Uncovering the Peace Process Charade

"For Obama, Choice is Unified Palestinian Government or an Isolated Hamas"
A6, Thursday 1/22/09
By Steven Erlanger

Erlanger gets closer to uncovering the farce that is the current peace process when he writes about Hamas’ “popularity growing in the West Bank,” and Palestinians’ views of of Fatah as “collaborationist”. Yet these are only quick references meant to reinforce the view the notion Hamas is going nowhere. He fails to contend with, and thus fails to admit, the scale of this problem.

Erlanger notes the obvious choices of engaging Hamas or isolating it. He notes that with engagement there's “hope that Israeli military power and political reality will trump Hamas’ religious conviction that Israel must be destroyed.” He neglects to mention the legitimacy engagement will confer on Hamas, which could make harder dislodging its rule.

With isolating Hamas, there's “hope that Fatah can somehow be resurrected.” He writes somehow even though he writes in the first paragraph “on building up the West Bank as a political alternative to radical Islam.” Of course, that economic prosperity will trump struggle against Israel should rightly be viewed as a “somehow” scenario.

After all, what does it say about Palestinian society’s readiness for peace with Israel when Hamas’ popularity is soaring? This is such an obvious question that remains unasked. The answer's obvious and it doesn’t jive with the Times’ ignoring the issue.

Armed struggle against Israel is the Palestinians' preferred path. What other conclusion could be drawn? A minor reference to Fatah’s corruption and lack of reform goes nowhere, because there's nothing there. It is Hamas’ ability to provoke Israel and live through the response – and not some contrived image of clean governance – that's carried the day.

Erlanger makes a feeble attempt to explain Hamas’ popularity by pointing out Abbas’ failures. “His months of negotiation with Israel and the U.S. have been fruitless, while he has failed to reform Fatah.” Perhaps the failure to reform Fatah is the reason for fruitless negotiations, if one counts as reform the Palestinian commitment to advocating for peace, including a campaign against militancy.

Further, there is nothing of substance with the idea that lack of results in the peace process will send Palestinians running into the arms of armed struggle. Also, what fruit has armed struggle born?

Erlanger turns to “independent legislator” Ziad Abu Amr, who spells out two points consistently conveyed in Times coverage. The notion that “Hamas is a reality, and ‘maybe this is the time to engage Hamas’,” as expressed by Amr, has been a position the Times hasn’t itself advocated, but has used others to present.

The article ends quoting Amr, who, in reference to the Israeli elections, says that “we’ll just have to see what emerges on the other side.” A frequently-expressed concern of the Times is that Israelis choose a leader “truly” committed to a two-state solution. If only the Palestinians had a partner for peace.