OPINION & EDITORIAL
Hamas must be part of discussion
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Wasim Salman:
- Hamas must be part of discussion (November 30, 2007)
- Madison's history proud, not for sale (November 15, 2007)
- Graffiti speaks to urban condition (November 2, 2007)
- Surveillance evokes Orwellian reality (October 4, 2007)
- Russian-Chinese coalition revives Cold War realities (September 20, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Peace attempts in Israel destined for failure, Hamas to blame (November 28, 2006)
- Israel right to reject Hamas government (March 22, 2007)
- 'Two roads diverged...' (September 14, 2004)
- Israel, not Palestine, wants war to continue (March 7, 2002)
- Middle East ceasefire saves lives; generates hope, not dissent (November 30, 2006)
by Wasim Salman
Friday, November 30, 2007
Currently, hopes for a lasting peace in Palestine and Israel are being placed on the shoulders of Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at a conference at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md. The hope for this conference is that subjects such as the building of Israeli settlements, Israeli control of Jerusalem and control of water sources will be settled by the end of the Bush presidency in December 2008. In spite of such lofty goals, the actual chance of success in achieving a lasting compromise in any one of the discussed fields is virtually nonexistent.
Looking at the history of such talks, one can begin to understand why the rate of failure is so high and the rate of success so low. The first of such peace initiatives took place in 1967 after Israel had won a war against allied Arab militaries, in which Israel had gained a large quantity of land and control of Jerusalem. After the war, the UN Security Council declared Resolution 242, which stated Israel must withdraw "from territories occupied in the recent conflict."
However, the imprecise wording of the resolution led the Israeli government to believe that this withdrawal was not applicable to all territories gained, where the Arab states argued that it was. Resolution 242 (despite its ambiguous wording) then became the basis for each subsequent and failed attempt at creating a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine.
The next major attempt at establishing peace between Israel and Palestine took place in 1993 in Oslo, Norway. The Oslo negotiations took place between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestine Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat. What made the Oslo negotiations unique was that this was the first time the two sides had negotiated and reached an agreement with no intermediaries.
The Oslo agreement was then signed and stated that the Israeli government would withdraw from Gaza and the West Bank (territories gained in the 1967 war) in stages, allowing Palestinian autonomy. In turn, the PLO would recognize that Israel has a right to exist in peace. However, due to the rejection of the Oslo agreement by both Israeli settler groups and Palestinian groups such as Hamas, violence continued and Oslo, the most promising of all agreements, fell through.
After constant negotiations and consistently failing to establish a long-term peace plan, it is no wonder that hopes for achieving success in Annapolis, to any degree, are low. Quite simply, this round of negotiations is guaranteed to fail because the preconditions set up by the conference are unfair and unrealistic.
Messrs. Olmert and Bush are only willing to deal with Mr. Abbas and his Fatah party — who now control the West Bank — yet are unwilling to deal with the democratically elected political group Hamas — who control Gaza — because they are viewed as terrorists by both America and Israel.
If Annapolis were a serious attempt at peace, all sides would have been engaged. It is understandable that Hamas is viewed as a threat to both peace and life in Israel, and it is very shortsighted, on the Palestinians' behalf, to have elected a party into office that both the reigning superpower and its closest ally have blacklisted. However, in negotiating only with those they approve of, Messrs. Olmert and Bush have sown the seeds of failure for any attempts at peace.
This new round of negotiations will not achieve a lasting peace or agreement of any kind, and that is the shameful reality of this whole sordid affair. Rather than really aim for grand ideals like coexistence and the preservation of life, each side has opted for the road most trampled and have decided that the way things were are the way things always have to be.
With Israel and the United States only willing to engage in dialogue with those who agree with them and the Palestinian voice caught between rage and concession, nothing can be expected to change. Many Israelis will have to die and many more Palestinians will have to die all because those involved at Annapolis are afraid of what true peace might look like.
