A differing view-point on the reconciliation deal
Hollow 'reconciliation' in Palestine - Opinion - Al Jazeera English
I vehemently disagree with its major points.
Article said:
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
Article said:
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.
Article said:
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.
article said:
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.