The GOP is like Hamas, but Not in the Way You Think
It's hard to tell what to make of this analysis of the recent Palestinian elections.
On one hand it appears a desperate attempt by Western institutions to cling to the idea that Hamas isn't really the party of Palestinian preference, but merely the party of fanatical discipline. On the other hand the numbers seem to make sense to me (a much different thing than making sense to Anna, who actually understands things like math and statistics, but never mind). Apparently, Fatah's candidates received more votes during the election, it's just that there were too many of them. In Jerusalem, a district with six available seats, Hamas ran four people and Fatah ran 26. Fatah's candidates combined outpolled Hamas' combined 93K-58K. All four Hamas candidates won seats, a result that even I could have predicted.
So really what you see here in Fatah-Hamas election is exactly what you would see in the Democrat-Republican face-off here. One party relies on an ancient record while dithering about and defeating itself and the other one actually plays to win. If anything you think this would help relations between George W. Bush and his new Hamas counterpart, Ismail Haniyeh. Both were elected in large part because of their nation's religious right and both assumed power with less than a clear mandate. I doubt it though.
This probably makes it easier to walk away from Hamas' Palestinian Authority, which appears to be what is happening. Israel announced sanctions against the Palestinian Authority today and urged the U.S. and Europe to follow suit. On Friday, the U.S asked for $50 million of unspent aid back from the outgoing government because it didn't want Hamas to have it. So this is turning into a Fidel situation, where instead of engaging a potentially unfriendly government and trying to influence through trade, the west is going with isolation instead. Does it strike anyone else as a particularly bad idea to attempt bankrupting a government run by a group that has really close ties to Iran? And, given what we saw in Afghanistan is it a smart plan to facilitate failed-state conditions on the border of our biggest ally in the region?
Perhaps what we've learned from our dealings with Saudi Arabia is that Western investment and trade isn't actually enough to encourage liberalization. Certainly when you run on a platform of destroying Israel and win as Hamas did, it's overly optimistic for anyone to expect that being an actual government will have any moderating effect. But if you are the Bush administration and you've been telling everyone that your sole foreign policy aim is to spread freedom and democracy, aren't you beholden to try and work with democratically elected governments? I'm willing to accept that the answer is no in the case of Hamas, that the organization is too entwined with terrorism to ever become a partner of the U.S. But doesn't that require a complete re-thinking of this adventure in Iraq?
On one hand it appears a desperate attempt by Western institutions to cling to the idea that Hamas isn't really the party of Palestinian preference, but merely the party of fanatical discipline. On the other hand the numbers seem to make sense to me (a much different thing than making sense to Anna, who actually understands things like math and statistics, but never mind). Apparently, Fatah's candidates received more votes during the election, it's just that there were too many of them. In Jerusalem, a district with six available seats, Hamas ran four people and Fatah ran 26. Fatah's candidates combined outpolled Hamas' combined 93K-58K. All four Hamas candidates won seats, a result that even I could have predicted.
So really what you see here in Fatah-Hamas election is exactly what you would see in the Democrat-Republican face-off here. One party relies on an ancient record while dithering about and defeating itself and the other one actually plays to win. If anything you think this would help relations between George W. Bush and his new Hamas counterpart, Ismail Haniyeh. Both were elected in large part because of their nation's religious right and both assumed power with less than a clear mandate. I doubt it though.
This probably makes it easier to walk away from Hamas' Palestinian Authority, which appears to be what is happening. Israel announced sanctions against the Palestinian Authority today and urged the U.S. and Europe to follow suit. On Friday, the U.S asked for $50 million of unspent aid back from the outgoing government because it didn't want Hamas to have it. So this is turning into a Fidel situation, where instead of engaging a potentially unfriendly government and trying to influence through trade, the west is going with isolation instead. Does it strike anyone else as a particularly bad idea to attempt bankrupting a government run by a group that has really close ties to Iran? And, given what we saw in Afghanistan is it a smart plan to facilitate failed-state conditions on the border of our biggest ally in the region?
Perhaps what we've learned from our dealings with Saudi Arabia is that Western investment and trade isn't actually enough to encourage liberalization. Certainly when you run on a platform of destroying Israel and win as Hamas did, it's overly optimistic for anyone to expect that being an actual government will have any moderating effect. But if you are the Bush administration and you've been telling everyone that your sole foreign policy aim is to spread freedom and democracy, aren't you beholden to try and work with democratically elected governments? I'm willing to accept that the answer is no in the case of Hamas, that the organization is too entwined with terrorism to ever become a partner of the U.S. But doesn't that require a complete re-thinking of this adventure in Iraq?
1 Comment(s):
- Posted by
BrooklynDodger at February 20, 2006 7:50 PM |
Permanent Link to this Comment
We thought it very cool that this post captured the ads:
Meet Palestinian Singles
Find Your Arab Soul Mate Today!
and
Calls deliver votes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Multiple candidates for Fatah indicate that Fatah is many parties, while Hamas is only one. Hamas mimics the Republicans in that it's dominated by religious fundamentalists.
