The Palestinian Elections
by Geov Parrish
The Islamic group Hamas, considered "terrorist" by Israel, the US, and
Europe, won 75 of the 132 seats in voting for the Palestinian Authority
legislature last Thursday, setting up a direct conflict with the
European Union, with Israel, and, of course, with the Bush
administration, which all refuse to deal with Hamas.
Hamas' victory marks the end of ten years of Palestinian Authority rule
for Fatah, the famously corrupt party of former PLO leader Yasser Arafat
and of current leader Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas still controls the
presidency, but not the legislature.
It's no secret why Hamas won. Factors were both domestic and foreign.
Domestic include Palestinian demographics (Hamas' support heavily skews
young, and a large majority of Palestinians are under age 25); the
failure of the second intifada uprising; and Hamas' reputation,
shared by most Islamist groups, for honesty and public service in a
region where politicians (including Arafat) are notoriously corrupt and
indifferent to the fate of their constituents.
Factors outside Palestine included Abbas' support by the US; the
continuing humiliation of Palestinians by Israel, escalated in recent
years by the apartheid wall, the continued expansion of illegal
"settlements," highways, and checkpoints that carve Palestinian land
into ever-smaller Bantustans; and the years of what was essentially the
house arrest of Arafat, an ordeal that probably killed him.
Palestinians, by and large, see no hope of a peace process from the
current leadership of Israel or the United States--both so that peace
and autonomy can be achieved, and so that Palestinians' wretched quality
of life can be alleviated. And they had little faith that the leadership
of Abbas and of Fatah will get them there. Hence, the overwhelming
support for a more radical alternative.
It didn't have to be this way.
Israel is highly dependent upon the United States--not so much for
military assistance (though the US gives it freely, Israel has the
fourth largest army in the world and is quite self-sufficient in that
regard) as for its economic support and for the cover it gives in
international diplomacy, where Israel would be a complete, apartheid
South Africa-style pariah were it not for American support. As such, the
United States is the only international player (the U.N. having
long since proven itself wholly ineffective on the Palestine question)
with the leverage to get Israel to change its oppressive behavior.
And, true to form, George Bush has enabled Ariel Sharon and the
ruling Likud party to change Israel's behavior. For the worse. Bush has
almost completely ignored his widely-ridiculed "roadmap" plan for a
peace process, being content instead to stand by Sharon and either cheer
or wink as Sharon has done it all: expanding settlements and
checkpoints, erecting the apartheid wall, launching bloody military
operations deep into Palestinian territory at Jenin and other refugee
camps, and, as mentioned, the slow murder of the iconic Arafat.
9-11 never would have happened but for the decades of continuing US
support of Israel's illegal and unconscionable military occupation of
Palestine. It is the reason why the US is despised by the Muslim
world. The invasion and bloody occupation of Iraq only confirmed and
further inflamed opinions that were already widely held.
Palestinians are choosing to turn to Hamas because they are desperate,
and because they are fed up with a "peace process" that allows Israel to
illegally move the goalposts further from a viable two-state solution
each year. That's a situation the US has control over. If the United
States were ever to be serious about preventing terrorism--not to
mention encouraging democracy and self-determination in the Middle
East--it would stop its deferential enabling of Israeli atrocities and
force Israel to seriously come to the table and negotiate a peace
settlement that was truly fair to both sides.
And it would encourage, in the strongest possible terms, the
participation in that process of the representatives democratically
chosen by Palestinians, rather than calling them "terrorists" and
refusing to be seen with them. Instead, Bush (and others) are moving to
cut off international aid to Palestine if Hamas does not renounce its
armed wing (which has observed a truce for the past year, even as Fatah
has not) and recognize Israel's right to exist. Due almost entirely to
the nature of Israel's oppressive occupation, the Palestinian economy is
in ruins, and Palestinians themselves are often dependent on foreign aid
for their only source of food or money--survival. Expect Hamas to
compromise on this, for the sake of its people.
But don't expect many further compromises. What is it about Bush foreign
policy mandarins that renders them incapable of seeing that this is a
dilemma of their own making? In Iran, Egypt, Iraq, and now Palestine,
voters given even a semblance of democratic choice have punished
politicians seen as too close to the US, and rewarded their Islamist
opponents. Bin Laden could scarcely have scripted it any better. The US,
by threatening to remove an economic lifeline from the Palestinian
people, is teaching that our version of democracy is all fine and
well--so long as voters select our candidates. Otherwise, we
punish the voters.
Rather than launching still further humiliations upon a people who have
already suffered quite enough, it might behoove Washington to try to
understand the desperation behind their vote--and move to
alleviate it. That means restraining the unacceptable actions of
Israel--not further collective punishment of Palestinians.
|