Everyone’s all abuzz over the Hamas win in the palestinian elections. Personally, I think it’s incredibly difficult to predict what might happen. that’s the rub with the democratic process: you might not like who they elect, but it’s nearly impossible to invalidate their choice.

and i think that’s precisely what the palestinians are looking for – validation and acknowledgement. it’s a wake up call, saying, “hey we’re here, and we won’t be ignored any longer. this is the party we think can get stuff done.”

but how do you engage with a group who simultaneously refuse to acknowledge a state, and call for its destruction? (there’s a conundrum!) How do you attempt to change the dialogue without implicitly recognising their position? in that respect, i think it’s very clever – the palestinians finally have the ball in their court, and the power of legitimacy behind it. it’s the strongest position they’ve ever held, and i can understand why they’ve done it.

but have they cut off their nose to spite their face? as slate says, “With Hamas democratically elected into power, a peace process leading to the formation of a Palestinian state is no longer a viable option—unless the organization completely changes its ways.” They’ve either played it brilliantly, or painted themselves into a corner.

in a way, it charges both sides with trying to do things differently. to play ball with the big boys, hamas will have to step up their game. and to support them in reaching that new level, the westernised countries will have to let them in to play. both sides will have to drop some of the rhetoric which makes drawing lines in the sand such an easy option. the real work either starts here, or ends before it’s begun.

the only alternative is bloodshed.

Like this post

Unlike