Identical U.S. And Israeli Attitude Toward Hamas

     Al-Hayat     2003/07/5

According to the International Herald Tribune, the current attitude of the U.S. administration toward Hamas is identical to that of Israel. Previous American administrations had kept a distance from the traditional Israeli position, which regarded Hamas as a terrorist organization. There used to be a distinction between the military wing of Hamas and the political and civilian wing, which provided social services to the population (which was also the position of the European countries). Israel used to exert pressure on the American administrations to have them endorse its attitude, and to place Hamas on the list of terrorist organizations.

As many analysts maintain, the Bush administration is the "unprecedented Likudist American copy of the Israeli policy." Over the past years, the American administration used to press the Palestinian Authority and neighboring Arab countries to exercise pressure over Hamas to achieve a truce that would give the peace process a chance. This truce was considered important in order to deny Israel the justification to carry out oppressive practices against the Palestinian people. As such, the recent decision by Hamas and Jihad to suspend their operations meant removing such justifications, and confronting Israel with two options: either to have it take steps as stipulated in the Roadmap, or create excuses to escape such moves. Israel chose the second alternative and was immediately supported by the U.S. Both Israel and the U.S. demanded more than a declaration of truce. They wanted the disarming and dismantling of Hamas and other opposition Palestinian groups as a necessary first step in order to proceed with the Roadmap. Yet the Palestinian organizations will never accept such a demand, and it is unlikely that the Palestinian Authority will be prepared to enter a military confrontation with them unless there is a substantial change on the ground that convinces the majority of the Palestinians.

The second major shift in position was the emphasis over the past few days on the need to dismantle Hamas, and not only to disarm it. The American position here is most serious because it provides a diplomatic and political cover to that of Ariel Sharon in rejecting any temporary truce. Three days before Israel announced its refusal of the Hamas truce, George Bush went as far as blaming European leaders who had gathered in Washington because of their 'lax' attitude toward Hamas, and described it as a terrorist organization making no distinction among its separate wings. More important is that he mentioned twice "dismantling Hamas is vital for the success of the Roadmap."

The danger involved in this attitude is not only that it removes any hope of having a serious American position toward the Roadmap, but also in that it drives the Palestinians toward a civil war. On the one hand, the U.S. administration is exerting pressure on the Palestinian Authority and the Abbas government, asking them to "take advantage of the golden opportunity," warning against the element of time, the American elections and that any new Israeli closure of the Palestinian areas would be harsher and more oppressive. Yet on the other hand, if the Palestinian government were to follow the American conditions, it would find itself in a position of enemy of its own people, since it burdens it with the mission of disarming and dismantling Hamas.

The main focus on the ground is obviously getting rid of Hamas and other militant groups. The withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza and Bethlehem is aimed at 'testing' the Palestinian government in confronting Hamas. There is no talk about dismantling the settlements. In fact, more settlements are being built as the Israeli government recently approved the building of 12 new settlements, while the theatrical removal of empty caravans, described as settlements, continues.

The main fault in the Roadmap is the same in the Oslo Accords, and that is delaying the main Palestinian concerns and focusing instead on the security aspect, thus stripping the issue from its humanitarian dimension, which is the military occupation. This mechanism allows Israel, with American support, to have the decisive say, since it continues to 'test' the authority of the Palestinians to negotiate with it, and examine their ability to oppress themselves. All that it hopes is to spark a civil war, which would allow it lay back.

Mr. Al Haroub is a Palestinian writer residing in England.