Yes.
U.S. must support a partnership that could bring Mid-East peace.
By Jimmy Carter
This is a decisive moment. Palestine’s two major political movements — Fatah and Hamas — have signed a reconciliation agreement that will permit both to contest elections for the presidency and legislature within a year. If the U.S. and the international community support this effort, they can help Palestinian democracy and establish the basis for a unified Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza that can make a secure peace with Israel. If they remain aloof or undermine the agreement, the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory may deteriorate with new violence against Israel.
This accord should be viewed as a Palestinian contribution to the “Arab awakening,” as well as a deep wish to heal internal divisions. Both sides understand that their goal of an independent Palestinian state cannot be achieved if they remain divided.
The accord commits both sides to consensus appointments of an election commission and electoral court. I have observed three elections in the Palestinian territory, and these institutions have already run elections that international observers found to be fair, honest and free of violence.
The two parties also pledge to appoint a unity government of technocrats — i.e., neither Fatah nor Hamas. Security will be overseen by a committee set up by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), and Egypt will assist.
Why should the U.S. and the international community support the agreement? First, it respects Palestinian rights and democracy. In 2006, Hamas won the legislative election, but the “Quartet” — the U.S., the European Union, the United Nations and Russia — rejected it and withheld aid, and the unity government collapsed.
Competition between the two factions turned vicious, and each side has arrested the other’s activists. The international community should help them resolve disagreements through electoral and legislative processes.
Second, with international support, the accord could lead to a durable cease-fire. Israel and the U.S. are concerned that Hamas could use a unity government to launch attacks against Israel. I have visited the Israeli border town of Sderot and share their concern. I urged Hamas’ leaders to stop launching rockets, and they attempted to negotiate a lasting mutual cease-fire.
Third, the accord could be a vehicle to press for a final peace agreement for two states. Abu Mazen will be able to negotiate on behalf of all Palestinians. And with Quartet support, a unity government can negotiate with Israel an exchange of prisoners for the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit and a settlement freeze. In my talks with Hamas leader Khaled Meshal, he said Hamas would accept a two-state agreement that is approved in a Palestinian referendum. Such an agreement could provide mutual recognition — Israel would recognize an independent Palestinian state and Palestine would recognize Israel. In other words, an agreement will include Hamas’ recognition of Israel.
Suspicions of Hamas stem from its charter, which calls for Israel’s destruction. I find the charter repugnant. Yet it is worth remembering that Israel negotiated the Oslo Accords with the Palestine Liberation Organization while its charter had similar provisions. It took five more years before the PLO Charter was altered.
Many Israelis say that as long as the Palestinians are divided, there is no partner for peace. But at the same time, they refuse to accept a unity government. In Cairo, the Palestinians chose unity. It is a fragile unity, but the Quartet should work with them to make it secure and peaceful enough to jump-start final-status negotiations with Israel.
Jimmy Carter of Plains was the 39th president of the United States.
No.
Hamas seeks Israel’s destruction and cannot be an honest partner.
By Alan Elsner
While the civilized world celebrates the death of Osama bin Laden, the Hamas terrorists who run Gaza are plunged into mourning. Their leader Ismail Haniyeh said: “We condemn the assassination and the killing of an Arab holy warrior. We ask God to offer him mercy with the true believers and the martyrs.”
Hamas is armed by Iran and has fired 328 missiles, rockets and mortars at Israeli civilians so far this year. Its charter calls for the destruction of Israel. So it is no surprise to find that Haniyeh considered bin Laden a spiritual brother.
But his statement is embarrassing to those western diplomats who have been pushing the idea that Hamas is a suitable, even a vital, partner in Mideast peace negotiations with Israel.
What makes the statement particularly troubling is that Haniyeh signed a “reconciliation agreement” with the Palestinian Authority led by President Mahmoud Abbas last week. Abbas has been eager for this the deal because he wants to push the U.N. General Assembly to recognize a Palestinian unilateral declaration of independence without going to the trouble of negotiating a peace treaty with Israel. Before going to the U.N., Abbas needed to be able to say that he spoke for all Palestinians, not just those in the West Bank.
Abbas long ago renounced violence against Israel, and his West Bank security forces have established good cooperation with the Israeli Army. This has kept the area mostly quiet except for the occasional terrorist rampage such as the brutal slaying of an Israeli family earlier this year. The U.S. has provided training and tens of millions of dollars to raise the professional level of these Palestinian forces.
But now Abbas has taken a decisive step in the wrong direction by agreeing to a unity deal with Hamas, whose charter calls for the wanton slaying of Jews and the destruction of Israel.
President Barack Obama has allowed the peace process to languish in recent months, not putting too much of his personal prestige on the line. Understandably, he does not want to risk alienating his American Jewish or American Muslim supporters in the run-up to the 2012 election. It is understood that if re-elected, Obama would feel freer to take a more active role.
But the world can’t wait that long, and the death of bin Laden combined with Haniyeh’s statement has created a moment of rare clarity — a moment our president should seize.
He should clearly state once again that Israel should no more be expected to negotiate with Hamas than the United States should have negotiated with bin Laden. One cannot negotiate with murderous terrorists — one can only fight them until justice prevails.
Obama should go further and urge President Abbas to pull out of his deal with Hamas. If Abbas embraces Haniyeh, all bets are off. As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, Abbas cannot have it both ways; he can have peace with Israel or peace with Hamas.
Obama should tell Abbas that if he joins hands with Hamas, which is officially defined by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization, U.S. aid to the Palestinians cannot continue.
Lastly, Obama should use all his persuasive powers and all his diplomatic muscle to get Abbas to resume peace talks with Israel without preconditions. That’s the only way to achieve a Palestinian state living in peace and security with Israel. The other way — the Hamas way, the al-Qaida way, the way of the terrorists and the murderers — is a literal dead end.
Alan Elsner is senior director of Communications for The Israel Project, a non-profit with offices in Washington and Jerusalem that provides information about Israel and the Middle East.
