This
is the third entry in the series Letters of Understanding. In an
e-mail-based dialogue, sponsored by IslamOnline.net’s Muslim
Affairs section, American student David Mauldin and Palestinian
student Tasneem Shaer discuss Hamas's victory in the Palestinian
elections and the challenges that the new government faces.
What
do you think of this dialogue? Which argument do you support?
E-mail us your feedback and comments: mideast@islamonline.net
*
February 12, 2006
Dear
David,
Thank
you for your e-mail, and I hope we both get to say and ask
whatever we have in mind freely in this dialogue.
I
would like to start with the point you raised regarding
Hamas’s weapons and its disarmament. Why is it that Hamas and
other parties in Palestine should put down their weapons while
Israel is left free to have as much weapons as it wants and use
them however it likes without being told to stop? It is very
strange, really. The world wants the Palestinians to sit down
and watch Israeli tanks and bombers exterminate them and destroy
their homeland without moving a muscle.
And
something else: How can any country be considered an
independent state without having an army to defend itself?
Although the world doesn’t consider Hamas's militia to
constitute a Palestinian army or part of it, every Palestinian,
I believe, is a soldier — because we all share the chance of
being attacked — and Hamas's fighters are Palestinians.
By not negotiating with Hamas, the United States is being far
from promoting democracy. |
|
You
also raised the point of we, Palestinians, being regarded in the
United States as "terrorists." I think that any
sensible person can see that, during the past months, the only
side that abided by the truce, reached by the Palestinians and
the Israelis, was the Palestinian side, including Hamas, while
Israel appeared to be the terrorist by continuing with its
assassinations and attacks almost every day. So Hamas doesn’t
go around killing any Israeli it finds, but at the same time it
has the right to defend every Palestinian when attacked for no
reason other than being a Palestinian hated by Israel.
Moving to the US role in promoting democracy in the region, I
think that, by not negotiating with Hamas, the United States is
being far from promoting what it calls democracy. If it is
always talking about democracy, then why won't it negotiate with
the people who came to power through democratic elections?
Palestinians
now see Hamas as the new ruler of Palestine and, if any country
wants to negotiate with Palestine, then it should negotiate with
whom the Palestinians chose to represent them. But I believe
that the position America chose to take when Russia invited the
representatives of Hamas to hold talks with the Russian
goverment was a kind of a new beginning. I mean that
we are used to hearing the White House reject what it doesn’t
approve of, but it just kept silent when asked about its opinion
on the Russian invitation to Hamas. So I believe that America
will eventually negotiate with Hamas's leaders.
Hamas's leaders have made it clear that they are willing to make
strong relationships with the international community and that
their aim is to help the Palestinians stand on their feet and
move towards establishing a developed country that has health
care, education, trade, and a strong economy; none of them said
that they are willing to cut ties with the world and only care
about fighting Israel. So they are ready to meet all the
leaders of the world if the latters are willing to.
If
America doesn’t want to negotiate with or support Hamas, be
it; we can see that everyday a new leader comes out on
television and says he welcomes Hamas's leaders to his country.
So,
to me, I don’t feel that America is being a real supporter of
democracy in Palestine. Nor is it helping the Palestinians build
an independent state that is free from conflict with Israel.
I
am ready to hear more from you on this issue.
Tasneem
*****
February
14, 2006
Dear
Tasneem,
I
agree with basically everything you said in your last e-mail. If
anyone reading this is expecting to hear another American defend
his country’s actions in the Middle East as holy and solely
for the good of peace and democracy, allow me to say that I
cannot provide that. I wrote another response but concluded that
it would be better not to send it because it would not create
dialogue. Those who were anti-US would probably feel
self-satisfaction in their views, which would lead to pride and
would never allow them to see the other view, and those who were
pro-US would just get enraged, call me a naïve liberal, and
shut their minds even tighter. Neither of those results promotes
understanding.