Wasim Salman (salman@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in international relations.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 1:02am):
Hamas: "Israel should not exist"
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 2:26am):
to 1:02 ... Its not about "Israel not existing", clown, its about Israel not being an aparthied state. Its pretty simple really, what if everytime Blacks in the 60's said "we need to change society, we want equality" society inerperted that to mean you want "America not to exist". Or how about when the world community said South Africa should end aparthied and they reacted by saying "you don't want to exist". The reality is that All of Israel is an occupying force and has been since its inception. Zionism is built on the idea of ethnic cleansing. To say that Isreal should not be a "Jewish" country (just as no country should be for one religion) and should end its committment to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is not "Israel shouldn't exist" but rather "Israel should not exist in its current form which is founded on the basis of occupation, subjugation, and ethnic cleansing".
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 8:07am):
Both Hamas and the settlers should be left out of peace talks. How do you discuss peace with a group of people who think the other group should all be dead? Neither is reasonable, neither cares about peace, and both are just a bunch of criminals.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 9:09am):
Mr. Salman, I fully agree with your foresight. Understanding the cultures there and what is really going on the ground is fundamental to effective negotiations that lead to success in a lasting peace
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 9:28am):
Wasim, give us one good reason why Hamas should be included in any peace talks. They shoot off rockets daily into Israel. They brainwash Palestinians, especially kids, into hating Jews. They threaten anyone who disagrees with them. And now they have al-Qaeda operatives in Gaza training tomorrow's jihadists.
Yeah, that's a bunch of "peacemakers" that folks are willing to sit down at the table with. Right? Like they're actually gonna get serious about peace this time with Hamas in the deal. Right?
Wasim, do us all a favor and start paying attention in class for once. You might learn something about why goons with guns should never be allowed the courtesy of being include in peace negotiations. The only thing I'm willing to negotiate with terrorists is their immediate and unconditional surrender.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 10:04am):
"being an aparthied state"
Would you rather see an Islamic apartheid state? Muslims have far more rights in Israel that Jews have in many Islamic states.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 10:26am):
"You might learn something about why goons with guns should never be allowed the courtesy of being include in peace negotiations."
Right, cause Fatah is composed of prim proper gentlemen who abhor guns. As long as Israel has laws that discriminate against non-Jews, we (I am Israeli) cannot claim to have any moral high ground.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 10:49am):
2:26am, go fuck yourself! You obviously hate Jews. Israel belonged to them a long time ago. Then those trashy Muslims came along and took it away. Now the Jews have it back. It's the Muslims who need to get the hell out of Israel!
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 12:07pm):
Wasim, whassup! Hey listen, if you Muslims think the West is so friggin' evil, what the hell are you doing here? Go back. We are really fed up with you Muslims coming over here and blaming our glut for oil and our support for Israel for all the terrorism. Fine, we'll just sit back and let Israel nuke the oil fields off the planet-we only get 20% of our oil from there nowadays-and you can offer $5 camel rides to all the tourists to pay for your upkeep. Of course, you'll have to wait until the radiation dissipates before the tourists will come. And what's gonna be left for the tourists to see after Israel blows it all away?
Bitch-bitch-bitch, that's all you Muslims can do. If I want to listen to bitchin' I'll turn on O'Reilly. It's free and I can turn it off anytime I want.
Call a teddy bear "Mohammed" and you all go ballistic. They want her executed, for chrissakes! To me, that's the real Islam. Stop flinging this Islam-is-a-religion-of-peace bullshit in our faces and face the fact that you Muslims are just a bunch of psychos. We got enough psychos over here already, we don't need any more.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 12:12pm):
"Right, cause Fatah is composed of prim proper gentlemen who abhor guns. As long as Israel has laws that discriminate against non-Jews, we (I am Israeli) cannot claim to have any moral high ground."
I know several Israelis on this campus and I have never heard any of them say "cause." And none of them seem to feel that Israel discriminates against non-Jews, rather it is the non-Jews who are so hostile to Jews. And while they agree that Hamas deserves what it gets, the Israelis aren't really read to trust Fatah just yet. Abbas certainly has a lot of proving to do before he could be considered a true peace partner.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 1:53pm):
Negotiating with Muslims is useless because their holy book tells them that they should lie to the infidel and that they are not bound by any promise made to an infidel.
