Why the US (and Israel) should talk to Hamas
A good post on the blog of Conflicts Forum... It's the contribution that CF co-head Mark Perry made to a debate held in NYC recently on the motion of whether "“A democratically elected Hamas is still a terrorist organization.”
Perry, Mahmoud Mohamedou of Harvard, and defense lawyer Stanley Cohen all spoke against the motion. Israeli Ambassador to the US Daniel Ayalon and two other guys spoke in favor of it.
(Need I note: an all-male line-up there... )
Perry was speaking more to the question of whether the US and Israel should talk to Hamas, rather than whether it is or is not still a "terrorist" organization. Of course, the whole discourse of terrorism is usually invoked-- in many current cases in the Middle East, as in the case of the ANC in its day-- to claim that on that basis no-one should even talk to the organization(s) in question. But still, it is a slightly different issue.
Anyway, Perry makes an excellent case.
Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,
Notice the personal attacks on Carter and his wealth and other things here in this article by Josh Getlin in Baltimoresun, while others like Hennery Kissinger and his wealth not questioned what he writes off course he is pro-Israeli why not.
They need to be deaf from one side and full of ears from another side….
""The so-called road map for peace has failed, he writes, because "Israel has been able to use it as a delaying tactic with an endless series of preconditions that can never be met ... and the United States has been able to give the impression of positive engagement in a 'peace process' which President Bush has announced will not be fulfilled during his time in office.""
"Jimmy Carter has written a new book, "Palestine: Peace not Apartheid," and we should thank God for his courage in trying to start a useful debate on the Israel-Palestine conflict. It has been clear for some time that in Israel and in the world a strenuous debate has been going on and continues to this date.
It is not enough to condemn Palestinians for rocket attacks and the capturing of soldiers; we must criticize and not condone or abet the Israeli confiscation and colonization of Palestinian territories. Balance is the operative term and the United States is not balanced on these issues.
If Israelis can discuss these issues so can we. I do not know why there is so much resistance to having a debate, but those responsible for it need to get over it. Things have gotten too serious and too dangerous to ignore the facts on the ground. Let us talk and find a sensible solution to this vexing problem."
OSWALD SYKES
Delmar
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=542743&category=OPINION&newsdate=12/8/2006
"The numbers don't lie. They never do. In the past month, the number of Palestinians killed by Israeli forces was 45 times greater than the number of Israelis killed by Palestinians. The Palestinian dead included 13 minors. All in one deadly month. The last name on the list is Ayman Abu-Mahdi, a 10-year-old boy who had come home from school and gone out to get a little air with his siblings and friends. He was sitting on a bench in front of his house. The time: 15 hours before the cease-fire in Gaza."
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=798266
People don't understand why W doesn't talk to his enemies. They think it's stubbornness, or some kind of bad strategy. Actually there are two reasons: (1) W thinks an audience with himself (especially an invitation to Crawford, TX!!) is some kind of sought-after reward, which he only bestows on loyal admirers, and (2) W can't think of anything to say to people who disagree with him.