Hamas says will never recognise Israel

[oberliner]

GAZA, Jan 15 (Reuters) - Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said on Monday the Islamist militant group Hamas would never recognise Israel.

Haniyeh, a Hamas leader, said in an interview from Gaza with Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah's al-Manar television: "Hamas will never recognise the legitimacy of the occupation (Israel)."

"Hamas will never show flexibility over the issue of recognising the legitimacy of the occupation," he added.

Hamas took control of the Palestinian government last March after winning parliamentary elections a year ago.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L15411103.htm

[aquart]

1. Well, that's helpful.

Gonna start calling the Palestinians George.

[Tom Joad]

15. Huh? Don't understand your post.

Who is going to call Palestinians "george" and that means??

[number6]

17. I doubt you will

must be a compliment ?? George Washington Palestinians

Israelis are the British

[bbinacan]

2. Fuck Hamas. n/t

[Nevernose]

3. I'm sure that'll bring peace to Palestine

Thanks, guys, that really helps matters. Now why don't you deny the holocaust and launch a few rockets? I'm sure that'll help even more.

[calzone]

4. blatant propaganda

Same as the spin that the Iranian prez said Israel should be destroyed and the holocaust never happened. Lies.
Hamas has already recognized Israel, as usual, the Israeli govt ignored them.
Israel seems to find itself in a very similar position with it's govt as we do with ours. The people are not only not in control, they're ignored and subject to relentless perception management.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

10. "Hamas has already recognized Israel"

erm... I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or if you really actually believe that.

[Tom Joad]

5. the ANC never recognized the legitimacy of the White State.

Yet a measure of justice and peace was won for all in South Africa.

Hamas is not saying all Jewish people must leave, but that they will not recognize the dispossession 700,000 Palestinians, and give up the right of the refugees to return. No Palestinian political movement will do so.

[oberliner]

9. Hamas seeks to establish an Islamic State in place of present-day Israel

Is that not your understanding?

That goal is quite different from justice and peace for all.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

11. That seems to be the case

If Hamas achieve their goal it means the end of of the most socially progressive country in the Middle East.

[Douglas Carpenter]

18. less than 3% of Palestinians support an Islamic State

There are many reasons why 42% of Palestinians voted for Hamas in the elections...but the desire for an Islamic state is not one of them for the vast majority.

Other polls have the figure around 1%. Here is one recent poll with a extensive breakdown of Palestinian opinion:

"Some believe that a two-state formula is the favored solution for the Arab-Israeli conflict, while others believe that historic Palestine can’t be divided and thus the favored solution is a bi-national state on all of Palestine where Palestinians and Israelis enjoy equal representation and rights. Which of these solutions do you prefer?

Two-state solution: an Israeli
state and a Palestinian state
52.4%

Bi-national state on all
of historic Palestine
23.6%

No solution
9.4%

One Palestinian state
7.4%

Islamic state
2.9%

Others
2.0%

Don’t know
1.0%

No answer
1.3%

Source: Jerusalem Media & Communication Center
Methodology -- Interviews with 1,197 adults in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, conducted on Jun. 21 and Jun. 22, 2006. Margin of error is 3 per cent "

link to full article:

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/12493

[oberliner]

19. thanks for that info

While those poll results are very informative, the Hamas Charter is pretty explicit about it's long term goals.

The comment to which I was responding seemed to be drawing an analogous relationship between Hamas and the ANC.

In my estimation, if the leadership of Hamas has its way, the future Palestinian state would include the land that is curently Israel and would be under Islamic law and would not be a state welcoming of its Jewish residents.

While it is encouraging to see data that suggests most Palestinians are not interested in such an eventuality, I still feel that it is disingenous to pretend that Hamas is anything other than what it claims to be.

The guidelines to this discussion forum single out Hamas (along with Kahane) as a group that promotes hate in the Middle East. I agree with that designation and I am surprised to find Hamas described in much more charitable terms that that in this forum.

[Douglas Carpenter]

24. they are certainly not the ANC ...but they are not al Qaeda either

there is a tendency for some westerners to equate all forms of political Islam as the moral equivalent of Al Qaeda or the Talaban. Not that you have done so.

this is the quote from their charter regarding the attitude toward Christians and Jews:

"Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism - to coexist in peace and quiet with each other. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam. Past and present history are the best witness to that.

