OK, remind me again why we should give Hamas a nickel, or why the Palestinians, who’ve never missed an oportunity to miss an oportunity, deserve a state (and not the Kurds?) Because from where I sit, all I can see is the partying in the streets after 9/11, and now the comes the reaction of Hamas to Zarqawi’s death – a man responsible for the death of thousands, and a man who took delight in beheading people: “With hearts full of faith, Hamas commends brother-fighter Abu Musab … who was martyred at the hands of the savage crusade campaign which targets the Arab homeland, starting in Iraq”. If Hamas considers Zarqawi a brother fighter, and Zarqawi clearly fought against the US, that means that Hamas considers themselves … in a fight against us. I say we don’t disappoint them.
Posts Tagged Palestine
Hamas Election
Mar 9
I enjoy history. Any period, any culture, history simply appeals to me. One of the nice things about it is that you can learn quite a lot just by reading, which I do. And another nice thing is that it provides perspective on the events of today. So one of the lessons of history I draw is that a major problem with rule by a single person, whether by king or despot, emporer or strong-man, whether accepted by the governed or subject to constant rebellion and resistance, is that its quality depends on the quality of a single individual. The character of government depends on the character of the ruler; even where the ruler wasn’t particularly able, they could recruit and rely on able subordinates if they were of a mind to. So looking at a nation under such a single person rule over time you see how the overall fortune of the nation depends on how good a ruler is curently ruling.
And its not just true of single person rule, it’s just easier to see there. The exact same thing is true of any government — it’s character depends on the character of the ruler(s). And so for representative governments, the character of the government depends on the character of the people. Harsh people lead to harsh rule; tolerant people to tolerant rule, wise people to wise rule, and foolish people to foolish rule. You get the idea.
That brings us to the results in the Palestinian election where Hamas, a terror organization (or not), was voted into office. Some people tell me that Hamas doesn’t reflect the Palestinian people. Oh really? Who does it represent then? The Israelis? Look, if the Palestinians wanted a less corrupt government and mutual existance with Israel, then a political party that espoused that view would have formed and been voted into office.
They’ll moderate under the pressures of governance alone I’m told. Really? Why should they? When have Palestinian governments every lived up to their end of agreements?
Maybe Hamas is just the natural response to Israeli intransience? Such a view ignores the reality – Israel is ready to coexist with a Palestinian state that is not out to destroy it, the Palestinians are not. (If Israel wanted all the Palestinians dead, they’d be dead already). And as far as Israeli violating a voluntary truce on the part of Hamas, why should Israel hold back against an avowed foe just because the foe wants a break?
And of course, what to do about funds for Palestine. Should the US and the EU continue to subsidize the Palestinian government, or should they be cut off? What about the money Israel collects on behalf of the Palestinian government? What will the effect be on the Palestinian people? Should the plight of the people who voted for terrorists to take over sway us? Sometimes, there are no good solutions, just muddling through as best as you can, and guess what – we have been in that situation in the middle east for a long time now.
We need to really keep in mind what the desired end state is, and work towards that with as much focus as we can — and that is two healthy states at peace with each other. The trick is in figuring out if that requires a firm stand on principle or flexible pragmatism. I think it requires what President Bush has been doing all along – clear expectations for both Palestine and Israel, and keeping our commitments either to withold or provide based on their behavior. The previous and current goverments of Palestine have not reflected favorably on the Palestinian character. I’m hoping that that changes.
(Whew! After singing in three Messiah concerts in 27 hours, it’s time for some non-vocal communication.)
I want to go back to something Kevin said on May 5, 2004 (post: “The State of Diplomacy”):
It means that the palestinians won’t get a state until they get serious about being a nation and not just an odd cross between victims and terrorists.
This statement is insightful, profound, and (best of all) true.