I
don’t think that just because other countries start to talk
with Hamas the United States will automatically jump in. As
foolish as such action often is, my country does not seem to
have a problem standing alone. And even though Russia has
invited Hamas to Moscow , this does not necessarily mean that US
silence should be interpreted as a new view of Hamas. You may be
right, of course, and I do hope this is the case; however, I
urge caution on this point since other forces are currently at
work. I think the United States is worried about Putin’s
tightening grasp around his political power and, with the recent
British spy scandal, relations are delicate to the point that
raising the issue of the Hamas's invitation could be seen as
unhelpful to the situation. Or for another take, it has been
argued that Russia's invitation of Hamas for talks is good for
the United States, since another fear is that of Hamas going to
Iran for support; so Russia ’s invitation can be seen as a
counter-option to that of Iran if Hamas needs to look elsewhere
for support. And what comes next suggests that Hamas might have
to do just that.
The paranoia out of which US decisions are made is in
control.
|
|
The
near future for Hamas is not bright at all. I was reflecting on
this upcoming struggle when The New York Times refreshed
their home page and the first article on the page was titled “U.S.
and Israelis Are Said to Talk of Hamas Ouster.”
I stared at the title and felt sadness because it so far appears
that the United States is not going to even give Hamas a chance.
The paranoia out of which US decisions are made is in control.
The sources of the information were Israeli and Western
diplomats who said that the plan was to starve the Palestinian
Authority of money so that new elections would have to be
called. The choice for the Palestinians would be either to fully
enter the Third World or redo the elections in a way more
pleasing to the United States.
Around
$50 million that should be given back to the Palestinians will
be withheld by Israel, as will some or all of the economic aid
given by the United States and the European Union once Hamas
takes power — to name but a few planned tactics to undermine
the election. This would come to a deficit of about $100 million
a month and, as the article explains, “the potential for an
economic crisis is real.”
To
all those who believe that black and white no longer exists,
allow me to say that this vile action on the part of the United
States proves that there is evil in the world — dark,
greedy evil with a foul stench that is wholly wrong and contains
no good. For at the same time the United States claims to be
fighting to spread freedom and democracy in the Middle
East, particularly Iraq, my government is working to force out
of power a democratically elected government in
Palestine. It is ultimate hypocrisy although it changes nothing
— I am truly sorry, Tasneem.
I
think that while the future is not bright, enough hope remains
to keep working. The three demands placed on Hamas are to
recognize Israel, forswear violence, and accept previous UN and
Western agreements. Now, I think the most important demand here,
the one closest to the heart of the United States, is that Hamas
recognize Israel. Treaties can be hammered out later, I believe
it can be accepted that all sides have the right to defend
themselves, but what the United States will never accept is
Hamas’s official goal of destroying Israel.
What the United States
will never accept is Hamas’s official goal of destroying
Israel.
|
|
Hamas
needs to abandon its desire to get rid of Israel. I understand
that recently, to their credit, Hamas officials have laid off
such rhetoric, but as long as Hamas's officials do not come out
and say “We recognize Israel,” I honestly do not think Hamas
has much of a chance of ever gaining support from the West. I
think that if the group does fully accept Israel, the United
States will be more lenient than it is now concerning Hamas’s
weapons and armed wing, and much less heavy-handed in
negotiations.
One
thing The New York Times article also said was that the
United States wanted to bring back a Palestinian authority
dominated by the Fatah Movement. Yet, doesn’t Fatah have an
armed wing as well, and haven’t some members of its armed wing
performed suicide operations just as Hamas has? I don’t know
if the reason behind that is that Fatah has a different view of
Israel than Hamas's, but I do believe this provides more of a
reason for Hamas to work on accepting Israel rather than fight
to keep its weapons and right to defense. The weapons are
negotiable, the existence of Israel is not.
I
have some questions. Do the Palestinians and the Arab and Muslim
world understand this paranoia that grips the United States? Do
they recognize that it is there and do they understand that most
US foreign policy is influenced by its existence? What is your
stance on Hamas accepting Israel as a state? Could you tell me
about Fatah’s view concerning the existence of Israel ?
I
look forward to your response,
David
