Should Israel punish Hamas?
Rejecting dialogue out of electoral considerations in Israel may increase desperation and violence among Palestinians and leave both peoples with no hope for peace and security.
Tel Aviv (AsiaNews) The new Palestinian parliament was sworn it on Saturday, February 18, with the radical Islamic party Hamas holding an absolute majority of seats. A new speaker was elected from its ranks and all seems set for President Mahmoud Abbas to appoint another Hamas representative as Prime Minister, probably Ismail Haniya.
Although President Abbas's own party, Al-Fatah, remains in the minority in the new Parliament, Abbas himself remains chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organisation and the representative of the Palestinians on the international scene, andif and when peace negotiations do take placevis-à-vis Israel.
In spite of the time that has lapsed since the Palestinian elections (25 January), Israel's government still seems uncertain and undecided as to how to respond to the new situation. It has announced that it would not negotiate with the new government of the Palestinian Authority, which does not in any way change the situation from before the Palestinian elections. Then, too, Israel consistently declined to accept President Abbas' repeated invitations to negotiate a peace treaty.
As some Palestinian spokesmenand Israeli opposition figuresput it: The Palestinian institutions were not considered a "partner" either before or after the elections. Indeed, the Israeli government stands very firm in denouncing Hamas as a terrorist organisation, pledging that it would not have any contacts with the new Palestinian government, and demanding that the same policy be followed by all other nations.
Israel has already announced, for example, that it will no longer transfer to the Palestinian Authority taxes and customs dues that it routinely collects on its behalf, and that it expects other nations tooespecially in Europeto end financial support to the Palestinian Authority.
Israeli government spokespersons speak of "punishing" the Palestinians for their vote in favour of Hamas. One prominent adviser to the Prime Minister has said that the Palestinians will have to be subjected to an involuntary "diet", one however that will stop short of actually starving them to death. Yet precisely how much "dieting" can the Palestinians be forced to endure?
Essentially, the Palestinian Authority acts as an "agent" for Israel in taking care of the needs of the Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories, for which Israel, as the occupying power, is responsible. To a large extent, therefore, the donations made to the Palestinian Authority, by the Europeans and others, help lift the financial burden from Israel itself, which would have to make up for any shortfall in funding services to the population.
The "punishment" contemplated by Israel would therefore have to be limited to the Palestinian Authority as an organisation, and not include the population as a whole. Israel cannot allow a situation in which there will be no money for schools, hospitals, and all other services to the civilian population. But does Israel really want to create a situation in which the Palestinian Authority is unable to pay the salaries of the tens of thousands of Palestinian police officers and soldiers? Is it really in Israel's interest to have these large numbers of armed and bitter men grow ever more bitter and angry and desperate and prone to violence and even terrorism? And if it were possible to bring about in this way the actual "collapse" of the Palestinian Authority (as some Israeli officials have been proposing), is this in Israel's interest? Such a "collapse" would force the Israeli army to take up once more the direct management of every facet of life in the Occupied Territories, and devote enormous financial resources and manpower to do so. It would have to deal with tens of thousands of unemployed police and army personnel in the previously autonomous areas and their families.
So far it appears that Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his government are very wary of such scenarios and will not push their "punishment" of the Palestinians to such extremes. But they do feel under very great pressure to take, and especially, to be seen to take, measures of "punishment".
The pressure comes from Israel's heated election campaign in which the nationalist right wing parties, Likud and the National Union, are accusing the government of having allowed the Hamas takeover of the Palestinian Authority, letting the Palestinians hold elections in the first place, and then letting Hamas take part in those elections.
All things considered, one can therefore expect a series of Israeli measures that will make life even harder for the Palestinians, but stopping far short from causing the "collapse" of the Palestinian Authority or denying essential services to the population.
The question then is what is the point of such a policy? It will not eliminate the "terrorist Authority" (which is how Mr. Olmert reputedly characterised the Palestinian Authority at the cabinet meeting last Sunday), but it will instead increase the desperation, bitterness and hostility against Israel among the Palestinians, and perhaps push more extremist elements to resort to violence and terrorism.
Amidst all the worry and confusion, there are, however, still those in Israel, in Palestine and elsewhere who hope that leaders on all sides will see that the only answer is precisely peace, a renewed, vigorous peace initiative, which could take the form of an international peace conference, perhaps a reconvening of the 1991 Madrid Conference.
It is very hard to see, in the present circumstances, any other way to break the cycle of hostility, and give hope of freedom and security to the two peoples in the Holy Land.
.png)