It is the duty of the followers of other religions to stop disputing the sovereignty of Islam in this region, because the day these followers should take over there will be nothing but carnage, displacement and terror. "

link to Hamas Charter: http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm

Hardly progressive --- but as I said not AlQaeda

Also I found this interesting article that mentions Hamas' relationship to the Christian minority....I don't mean to be singing the praises of Hamas...I wish there was a democratic and secular alternative to Fatah..but I think one also has to assess where they are coming from. Apparently Hamas has a reasonable record in its dealings with the Christian-Palestinian community:
"Since the Hamas-led government took office in March, it has been very sensitive to the Christian population and has been eager to offer its support whenever it can, condemning the attacks against Christian churches and donating $50,000 for Christmas decorations in Bethlehem"

link: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.gaza21dec21,0,5714447.story?page=2&track=rss
_______

This was interesting too:

Christian candidate on Hamas ticket
By Motasem Dalloul

link: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/archive/archive?ArchiveId=18115

Hosam al-Taweel, 40, is a Christian candidate running on the electoral ticket of Islamic resistance group Hamas in Gaza, in the upcoming Palestinian parliamentary elections.

He is competing for one of six seats specially designated for the Christian community in the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC).

He worked as a volunteer at the YMCA in Gaza for more than 30 years, serving on its board three times. He is also a regular columnist in the Palestinian daily newspaper, Al-Quds.

[Shaktimaan]

20. This is why the south africa/apartheid analogy is dangerous

There are not many similarities between Hamas and the ANC. Trying to carry the metaphor and apply it to other facets of the I/P conflict can lead to people making conclusions based on the analogy rather than the facts at hand, like what you've done here. Just because they were both militant groups fighting for a nationalist cause and neither recognized the legitimacy of the state they were fighting doesn't really mean anything here unless there is something else to suggest that Hamas is likely to act similarly to the ANC if given the chance.

I happen to believe that peace is possible. The PLO swore that they would never recognize Israel yet eventually they did. But the PLO was secular and for all the rhetoric surrounding them, their goals were tangible and rational. I'm not saying that they were always reasonable, just that at the end of the day Arafat was willing to negotiate with Israel and compromise a little on his ideology in his own best interest. And I fear that Hamas may not be willing to concede anything just for the well being of Palestine.

I do think that if anyone from the Palestinian camp is able to make peace it is Hamas. If you look back at the real treaties between Israel and another Arab state you'll notice that the only ones able to do it were the hawks. That isn't a coincidence. It's because these are the people who hold the keys to rejecting peace. Sure, we know that Labor is dying to make a peace deal, but will the coalition in the Knesset support it? Would Sadat have been as willing to put himself out to make a deal with anyone who couldn't ensure that the next Likud PM elected wouldn't just tear it up?

Look at why Oslo failed on the Palestinian side for example. From day one Hamas rejected it and refused to halt attacks on Israel. My theory is that they rejected it for one of two reasons. The first would be that their rhetoric is honest and they really don't seek peace with Israel unless Israel meets all of Hamas' demands and probably not even then. If this is the case and they are fighting for ideological reasons over practical ones then we're screwed. That would mean they can't be relied on to act in their own (or their people's) best interests. They wouldn't care what Israel offered them because they aren't looking to deal.

The other possibility is that they are acting in their own best interests. "Their" being Hamas, not the Palestinians as a whole. In this case they rejected Oslo so as to retain their validity. If Arafat could successfully make peace then why would Hamas need to exist? But if there was still fighting then they would be seen as indispensible heroes. The key here lies in bringing Hamas into the political process thus ensuring their continued relevance in times of peace. (Done.) Then you just have to figure out how to make it worth more to Hamas to not fight than vice-versa.

Yet it would be wrong to assume that they are the Hamas from door #2 just because it's what we want. So far it isn't looking like they give a rat's ass about anything enough to stray from their mission statement. The problem is that making concessions to Hamas#1 would have the opposite effect of what we're hoping for. It would embolden them. But if we are dealing mostly with Hamas#2 then despite what things look like now we may actually have the best opportunity ever for peace in the next few years.

