Posed
by Matías Bakit to Minaret of Freedom Institute president
Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad
El Mercurio newspaper, Santiago, Chile
Q. What
are the main reasons for HAMAS’s victory?
A. The
main reason for HAMAS's victory was that voters sought an alternative
to the
corrupt, failing and fractious FATAH regime. The corruption of FATAH
was well
known, but their use of American tax money for what were really
campaign
purposes in the days before the election was an embarrassment that
drove home
the point of their corruption to the Palestinian voters. The main
failure of
the FATAH regime was their inability to conclude a peace treaty within
the Oslo
framework. The Palestinians had abandoned their objection to the
existence of
the state of Israel on pragmatic grounds, that they should obtain
sovereignty
and peace and they had been given neither. Further, it is widely
believed among
Palestinians that Mahmoud Abbas is prepared to abandon the
Palestinians' right
to return to their homes guaranteed by International law. HAMAS was
seen as the
only viable alternative to FATAH's failures, an organization that had
provided
the kinds of services the PA could not, that is largely free of
corruption, and
that would be less prone to unacceptable compromises. Finally, FATAH
divided
its support among rival factions while HAMAS's united front allowed it
to get
more seats than their 44% popular vote would command had FATAH been
unified.
Q. It is said
that HAMAS will be a disaster
for peace in Middle East. Is that so? Why?
A. There
is widespread concern that HAMAS's commitment to the destruction of the
state
of Israel, especially given the violent history of its military wing,
makes it
unsuited to negotiate peace in the Middle East. Further there is the
fear that
even if HAMAS moderates its views or overlooks them as irrelevant to
its new
role as representative of the Palestinian people, that Israel will
nevertheless
refuse to accept it as a negotiating partner. These obstacles, however,
may not
necessarily be insurmountable. They were, after all, the same argument
put
forth against PLO/Israel negotiations before Oslo, or for that matter
put forth
against the possibility of an East-West peace before American-Soviet
detente
became a reality. HAMAS has already expressed its willingness to
include FATAH
in the new government, has built bridges to the Christian Palestinians,
and
showed by its observance of the PA's truce with Israel that it can
behave pragmatically
even while adhering to its fundamental positions. In any case, Mahmoud
Abbas
remains the President of the PA for the time being and it is with him
that the
Israelis must negotiate. HAMAS has already announced that they will not
obstruct Abbas' negotiations with Israel. Whether Israel will give
HAMAS the
opportunity to join in the efforts for peace is a more difficult
question, but
it is in Israel's interest to do so and America has a great deal of
influence
with Israel and could be helpful if it chooses to be.
Q. Is
there a possibility of a truce by HAMAS?
A. Yes.
HAMAS largely observed the PA's truce with Israel despite Israeli
provocations.
Even the most fanatical Muslim extremists accept that long-term truces
are part
of Islamic law. This is really in Israel's hands as the Qur'an
commands,
"If the enemy inclines towards peace, the do you incline towards peace
and
trust in God."
Q. What
would be the effects of the loss of international aid for Palestine?
A. In
all probability the loss of Western aid would be made up for by an
increase in
aid from other sources, less favorably inclined towards Israel, which
would
remove some of the incentives for HAMAS to show patience with the peace
process
or with problematical Israeli actions.
Q. What
do you think the Israeli State will do?
A. Speculation
is best postponed until after the
Israeli elections in March. Nonetheless, I think that it is most likely
that
Israel will proceed with extreme caution. At the moment the world
community
understands their concerns, but it could hurt them to press their point
too
far. The country that has been led by Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon
undermines itself by protesting that leaders of other governments are
associated
with terrorism.
Q. What
are the chances for peace?