Skip to main content

Gaza, Hamas - and the whole mess

Events have moved so quickly in Gaza and the West Bank that it now appears that Israel has an Islamic Hamas-led Gaza on its doorstep. Meanwhile, the West has already flagged its support for the President Abbas and his Fatah organisation in the West Bank. One doesn't need to be much of a political-animal to see that this just isn't going to work. What? - in effect starve out the 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza?

At coincidence has it, The Spectator this week has an interview with Dr. Ghazi Hamad, official spokesman for the Palestinian National Authority, who seeks to explain where Hamas stands in the whole Gaza-West Bank-Israel mess:

"It’s a sunny afternoon in London, and I am having tea with Hamas. Or rather, I am having tea with Dr Ghazi Hamad, official spokesman for the Palestinian National Authority and the man tipped to be the new Interior Minister. Dressed in a finely tailored suit, Dr Hamad, a handsome former journalist who holds a doctorate in pharmacology and speaks fluent Arabic, Hebrew, English and French, does not look out of place in this Mayfair hotel. Nor, it has to be said, does he look like your average Muslim terrorist — although as a member of Hamas, he is classified as a terrorist by the West. There was uproar in certain quarters recently when it emerged that the Sudan-educated Palestinian had been granted a visa to travel to the UK.

But here he is, politely sipping Earl Grey and trying to convince me that his party is not a terrorist organisation. ‘Tell me,’ he asks, ‘has Hamas ever used violence against the West? No. We believe in moderate Islam. We are not Taleban. We are not al-Qa’eda.’

‘But you call for Israel’s destruction and recruit suicide bombers!’

He shakes his head at me, and I wonder if he is about to say ‘Israel? What’s that?’ Much to the frustration of the international quartet (EU, US, UN and Russia) and Israel, who claim to be ready to come to the negotiating table, Hamas has doggedly refused to accept the three conditions on which peace talks might be kick-started; one of which is officially recognising its occupying neighbour.

‘We have held a ceasefire since 2005’, he points out. ‘We fought the elections as Al-Eslah and Al-Tagheer, which means “change and reform”. We say that terrorism is not the right track to achieve goals. Our struggle is only against the occupation. Only to reclaim our homeland. Only to be able to live like any other human being.’

‘So, what, you don’t want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth?’

He looks me bang in the eye. ‘We just want a state, based on pre-1967 borders.’"

Reuters reports where things stand at the moment - doubtlessly fluid, to say the least - as being this:

"Western powers rallied behind Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Friday after Hamas Islamists routed his forces in the Gaza Strip and began imposing a new order in the enclave after days of bloody civil war.

Despite his mandate effectively being reduced to the West Bank, Abbas named a new prime minister after firing the Hamas-led government and declaring a state of emergency.

The United States, European Union, United Nations and Russia -- the Quartet of Middle East mediators -- gave a "clear message of support" to Abbas.

Washington, Europe and Israel prepared to open the taps on financial aid to Abbas that was cut off a year ago when Iranian-backed Hamas used its popularity in impoverished Gaza to defeat Abbas's more secular Fatah in a parliamentary election.

Abbas named Salam Fayyad, a technocrat who won respect in the West as finance minister, to replace Ismail Haniyeh as prime minister, three months after Hamas brought Fatah members into a "unity" government.

But in Gaza, all but divorced now from the larger West Bank in a blow to Palestinians' hopes for a united state, Hamas leader Haniyeh refused to accept his dismissal. He set about restoring order after six days of battles that ended in revenge killings and looting at Abbas's compound."


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reading the Chilcot Inquiry Report more closely

Most commentary on the Chilcot Inquiry Report of and associated with the Iraq War, has been "lifted" from the Executive Summary.   The Intercept has actually gone and dug into the Report, with these revelations : "THE CHILCOT REPORT, the U.K.’s official inquiry into its participation in the Iraq War, has finally been released after seven years of investigation. Its executive summary certainly makes former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the British push for war, look terrible. According to the report, Blair made statements about Iraq’s nonexistent chemical, biological, and nuclear programs based on “what Mr. Blair believed” rather than the intelligence he had been given. The U.K. went to war despite the fact that “diplomatic options had not been exhausted.” Blair was warned by British intelligence that terrorism would “increase in the event of war, reflecting intensified anti-US/anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, including among Muslim communities in the

Robert Fisk's predictions for the Middle East in 2013

There is no gain-saying that Robert Fisk, fiercely independent and feisty to boot, is the veteran journalist and author covering the Middle East. Who doesn't he know or hasn't he met over the years in reporting from Beirut - where he lives?  In his latest op-ed piece for The Independent he lays out his predictions for the Middle East for 2013. Read the piece in full, here - well worthwhile - but an extract... "Never make predictions in the Middle East. My crystal ball broke long ago. But predicting the region has an honourable pedigree. “An Arab movement, newly-risen, is looming in the distance,” a French traveller to the Gulf and Baghdad wrote in 1883, “and a race hitherto downtrodden will presently claim its due place in the destinies of Islam.” A year earlier, a British diplomat in Jeddah confided that “it is within my knowledge... that the idea of freedom does at present agitate some minds even in Mecca...” So let’s say this for 2013: the “Arab Awakening” (the t

An unpalatable truth!

Quinoa has for the last years been the "new" food on the block for foodies. Known for its health properties, foodies the world over have taken to it. Many restaurants have added it to their menu. But, as this piece " Can vegans stomach the unpalatable truth about quinoa? " from The Guardian so clearly details, the cost to Bolivians and Peruvians - from where quinoa hails - has been substantial. "Not long ago, quinoa was just an obscure Peruvian grain you could only buy in wholefood shops. We struggled to pronounce it (it's keen-wa, not qui-no-a), yet it was feted by food lovers as a novel addition to the familiar ranks of couscous and rice. Dieticians clucked over quinoa approvingly because it ticked the low-fat box and fitted in with government healthy eating advice to "base your meals on starchy foods". Adventurous eaters liked its slightly bitter taste and the little white curls that formed around the grains. Vegans embraced quinoa as