The cease-fire conditions are
clear: ending the rocket fire from Gaza, ending the siege on Gaza, new
elections in the West Bank and Gaza, which will be recognized by
Israel. Beyond that, serious negotiations could be commenced for the
establishment of a Palestinian state.
Israel should not make the cessation of weapons smuggling a condition for a cease fire, or for indirect relations with Hamas.
I am sorry to see that Meretz USA, which came out with a fine statement
otherwise, has called for "the verifiable termination of weapons
smuggling into the Gaza Strip" as a condition for a cease-fire. I have
no problem with that, provides that it calls for an arms embargo on
Israel as well. Jews smuggled weapons to Palestine before there was a
Jewish state, and the idea that Gaza and the West Bank should be left
at the mercy of Israel, or NATO, or whatever, is immoral as well as
stupid - immoral, because it says that one side has a right to
self-defence and the other does not, stupid, because it reinforces the
Israeli narrative that the Palestinians are the aggressors, which plays
into feelings of Palestinian resentment, and which encourages
extremists. Had Hamas not smuggled - and used - weapons, would Meretz
USA be calling today for an end to the siege on Gaza? (For the Meretz
USA statement, see Richard Silverstein's Tikun Olam blog here).
Beyond that, the Palestinians have to get their act together,
and stop their own internal fighting. That means
democratically-conducted elections whose results are accepted not only
by Israel, but by the world. If Hamas runs Palestine, fine - but a
condition for their joining the community of nations will be behaving
like one - ditto for Israel. Hamas has already laid out the conditions
- reasonable conditions, I might add - for its living in peace with
Israel: withdrawal to 67 boundaries and a just solution to the
refugees. Hamas doesn't recognize the right of Israel to exist as a
Jewish state. Big deal. Israel doesn't recognize Hamas, or a Hamas-led
Palestinian Authority, either. Lots of states don't recognize other
states. For years Egypt and Jordan didn't recognize Israel. Did that
mean that Israel did not conduct indirect negotations with them?
The world's policy of isolating Hamas has failed. If the world
believes in a two-state solution, it will have to get used to the
possibility that Hamas will be running the Palestinian state - not
permanently, of course, because the Palestinians, like Israelis, will
periodically throw the bums out.
But another solution -- a "one state" or "federal" solution,
may provide a better answer to the fundamentalists on both sides. There
would be no fear of the Palestinian state being dominated by Hamas
because the Palestinians wouldn't have their own state, but they would
share it with the Israelis. With the Israelis overwhelmingly secular
(and with the Palestinians "traditionalists" who could go either way),
a one-state solution, with a constitution that would take into account
the various factions, may be the better way to go.
Of course, it is not the way that either Israel or Palestine
will go. The day may not be too long when Hamas wins control of the
West Bank. Israel seems bent on doing everything it can to ensure that
possibility. It will then be able to go to the world and say, "What do
you want from us; we have terrorists on both our sides."
It won't be pleasant living in Gaza or the West Bank. But it won't be pleasant living in Israel, either.
Hamas has clearly failed the people of Palestine. Israel is most clearly guilty of crimes against humanity. Each of these parties is as guilty as the other and only the innocent will pay the price.
There has to be another way.