Palestines New Paradigm

Sam Bahour, The Electronic Intifada, 31 January 2006

Only time will tell: Graffiti reading "Islam is the solution" in Al-Shati Refugee Camp,
Gaza City (Wesam Saleh/Ma'an News)

Policies have repercussions, sometimes bitter ones. The historic election landslide victory of
the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, in Palestine on January 25 was merely a
confirmation of this basic fact. Palestinians simply voted in a manner that reflects their
reality.
Secular Palestinians, such as myself, are not thrilled to see an Islamist movement come to
the forefront of the historically secular Palestinian struggle to end the occupation and
continue with the state-building process. However, those of us willing to look beyond the
daily headlines, which emerge out of professionally spun mainstream media, are fully aware
that Hamas' victory does not emerge from a vacuum.
Palestinian reality in year 2006 is three-fold. There is the bitter reality of 39 years of a nonstop Israeli military occupation that has battered the Palestinians beyond recognition, but
failed to break the Palestinians' will and determination to ascertain the basic human and
national rights that are justly due to every indigenous people.
Then, there is a decade, some would say four decades, of a monopoly on Palestinian politics
by the moderate Fatah movement which mismanaged and abused its position of power to a
point where the average Palestinian saw their governance serving the Israeli occupation
more than serving the needs of a people hemorrhaging from an unrelenting Israeli
onslaught.
Nonviolent resistences have failed
Lastly, Palestinian reality today, after trying all possible nonviolent methods to jerk the
international community, particularly the U.S., into assuming its responsibility toward a
people under occupation (as per the Geneva Conventions) have been left naked to take on
their occupier single-handily, all the while, being coerced into becoming totally dependent on
the crumbs and political agendas of donor aid.
Initial knee-jerk reactions from Washington D.C. and Tel Aviv indicate that, not only have the
U.S. and Israel failed to acknowledge that decades of aggression against Palestinians was
sooner than later bound to result in bitter repercussions, but they arrogantly abolish

themselves of any responsibility for this reality. Palestinians under occupation were left with
little other choice, but to express their despair and frustration by electing into government a
movement that many believe speak the same language as Israel has been speaking to
Palestinians for almost four decades now, the language of force, both political and military.
The U.S. and Israel seem overly surprised at Hamas' victory. We must ask why? Back in
2002, following a suicide bomb attack in Jerusalem the United Press International's Terrorism
Correspondent, Richard Sale, wrote the following:
Israel and Hamas may currently be locked in deadly combat, but, according to several
current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct
and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years.
Israel "aided Hamas directly -- the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO
(Palestinian Liberation Organization)," said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the
Center for Strategic Studies.
Israel's support for Hamas "was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong,
secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative," said a former senior CIA official.
The UPI article went on to say,
But even then, some in Israel saw some benefits to be had in trying to continue to give
Hamas support: "The thinking on the part of some of the right-wing Israeli establishment
was that Hamas and the others, if they gained control, would refuse to have any part of the
peace process and would torpedo any agreements put in place," said a U.S. government
official who asked not to be named.
"Israel would still be the only democracy in the region for the United States to deal with," he
said.
All of which disgusts some former U.S. intelligence officials. [...]
According to former State Department counter-terrorism official Larry Johnson, "the Israelis
are their own worst enemies when it comes to fighting terrorism."
"The Israelis are like a guy who sets fire to his hair and then tries to put it out by hitting it
with a hammer."
"They do more to incite and sustain terrorism than curb it," he said.
Although the magnitude of Hamas' victory took all by surprise, the fact that the Palestinian
electorate booted from office the 40-year ruling party of Fatah was no surprise to anyone
familiar with the facts on the ground.
Bankrupt in its ability to frame the just Palestinian struggle in a manner understandable to
the external world and after reaching levels of corruption and nepotism unheard of in
occupied Palestine, Fatah deserved to lose, and lose big.
This writer wrote back in May 18, 2001, following the start of the second intifada:
Israel grasps to solve the conflict by inventing new political jargon and by engaging welldesigned public relation blitzes instead of facing its core international obligation of ending
occupation. The truth is becoming harder to hide with every passing Israeli warplane. The
world has spoken -- Israeli occupation is the source of contention and must end, illegal
Israeli settlements must end, imprisonment of Palestinian political prisoners must end. There
is no other way.