About a year ago I was reading the book: “Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East”, by Michael B. Oren, Oxford University Press, 2002. On page 3 Oren is talking about the Yishuv, the Jewish community in Palestine:
“By the 1940s, the Yishuv was a powerhouse in the making: dynamic, inventive, ideologically and politically pluralistic. Drawing on Western and Eastern European models, the Jews of Palestine created new vehicles for agrarian settlement (the communal kibbutz and cooperative moshav), a viable socialist economy with systems for national health, reforestation, and infrastructure development, a respectable university, and a symphony orchestra – and to defend them all, an underground citizen’s army, the Haganah.”
When I read that paragraph I thought, “What? An orchestra??!!!” I had thought of the early Jewish community in Palestine as a bunch of huddled refugees, hunkering down in the basement shelter and trying desperately to avoid being annihilated!
Well, I was wrong. The Yishuv did have somewhat of a siege mentality, but they also found time and enough violins to create a symphony orchestra and give concerts. That’s very interesting.
Victims don’t have orchestras. Terrorists don’t give concerts.
Nations do both of these things. And that’s a big difference.
I also remember reading sometime in the 1990s about the newly established Palestinian Authority. If I remember correctly, the article in Time magazine stated that the P.A. managed to collect even less money in taxes from the Palestinian areas than the Israelis had during their authority. If true, that’s pathetic!
Victims don’t pay taxes. Terrorists don’t pay taxes. Nations do pay taxes, and that’s partly how they build themselves into a functioning society and respectable member of the family of nations.
The Palestinians’ fate is not in their own hands. Their unhappy situation is partly a consequence of their own actions. That is reality. Behaving like a nation would go a long way toward changing their perception in the eyes of the rest of the world, where it really matters. Having an orchestra, and paying taxes, would also change their own self-image.
(I’m aware that the P.A. was corrupt, and perhaps Palestinian individuals avoided paying taxes that would just go to line some official’s pocket. If true, this would be a profound betrayal of a people’s hopes and dreams by Yasser Arafat. ‘Nuff said.)
So if you Palestinians want a state, you should start an orchestra and pay your taxes. Continue in that theme, and renounce your destructive intifada and the Hamas terrorists. After two generations of failure, it’s time to try doing something different.
If you search on Google for “Palestinian orchestra”, you will get some hits. Some of those links appear to refer to the early Jewish orchestra mentioned in the “Six Days of War” book. But there are also some references to an orchestra in Ramallah. It appears that some musicians had this idea before I did, and a few Palestinians aspire to play in the orchestra or to conduct it!
I wish them the best of success. Perhaps they could start with the opening Tenor aria from Messiah:
Comfort ye.
Comfort ye, my people, saith your God.
Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem,
And cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished [over],
That her iniquity is pardoned,
That her iniquity is pardoned.
The State of Diplomacy
May 5
If insanity is doing the same thing but expecting different results, a lot of the world goes crazy over Israel. A bunch of diplomats who were unsuccessful in the past in getting the Palestinians to stop killing Israelis in return for their own country are upset that President Bush wants to do something different – namely recognizing reality. So the old boundaries, which do not take into account “facts on the ground” are out; negotiations over the right of Palestinian return are out since Israel could never agree; and bargaining with the current power structure of the Palestinians which has only the legitimacy of force, is composed of terrorists, and has never bargained in good faith, and which has never renounced the destruction of Israel as the ultimate goal is also out. What does this mean?
Well, it means that the illusion of progress is over, and illusions die hard for those who believe them. It means that the Palestinians won’t get a state until they get serious about being a nation and not just an odd cross between victims and terrorists.
As for our state department, well, I’m not impressed. Someone I know worked at the state department. I noticed that they were reading Howard Zinn’s history of the US and was told that it was very popular there. I asked if they had heard of Walter Mead’s Special Providence. Nope. Never heard of it. On the one hand, you have a truly miserable book that’s all about how bad America is; on the other you have a book that offers a great deal of insight about America and diplomacy. Which is the popular book in the State Department? You got it, the miserable one.
