[Marxism] Important NY Times article

[David McDonald <dbmcdonald@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The articles is:

January 22, 2009
On Palestinian Question, Tough Choices for Obama
By STEVEN ERLANGER

JERUSALEM — With the rule of Hamas in Gaza apparently unchallenged and 
its popularity growing in the West Bank, the new Obama administration 
faces an immediate policy choice: support a Palestinian unity 
government, as Egypt and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, want, 
or continue to isolate Hamas and concentrate on building up the West 
Bank as a political alternative to radical Islam.

The issue is urgent because of the international effort to rebuild a 
bombed-out Gaza while trying to avoid letting Hamas take credit for the 
reconstruction, as Hezbollah did in southern Lebanon after the 2006 war. 
But the choice is more fundamental. It goes to the heart of what 
President Obama can accomplish in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process 
when the Palestinian side remains violently divided against itself.

In a series of calls to Middle Eastern leaders on Wednesday, President 
Obama did not tip his hand, simply calling for a role for the 
Palestinian Authority in Gaza’s reconstruction.

But many Middle East experts are eager to hear whether the Obama 
administration will try to create a credible, unified Palestinian 
government that could negotiate and enforce a state-to-state 
relationship with Israel, the essence of the so-called two-state 
solution that has dominated peace negotiations.

“This is a moment of very tough choices, with no dominant approach with 
obvious advantages,” said Gidi Grinstein, president of the Reut 
Institute, a policy research group in Tel Aviv. “Obama is being pushed 
to go for a Palestinian national unity government, negotiations and a 
comprehensive settlement. But it would be a mistake to push the 
two-state solution toward a moment of truth when it is in a moment of 
weakness, and when there is both a civil war and a deep constitutional 
crisis on the Palestinian side.”

Egypt, Saudi Arabia and even some in Israel favor a national unity 
government that would enable the Palestinian Authority to be seen as at 
least notionally in charge of the rebuilding in Gaza. But even if the 
antipathies between Hamas and Fatah, which controls the West Bank, could 
be overcome, a deal would almost certainly entail early elections that 
Fatah might very well lose.

The Gaza war has been bad for Fatah, and its popularity is plunging. 
Hamas is feeling victorious after surviving the Israeli pounding and is 
unlikely to allow Fatah to restore its presence, even for an election, 
in an angry Gaza.

The essential issue, and not for the first time, is whether Israel and 
the West should engage Hamas as an indisputable fact, in the hope that 
Israeli military power and political reality will trump Hamas’s 
religious conviction that Israel must be destroyed, or instead continue 
to confront and isolate Hamas, in the hope that Fatah can somehow be 
resurrected or some third force be created around Prime Minister Salam 
Fayyad, who is seen as a more capable leader.

President Nicolas Sarkozy of France is trying to get ahead of the 
argument, suggesting that France would deal with Hamas as part of a 
national unity government that rejects the use of violence. But putting 
such a government together will not be easy, and Hamas has said its 
demands will be tougher than before the war. These will include the 
release of all Hamas political prisoners held in the West Bank and the 
opening of the crossings into Gaza.

“Hamas feels it has come out unbroken and popular among Palestinians and 
Arabs,” said Khalil Shikaki, a Palestinian analyst and pollster. “French 
statements also embolden it. Hamas won’t accept a government led by 
Fayyad and would want to lead it,” a prospect, he added, that Mr. Abbas 
“would find hard to accept.” Part of the deal would be early elections 
in the next six months, he said.

Hamas no longer recognizes the authority of Mr. Abbas, also known as Abu 
Mazen, whose four-year term as president should have run out on Jan. 9, 
but which he insists has been extended under emergency procedures. Hamas 
has never recognized the legitimacy of the unelected Mr. Fayyad.

Mr. Abbas has proposed early elections for his office and the 
legislature, which Hamas won in free elections in 2006. But he also 
wants to change the electoral rules to benefit Fatah, making the 
election a straight vote for parties and removing the constituency 
voting for individual candidates that so benefited Hamas last time.

Hamas rejects the changes and elections for legislators before their 
four-year terms expire a year from now. Yet if Hamas did accept early 
elections as part of a negotiated national government or accord, it 
could win the presidency, said Zakariya al-Qaq, a political scientist at 
Al Quds University in Jerusalem, for Mr. Abbas is considered a spent force.

His months of negotiation with Israel and the United States have been 
fruitless, while he has failed to reform Fatah, which many Palestinians 
still consider to be collaborationist and corrupt. Many Palestinians 
also think he was too passive and too late in protesting the Israeli war 
in Gaza and the civilian deaths because he secretly wanted Hamas 
eradicated, Mr. Qaq said.

“Abu Mazen looked weak and had nothing to say, and Hamas comes out 
looking like the leader,” he added. “People think the man is over. It’s 
not a question now of the legality of Abu Mazen, but his legitimacy as a 
leader.”

Mark Regev, the Israeli government spokesman, said Israel believed that 
Hamas had been damaged politically in the war. “We think it’s a very low 
probability that Hamas will do well in a future Palestinian election,” 
he said. Many analysts disagree.

Yossi Alpher, the Israeli co-director of www.bitterlemons.org, a Web 
site that promotes Israeli-Palestinian dialogue online, said that if 
there were a unity government, there would probably be new elections. 
“Given Hamas’s political gains and Abu Mazen’s losses, Hamas could win 
them, and then they’d end up running not just Gaza but the West Bank, 
too, at least politically,” he said.

Mr. Obama is not the only new leader on the horizon. Israeli elections 
are scheduled for Feb. 10, and the conservative candidate, Benjamin 
Netanyahu of Likud, is expected to win. Mr. Netanyahu supported the war 
and believes that Hamas is an eternal enemy, an ally of Iran, and must 
be defeated.

Mr. Grinstein, of the policy research group in Tel Aviv, said that in 
the current confusion, it might be better for Mr. Obama not to reach for 
“unobtainable objectives,” but instead to explore an older idea: 
recognition of Palestinian sovereignty while the borders are still being 
negotiated and Israel unilaterally pulls out of more West Bank settlements.

Ziad Abu Amr, an independent legislator from Gaza close to both Fatah 
and Hamas, said he hoped that this time the international community 
would support a Palestinian unity government and open the crossings. 
Negotiation will be difficult, he said, but Hamas is a reality, and 
“maybe this is the time to engage Hamas and the other factions, since 
Hamas showed a lot of pragmatism and accepted this cease-fire.”

With Mr. Obama, he said, “this idea may be revived — it requires some 
wisdom and flexibility, and the international community should respect 
the choice of the Palestinian people.” As for Israel, he said, “we’ll 
just have to see what emerges on the other side.”

A few comments:

It is evident that the Obama administration is going to move to include 
Hamas in negotiations, and this article in the NY Times trying to get up 
to speed with reality after months (years? decades?) of parroting the 
Isreali line.

Im my opinion a significant opening is about to occur for activists in 
the United States to reach far larger sections of the populace than 
before with information about the Palestinian struggle. I will be 
working for a larger-than-before coalition effort in Seattle to reach 
out to community, religious and labor types with some sort of 
educational meeting.



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu