So, what drives this....
Well, The Palestinian Authority's move at the U.N. is popular with the Palestinian Polity. Fatah has gone from being seen negatively to having huge positive ratings. According to the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion in a poll out Sept. 6, 2011, Fatah polls at:
(57.3%) said "very good", (21.9%) "somewhat good", (9.4%) "somehow not good", (5.9%) "not good at all" and (5. 5 %) said "I don’t know".
While Hamas polls at:
(17.4%) said "very good", (42.0%) "somewhat good", (15.9%) "somehow not good", (14.9%) "not good at all" and (9.9%) said "I don’t know".
As for the popularity of the Palestinian move at the U.N. support this with 35.4% saying they should do it unilaterally (as they are now doing) and 59.3% support returning to the negotiating table first and then going to the U.N. However, in an interesting twist 53% of the Palestinian Polity stands firmly against any effort by P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas to step back from the U.N. bid in September. Certainly, confusing data in the sense that while most Palestinians polled want this not to be a unilateral move now that it is in motion they seemingly don't want it to stop.
Having failed at efforts for a "unity government" it seems that Hamas is going the "rejectionist" route and looking for an abrogation to the Oslo Accords.
For information sake:
The Oslo Accords, which are officially called the "Declaration of Principles," were negotiated in secret and signed in Washington on September 13, 1993. They call for a complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and Palestinian rule in both regions for a transitional period not exceeding five years, leading to a permanent solution.
Haaretz reports Hamas saying: "it was time for the Palestinians to "work to overthrow" the agreements, and called for "establishing a new era of national unity, building up a unified Palestinian front and a wise, unified and powerful leadership to face all the upcoming challenges."
The driving motivation here seems to be that Hamas is staking out a position on the Far Right (along with Palestinian Islamic Jihad) so it can maintain it's power base and "rejectionist credentials", after all, the money from Syria and Iran has to go to someone. In fact, Hamas reinforced its relationship with Syria as is reported in Maan News:
GAZA CITY (Ma'an) -- Hamas confirmed on Monday that it would not be moving its headquarters from Syria following unrest in the country, a party statement said.
“We confirm that the news reports on some media outlets claiming that the movement considers moving its offices or part of its leadership from Damascus, upon request from Syrian security, are false and not real at all,” the statement said.
One then should ask is the impetus for the overthrow of Oslo simply part of Hamas' overall hatred for Israel and their desire for conflict on the order of "Cast Lead", (a conflict they were crushed in militarily but were successful in propagandizing) or is it a product of internal Palestinian politics and the overall issue of influence not only within said polity but from backers in Teheran and Damascus?
In this authors opinion it is a function of both but I would say more towards the latter than the former. Hamas has always been committed to the end of Israel and to the genocide of the Jewish People in the long run (even though they make noise of a hudna in the short term), but this and their earlier distancing themselves from the Palestinian Authority's bid at the U.N. comes more from a battle for the "hearts and minds" of the Palestinian Polity. Not just for themselves but from the folks that bankroll them in Damascus and Teheran.
It will be interesting to see the rise of Turkish influence in the region and how that affects the Iranian push for regional hegemony. Right now despite efforts of Iran to win over the developing Egyptian polity, the Turks seem to have a stronger foothold. As that develops, the question is whether Hamas will become increasingly radicalized and take a stronger line against the U.S., Israel (which they see as an extension of U.S. colonial power) and the P.A. (who they claim is an extension of Israeli polity) to better serve their paymasters and counterbalance the Turks. Needless to say, it seems that with the confirmation of a continuing alliance with Syria, Hamas is rejecting all forms of moderation in favor of a radicalized agenda of perpetual war against foes both foreign and internal.
All I need to know about Hamas is what it says in their charter, specifically blaming Jews for the World Wars, imperialism and claiming that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are true. Pretty much every historically deadly antisemitic meme can be found in that piece of filth.
ReplyDeleteI firmly believe Hamas is driven, first and foremost, by its desire to destroy Israel and create an Islamic state coextensive with the boundaries of the former mandate. Their problem lies not only in internal Palestinian politics, but in the fact that it is unknown how long the Baathists can cling to power in Damascus and how long the ayatollahs can cling to power in Tehran.
Yes and no... I think that Hamas is driven by it's desire for power within the Palestinian Polity. I think everything else including destoying Israel is secondary.
ReplyDeleteBut the more I think on it, the more I think that they are willing tools of Iranian Hegemony in the region. Think on it this way, they are bankrolled by the Mullahs but they are not a Shi'a group. Do you really think the Mullahs will allow a Sunni group to rule over Jerusalem?
No the Iranians see Hamas as a way to destabilize the region and are using to them to maintain friction between the Israel/the U.S. and the Palestinian polity.
They are driven by the desire to achieve power. That is a given. Otherwise, they would not exist. However, they have no desire to achieve power in the context of a two-state solution. Their ultimate goal is the eventual destruction of the State of Israel and shattering any, and all, Jewish connection to our ancestral homeland. That is Hamas' end game.
ReplyDeleteAs for who the Iranians would allow to rule over Yerushalayim, I think they would much rather have their proxy Hamas than the proxy of Saudi Arabia or some other country. I think they are keenly aware that the likelihood of a Shia group ruling in any Palestinian state is somewhat below zero. Therefore, they are best suited by having a proxy that shares a general sense of purpose. Hamas suits this quite well.
Possibly... I just think they are more focused on themselves than they are on Jews/Israel.
ReplyDeleteYou are right when you say they don't want a Two State solution. That is a given.
I think we might be saying the same thing but phrasing it differently!
As for the Iranians... I don't know. People betting on what Mad Dog (Ahamdenijhad) will do next don't tend to make a ton of money.
There's a power struggle going on in Iran between Ahmedinejad and the Ayatollahs, particularly since he is going to have leave office in a few years and the Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Khameini) is the one who is really in charge. And, on top of that, there's no guarantee that the ayatollahs remain in charge either given what we saw a few years back when the election was clearly rigged. With what's happened against the other dictators, and how the Shah fell in the first place, there's no guarantee that another rigged election won't lead to that happening in Iran.
ReplyDeleteThat in itself is very interesting. The conflict between the Ayatollahs and Ahamdinejhad is fascinating. Very well said....
ReplyDeleteYou guys should be proud.
ReplyDeleteIt took me months before I got my first troll.
We, Karma, are apparently Chosen.
ReplyDeleteSo.... divide that by five seconds.....
ReplyDeleteBasically, with 80% of Jordan's population Palestianian, they already have a State. I don't know why it's up to Israel only and there is no pressure on Jordan to accommadate some. It's is all a ploy to destroy Israel.
ReplyDeleteWell Silver, I am not sure I totally agree with that.
ReplyDeleteJordan is Jordan (and at peace with Israel) - let's take that out of the equation.
The West Bank is mostly Palestinian and that is the issue. The fact of the matter is that unless one is willing to ethnically cleanse the Territories then it is an Israeli issue. I have come around to the P.O.V. of seeing nothing wrong with former PM Olmerts final offer. It keeps the major blocs, develops a security zone and ends the issue of Right of Return.
Former heads of the IDF, Shin Bet, and Mossad agree with it. I don't think you can argue with them as to what is in Israel's best security interests.
But here is my other disagreement with you Silver... If the drive for independence was to destroy Israel, Hamas would be in with it front and Center. YET.. they oppose it whole heartedly.
Just Sayin'
JS -
ReplyDeleteAny commentary on the sentencing in Orange County?
Yes Anon... I think it is ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteI really don't think this should have gotten to this point and have said so many times. It was an internal University issue and should have been handled as such.