The Shia and Sunni lie to each other, and they murder each other constantly - why should the infidel expect any better treatment?
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 3:05pm):
10:49 and 12:07, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't appreciate anti-Semetic comments so keep your hate speech to yourselves.
12:12, while it's true that non-Jews in Israel might receive better treatment than minorities in say Saudi Arabia, Israel claims to be a democracy and so should act as such in all regards.
Many Christians do not feel welcome in Israel (ex. being fined for "proselytizing," being spit on by Yeshiva students, etc.). Of course, Palestinian citizens of Israel have it much worse, with restrictions on land, voting, education, development, etc.
Demographically, the goals of maintaining a Jewish state and practicing a democracy are incompatible. Many Israelis realize this and struggle with the inherent conflict. It's time that Israel abandoned one of those two goals, and I'd certainly opt for democracy.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 3:18pm):
Wasim for World Emperor
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 3:25pm):
Blame Israel for not wanting to negotiate for peace with a terrorist group that by definition rejects peace? Come on Wasim, you have got to be smarter than that. And instead of saying Hamas is "viewed as terrorists by both America and Israel," why don't you just tell the truth: They ARE terrorists (and that view is not just held by America and Israel). Those like you who are unwilling to call Hamas's actions what they are- terrorism- contribute to the failure of reaching peace. Shame on you.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 9:42pm):
Wasim, bro, Islam seems pretty strict. That's not cool in my book. So what, I eat ham and wear silk ties? How does anyone think that rule after rule after rule is going to be attractive to an infidel like me? If I wanted so many damn rules, I'd be a Jew or something.
Anonymous (November 30, 2007 @ 11:35pm):
"10:49 and 12:07, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't appreciate anti-Semetic comments so keep your hate speech to yourselves."
Spoken like a true Muslim. Hate speech? Compared to what?
Anonymous (December 1, 2007 @ 5:46pm):
It's not that Hamas wasn't invited, it's just they sort of refused to be inivited, Wasim. Further, they, you know, are kind of violently opposed to the existence of a state that is participating in the negotiations. That's all. That's not really coming to the negotiating table with peace in mind, now is it?
Anonymous (December 2, 2007 @ 10:18am):
11:35. It's (former) Christian, actually. Nice to meet you.
Personally, I don't think those kinds of comments are worth the time for anyone wishing to have a serious conversation. If you think ethnic slurs and other ad hominem attacks contribute to progress, give me your argument.
Anonymous (December 2, 2007 @ 11:57am):
It's simple. Nobody wanted Fatah and Hamas shooting the place up, or bringing in bombs strapped to babies or something.
Anonymous (December 2, 2007 @ 2:52pm):
"Anti-Semite!"
"Muslim-hater!"
Fools... every last one of you. Thank God I stopped believing in myth stories.
Anonymous (December 3, 2007 @ 3:52pm):
Anti-jihadist @ 9:28am: "The only thing I'm willing to negotiate with terrorists is their immediate and unconditional surrender."
What do you make of Kaddafi winning a UN Security Council seat through "surrender" of his raped Bulgarian hostages?
Quid pro quo?
Westerners need to decide whether they really want to win this war; or just "pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
Anonymous (December 3, 2007 @ 4:12pm):
"afraid of what true peace might look like."
Nice terrorism sympathizer kaffiyeh, Wasim. Really makes it easier for Homeland Security to identify you.
10,000+ Jihadist attacks since 9/11 don't lie
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
If this were 1938, would the Badger Herald publish American Bund propaganda?
Anonymous (April 7, 2008 @ 11:24am):
It was Palestinians that danced in the streets on 9/11, not Israelis. It was the Palestinians that danced in the streets when a gunman mowed down students in a religious school.
In addition, there is NO state called "Palestine." Where you referring to the Palestinian terroristories? I mean territories. These are not a people who want peace. Wake up Madison. Wake up Wasim.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
