospect of
Hamas’s strong showing, or even victory, loomed, the Bush
administration seemed little interested in ensuring that the
rules of a real democracy be preserved. Double-dealing,
intimidation, and outright threats quickly replaced the rosy
promises once passionately delivered. News reports spoke of
last-minute US funding geared toward boosting the ratings of
Hamas’s formidable contender, Fatah, among Palestinians, who
were obviously fed up with the Israeli occupation, the US
dishonest role as a “peacemaker,” and the indefensible
corruption of the Palestinian Authority.
Palestinian
voters made their choice, decidedly choosing Hamas, whose social
services and corruption-free history placed its performance at
the polls above and beyond all expectations.
All
eyes were on Washington as the election results came out.
European Union members were careful not to validate the victory
of a “terrorist” group and the Arab front was suspiciously
silent. Worried not to fundamentally expose her government’s
democracy farce, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, among
other US officials, attempted to articulate a response that both
approves of Palestinian democracy and objects to its outcome.
An
international campaign — led by Washington, and Rice in
particular — was promptly devised to counterbalance one of the
most democratic elections ever experienced in the Arab world,
resorting to arm twisting over aid and out-and-out political
blackmail. One has to only consider UN reports of the extreme
poverty and alarming rate of malnourished children in the
Occupied Territories to appreciate how appalling the threats of
the Bush administration and its Western allies are.
The
tirelessly uttered argument by Washington and almost every
European capital is that no donor money should flow to a
government led by a group that doesn’t acknowledge Israel’s
existence and is “dedicated to Israel’s destruction.”
To
Washington, the burden is on the Palestinians to
legitimize the same entity that has illegitimately
expropriated their land. |
|
But
how can a nation unconditionally recognize its own occupier, who
adamantly refuses to honor scores of United Nations resolutions
and deems international law neither binding nor relevant?
Wouldn’t it be odd for a Hamas-led government to declare its
commitment to peace while, on the same day, top Israeli
officials declare that elected Palestinian ministers are not
immune to assassination?
Of
course any reasonable American or European assessment of Hamas
as a maturing political and social movement would realize a
pragmatic trend that can hardly be matched by Israel itself.
Hamas’s commitment to the ceasefire, for example, for nearly a
year has been exemplary by any definition, if compared with
Israel’s daily violations. Even while Palestinian ballots were
being counted, Israeli troops shot dead a nine-year-old girl,
Eya Al-Astal, in Gaza for no apparent reason.
From
Washington’s point of view, the burden is still on the
Palestinians — to legitimize the same entity that has
illegitimately expropriated their land — despite the
remarkable strides they have made under the most extreme
circumstances.
While
many Palestinians still oppose some of Hamas’s past methods
— the reprehensible targeting of Israeli civilians — many
still see the movement as the antithesis to the ills of the Oslo
Accord and its dreadful stagnation and countless failures.
However, it’s rather remarkable that years of collective
punishment and the persisting language of threats and
intimidation simultaneously pouring from Tel Aviv and Washington
were to no avail, as Palestinians voted for reforms and for a
political platform that is based on national unity, not
exclusion.
Moreover,
though the Hamas victory will possibly mark the end of the US
Middle East democracy project charade, it should strongly
enhance the chances of regionally fostered democratic
initiatives, ones that reflect the peoples’ own needs and
interests, not those of the beleaguered Bush administration.
Despite
the uncertainty that the future still carries, the many tricks
of coercion and pressure that Israel and the US will likely
pull, the hypocritical EU stance, and the terrible political
inertness and indecision of the Arabs, one can only hope that
true democracy will deliver what empty rhetoric has not — not
only in Palestine, but throughout the region.