Only one thing is absolutely certain about Hamas' secret identity that we can rely on to be true. They ain't the ANC.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BearSquirrel2]

7. Palestinians support Hamas ....

The Palestinians support Hamas and Hamas advocates and actively works for the destruction of Israel. The Palestinian people need to be careful that they do not declare themselves combatants against Israel. At that point they can be rightfully considered combatants.

[Tom Joad]

14. A whole people can be declared "combatants"???

Everyone? What exactly are you saying, Mr. BearSquirrel2?

[barb162]

8. He's repeating himself and showing his inability to compromise

as usual

[applegrove]

12. So those people will live in war for another 50 years. Great! That's leadership!

Bet ya Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria and all other non democracies in the Middle East are thrilled to hear they have a boogey man in Israel to keep their populations busy instead of asking serious questions about how they live and what is responsible government.

[Amused Musings]

13. I agree with that sentiment

If Israel did not exist, those countries would have to invent it.

[Shaktimaan]

21. Well said.

In a way they did. They all played a major role in shaping the modern face and personality of Israel. I'm not cynical enough to think that it was done on purpose though.

If the major players in this game possessed the abilities needed to plot and execute a plan like that over 5 decades just in order to guarantee their dictatorial hold over their respective countries then Syria would look a lot less like Syria and a lot more like Switzerland. But with a better economy. And more a punctual train schedule.

[newyorican]

16. They should just declare...

a Palestinian nation consisting of the WB and Gaza.

It escapes me why this isn't done by successive Palestinian governments. Just do it.

[oberliner]

22. Why didn't the Palestinians declare such a state

when Jordan was occupying the WB and Egypt was occupying Gaza for close to 20 years?

[Behind the Aegis]

23. Because they thought Israel would be destroyed.

[Violet_Crumble]

25. I'm guessing for the same reasons they haven't declared one since the Israeli occupation...

If the Palestinian leadership declared statehood, it'd achieve nothing because it'd be seen as a hostile move and there's other states who wouldn't recognise it as legitimate. And going back to pre-67 days, I doubt there was any sort of coherent leadership structure among the Palestinians for them to do it with any authority.

On the lack of approval from other states, here's a few examples:

Arafat applauded for statehood delay

The Israeli government has praised the "positive step" taken by Palestinian leaders who have called off their plans to declare independence later this week.
PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat had been threatening to declare an independent Palestinian state on 13 September - the original deadline set by both sides for reaching a final peace deal.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/919825.stm

Clinton Asks Arafat to Postpone Declaration of Statehood

KESSEL: Does that mean to say you are putting off indefinitely or will you set a new date for when you will try to declare your statehood with or without, a state with or without an agreement with Israel?

ABU AMR: Well, the Council is going to meet again on the 15th of November to study the issue again and in the meantime we will be doing stuff underground in order to continue with our process of state building and sovereignty. KESSEL: When you say continue a process of state building, what do you mean? Do you think that will be deemed provocative by Israel and the United States, even if you haven't declared a state?

ABU AMR: Not at all because also we are ascertaining our commitment to peace with Israel and whatever we do is going to be part of our current endeavor to build our state infrastructure.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0009/10/sm.03.html

[Douglas Carpenter]

26. Jordan very much dominated the politics of the West Bank and Egypt

under Gamal Abdul Nasser very much dominated the politics of the Gaza in those days. At that time the West Bank had been long annexed by Jordan. Neither King Hussein or Nasser was going to want a serious challenge to their authority.

Also support for the two-state solution didn't start gaining momentum in the Palestinian movement until the late 70's early 80's.

In fact it wasn't until 1974 when Arafat gave his famous "gun and olive branch" speech (link: http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/cahier/proche-orient/arafat74-en ) before the U.N. General Assembly when he first clearly and definitively postulated the secular democratic state in which all ethnic groups would live as equals. Although that had been the developing PLO position since soon after its founding.

Of course the PLO wasn't founded until 1964. And for its first few years it was largely dominated by Nasserite influence from Egypt. It took a few years for the PLO to truly become independent and develop its own positions.