The British legacy of messes

Hamas drops call for destruction of Israel from manifesto

Hamas has dropped its call for the destruction of Israel from its manifesto for the Palestinian parliamentary election in a fortnight, a move that brings the group closer to the mainstream Palestinian position of building a state within the boundaries of the occupied territories.

The Islamist faction, responsible for a long campaign of suicide bombings and other attacks on Israelis, still calls for the maintenance of the armed struggle against occupation. But it steps back from Hamas's 1988 charter demanding Israel's eradication and the establishment of a Palestinian state in its place.

The manifesto makes no mention of the destruction of the Jewish state and instead takes a more ambiguous position by saying that Hamas had decided to compete in the elections because it would contribute to "the establishment of an independent state whose capital is Jerusalem".

Baby steps - the world does not change overnight. Even when you wake up one morning and your whole world is different, like it was on September 11, the change was taking place years before. September 11th was the culmination of a long process that started with the creation of Israel. No amount of pro-Israeli sentiment is going to change the fact that Arabs were the people living in Palestine since the 700s until the Zionists decided they wanted to take the land. How would you like it if some group came in and took your land based on their racist beliefs? And how did all of this mess gain legitimacy? British Mandate.*

Regardless of how it started, you can't change the fact that what is done is done and both sides need to figure out a way to live together. Compromise is the essence of peace. People get tired of violence and death, thank god, for if they did not, wars would never end. Fortunately, our history is filled with brave people who were fed up with violence and took a stand against the violence itself rather than against one side or the other. Rabin was one of these people, and the violence won. But it doesn't have to.

Engagement is the key to any unsolvable conflict. It was the key to peace in Northern Ireland, it is the key to peace in Israel/Palestine. The parallels between the two situations are such that they should be studied more closely. First, however, the myth that Islamic terrorists are any worse than the IRA must be dispelled. There is a reason they are called terrorists. Blowing up a cafe in Tel Aviv is the same as blowing up a pub in Belfast. Just because some of our ancestors may have been involved in IRA activities doesn't make their actions less atrocious. My own Irish ancestors came from County Tyrone in the North, where Omagh is located. Who knows if some of my cousins were involved in IRA activity?

Face it - excluding groups you don't like from the democratic process is not only undemocratic, but it gives the groups a reason to continue their violence (or to start it if they weren't violent before.) My organization isn't allowed to work with certain groups because of alleged connections to militia groups like Hamas, even though Hamas and these other groups represent a portion of the people. Quite frankly, I wish we could work with Hamas and give them some proper training on democracy rather than leaving them up to their own devices. If they try to participate in a democracy with weak institutions and no plan to strengthen them, stability will never come. (And by working with Hamas, I mean the groups associated with them like the Ramallah Chamber of Commerce.)

As for the title of this post, I think you can get the idea.

*I hate to have to qualify what I've written with a statement declaring that I am NOT an anti-Semite, but that is the nature of any discussions about the conflict. I support the peace-loving peoples on both sides, and I despise the warmongerers on both sides. I believe in the maxim "do unto others." Am I making someone angry by this post? I don't mean to. It's a touchy subject.