Mr. [Ariel] Sharon has returned the Palestinian society back to a culture of resistance. Soon,
he will move the international community to a new culture of responsibility toward protecting
Palestinian civilians and realizing a negotiated solution to the conflict based on peace with
justice. In the meantime, a new generation of Palestinians will learn and live the meaning of
Intifada while the State of Palestine continues to be built amongst the backdrop of Israeli
bombings.
A month later, in a subsequent article on June 13, 2001, I continued,
If Sharon's Israeli war drums are translated into an all-out war on the Palestinian people or
its leadership, the world -- Americans and Israelis in particular -- should not expect the
frameworks of the Oslo Peace Accords, the Mitchell Report, or the numerous antiquated UN
resolutions to remain as reference points for any future resolution of the conflict.
If Palestinians must choose between their annihilation and their collective memory, their
choice is most likely to be the latter and their time frame, the future. Likewise, Israel must
choose between continuing an illegal occupation and preserving the State of Israel. To think
that both can peacefully co-exist is an utter ignorance of history and human development.
The end of Israel's occupation should be the priority
So as we move forward, we cannot but remind ourselves of all the warnings that were made,
mostly by Palestinians, over and over, advising the U.S. and international community that
without intervention and without a serious approach to ending Israel's occupation, once and
for all, moderate secular voices in Palestine would be drowned out.
Instead of heeding to Palestinian's advice and to the facts on the ground, the international
community preferred to only send international observers to oversee the most democratic
elections process that has ever happened in the Middle East, despite the occupation's boot
remaining on the neck of the Palestinians.
Now it is the world's duty and responsibility to accept the outcome of the elections. Each and
every country will need to redefine how it will deal with the sober reality that, once again,
now by way of the ballot box, the Palestinians have provided them.
The U.S. would be wise not to continue to set pre-conditions on yet another duly elected
Palestinian leadership. That policy has failed twice already, once with Yaser Arafat and again
with Mahmoud Abbas. The editorial of The Jewish Week said it best, "Hard and fast
proclamations at a time of tremendous ferment will only make it harder for regional leaders
to find a way to make the best of the newest tough hand dealt to them." (1/27/06).
The U.S., under President Bush, has caused so much havoc within U.S. foreign policy that the
U.S. will now find itself a hostage of its own hastily drafted internal polices. Political wisdom,
not Presidential evangelism, is what is required from Washington today.
For the first time since the Oslo Peace Accords, Palestinian priorities are being set
independent of foreign agendas. The donor community, led by the U.S., can choose to bring
the Hamas government to its knees financially. This would be short-sighted and catastrophic
for the region at large. Alternatively, Hamas can be given the needed time to reflect on their
election victory and define a set of policies that coincide with their new position which will
require them to be held accountable on a national and global level.
Speculation is a risky business in the Middle East, but if Hamas' victory is viewed as a pilot
project by Islamist movements in the region, we could expect them to excel in installing a
better system of governance which has the potential to positively affect every Palestinian
citizen. If they fail, they should only be removed through the same ballot box that they won
by.

As I wrote elsewhere, the Palestinian's "election season [should be viewed] as concrete that
has now been poured. What remains to be seen is whether it will actually dry in time and
remain in place to hold the Palestinian political house together."
Related links
BY TOPIC: Palestinian Elections
Sam Bahour is a Palestinian-American businessman living in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian
city of Al-Bireh. He is co-author of HOMELAND: Oral Histories of Palestine and Palestinians
(1994) and can be reached at sbahour@palnet.com.

Latest articles on EI:

Israel Lobby Watch: "This House believes that Zionism is a danger to the Jewish people" (20 February 2006)
Art, Music & Culture: First Museum-quality Exhibition of Contemporary Palestinian Art to open in New York
City on March 14th, 2006 (20 February 2006)
Art, Music & Culture: Freedom Theatre to open in Jenin refugee camp (18 February 2006)
EI in the Press: EI on WBEZ: Israel Should Recognize Moderate Hamas Rhetoric (17 February 2006)
Human Rights: Weekly report on human rights violations (16 February 2006)
Development: Final session of outgoing Palestinian legislators criticized (16 February 2006)
Activism News: British architects and planners boycott Israeli construction companies (16 February 2006)
Development: Local NGO's: "Respect of election results is the only way forward" (16 February 2006)

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4437.shtml