Fatah-Hamas Reconciliation

[Bismillah]

That's probably a bad idea...I don't see Hamas turning over a new leaf. At least not for a long time.

The fact that they were one of the few groups to approach Abbas to negotiate peace and quintessence control of foreign policy to Fatah is pretty indicative in itself of a completely different mindset.

 

[kai]

The fact that they were one of the few groups to approach Abbas to negotiate peace and quintessence control of foreign policy to Fatah is pretty indicative in itself of a completely different mindset.

The situation in Syria is worrying to Hamas and i believe so is the "people power" being flexed in the middle east. neither side can bring statehood but joining together and toning down the war rhetoric may bring about Abbas's attempt at a virtual statehood by attempting to get the UN to recognize a Palestinian state.

This at least would be something to say "look what we have done" because is at the end of the day politics boils down to the local level and Palestinians dont want this fracture and want some forward movement.

 

[Bismillah]

Agreed.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

For the Palestinians to move forward they need to be reconciled to themselves. This agreement is part of that process and is to be welcomed.

It is perhaps not welcome to anyone who would prefer to see the Palestinians divided and at war with them selves.

In the Long term, Peace in the area depends on an integrated and prosperous Palestine.
The divide and rule principle, is a long term recipe for prolonged unrest and intermittent fighting with Israel.

 

[croak]

I read this article the other day: BBC News - Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah agree unity pact

Mr Meshaal said that the Islamist group's "only fight is with Israel" and that the dispute with Fatah was "behind us".
He said the goal was an independent Palestinian state on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip "without giving up a single inch of land".

From what I've heard folks here say, that sounds like a concession. Sure, he won't give up "a single inch of land", but it doesn't sound like he's asking for Israel's annihilation.

And apparently Netanyahu "had urged Mr Abbas to choose peace with Israel over a reconciliation with Hamas." Yeah... snow in July sounds more likely than the former these days.

 

[kai]

I read this article the other day: BBC News - Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah agree unity pact

From what I've heard folks here say, that sounds like a concession. Sure, he won't give up "a single inch of land", but it doesn't sound like he's asking for Israel's annihilation.

And apparently Netanyahu "had urged Mr Abbas to choose peace with Israel over a reconciliation with Hamas." Yeah... snow in July sounds more likely than the former these days.

when Meshaal speaks of palestine he means all of it , not just Gaza and West bank.

 

[croak]

when Meshaal speaks of palestine he means all of it , not just Gaza and West bank.

I decided to have a look at Haaretz, just to make sure.

Netanyahu: Hamas-Fatah unity pact is a victory for terrorism - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

"Our aim is to establish a free and completely sovereign Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, whose capital is Jerusalem, without any settlers and without giving up a single inch of land and without giving up on the right of return (of Palestinian refugees)," Meshaal said.

No, now he does mean only the West Bank and Gaza.


Here's something about Haniyeh:
Hamas leader in Gaza urges militant groups to keep cease-fire with Israel - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

"I call for giving the coming government a chance by maintaining the cease-fire deal," Ismail Haniyeh said in a speech, a day after Hamas and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement signed a unity pact in Cairo.

Well, what do you know? I guess some people might be surprised.

 

[Bismillah]

Hmm maintaining a cease-fire to give a chance for the negotiations? We can't support this in the name peace.

 

[kai]

Hmm maintaining a cease-fire to give a chance for the negotiations? We can't support this in the name peace.

yep lets all support the ceasefire but its early days. it looks like the rhetoric is what we all want to hear. It does indeed look like Meshaal is advocating the 1967 borders, lets see what happens.

 

[TashaN]

I decided to have a look at Haaretz, just to make sure.

Netanyahu: Hamas-Fatah unity pact is a victory for terrorism - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News


No, now he does mean only the West Bank and Gaza.


Here's something about Haniyeh:
Hamas leader in Gaza urges militant groups to keep cease-fire with Israel - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News



Well, what do you know? I guess some people might be surprised.

Well, i'm surprised!

 

[croak]

Well, i'm surprised!

When you live in the Middle East, you learn not to be.

 

[Bismillah]

A differing view-point on the reconciliation deal

Hollow 'reconciliation' in Palestine - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

I vehemently disagree with its major points.

Whether Hamas realises it or not, it has effectively entered into a coalition with Israel and Abbas to manage the Occupied Territories, in which Hamas will have much responsibility, but little power.

The article seems to be referencing the fact Abbas will lead all foreign relations. What it discounts is that Hamas still has the right to rule Gaza through its own security apparatus. This is not the long-term solution but rather the transitory status until an elected government is sworn in.


It goes on to state

Notably, there was no commitment to real reform and democratisation of the defunct PLO to re-enfranchise the majority of Palestinians, who do not live in the Occupied Territories.

Considering the rights of the Palestinians in the P.O.T, cleaning house is of much greater importance and the first step to fighting for the rights of Palestinian diaspora.

The problem is that, on the most fundamental issues behind the intra-Palestinian split, there is no evidence of any "consensus". Rather, Hamas has bowed to pressure. For many years, Hamas correctly objected to the Abbas-controlled PA's open collaboration with Israeli occupation forces in the West Bank and, until June 2007, in Gaza. This collaboration has targeted not just Hamas members, but activists and organisations which resist Israeli occupation with nonviolent means.

Again, this is a reference to the short-term nature of the agreement of Fatah leading the negotiations. Given elections and given that Hamas achieves some measure of success there will be negotiations between the two as to how to best tackle problems that have so far been left by the way-side.

Had Abbas apologised for, renounced and foresworn such activities as part of the reconciliation, then it might be understandable that Hamas would sign the deal. But nothing was mentioned about ending PA-Israeli collaboration - and there is every sign that the PA will continue with it. Indeed it has no option but to do so or risk losing the US and European financial support that props it up.

True, but I believe that is a one-sided reflection of a civil war. While Fatah imprisoned Hamas representatives in the W.B likewise Hamas did the same in Gaza. This was an agreement without any sort of preconditions imposed on apologizing, which I believe while unsavory leaves the plans towards unity in the best light.

What this means, in effect, is that Hamas has agreed to join a Palestinian Authority which is actively engaged in a war against Hamas in conjunction with Israel - and that both Hamas and Fatah have decided to maintain division as a policy, but to rename it "unity", merely for public consumption.

If that is true, why is Hamas allowed the right to continue to govern Gaza until elections? Israel is largely a third-party hardly involved in the mechanations of the interim government.

Yet to choose different means, a movement has to have a viable political strategy and a clear definition of its ends. Hamas has failed to articulate, or to rally the Palestinian people around either. Instead its strategy appears to be simply to sign on to the inherently unjust, and infeasible "two-state solution" - and hope for admission to "the peace process".

While the two-state process may be a sham, an end to the civil war is a must if ANY plan of action is put to use. As it stands right now, division has only caused more problems for Palestinians. The stronger Palestine is internally the more assertive it can be, no longer will Israel be able to use the terrorism or security card. Compounded with the possibility of state recognition Israel will be put under increasing pressure for sponsoring the colonisation of Arab land.


He then states that instead of this deal, Palestinians should absolve themselves of these leaders and instead ally themselves with the BDS.



First of all, these elections do just that. They bring forward a new set of leaders, I believe Abbas has had enough of it already with his constant threats of a one state solution.



Secondly there is no reason why an elected government cannot support the BDS.



All in all, a nationalistic attempt to retain Hamas' pride and possible authority at the sake of Palestinians. Stupid I think.