Carter's visit to the Mideast.
Ahmed Hany
May 05, 2008
Carter´s visit to the Mideast was an important step to reach the "moment of truth" which is essential for any peace process to be successful. It showed that Hamas as an organization in not considered a terrorist group in all American circles. Carter as an ex-president has influence in the Democratic Party. At the same time, we did not hear any criticism from his party about his meeting with Hamas in spite of the electoral campaign when usually nominees talk carefully about the Mideast not to anger the Zionist Lobby.
Is this a message from the Democratic Party that if one of its nominees became the next US president, the new administration might talk to Hamas? When Foreign Secretary Rice criticized Carter for meeting with Hamas leaders, he denied that the present administration asked him not to meet them. Then the present administration took a path of a "wait and see" then followed by criticism. Personally, I do not believe that ex-President Carter may cross red lines of the American National Security. He will not meet Osama Bin Laden or any high rank Qaeda leader whatsoever the cause. Both Qaeda and Hamas are blacklisted as terrorist groups. Carter described Gaza siege as a crime.
Did the present American Administration send a message to Israel that talks with Hamas is inevitable if peace process is to be successful? On the other hand, the new cons send a different message to Israel and to the Zionist Lobby that if Democrats won they would talk to Hamas so that the Lobby that usually supports Democrats may change its stance during the forthcoming elections.
An Israeli Minister expressed his willingness to negotiate with Hamas about the kidnapped solider. Khalid Mashaal, the exiled Hamas leader agreed to a Palestinian State within borders of 1967 if the Palestinian people agreed to it in a referendum. This means that Hamas accepts the peace process. No one has the right to oblige Hamas to recognize Israel as there are extremist parties in Israel do not recognize Palestinian people and its right to have an independent state. Israel threatens Mahmood Abbas that it would halt negotiations if he talks to Hamas. While its negotiators talk to it through a third party, which is Egypt to reach a truce.
Israel announces tenders for building new settlements when there is a slight hope of reaching anything. Olmart thinks about saving his weak government more than thinking about the peace process. He is reluctant to take serious steps towards peace not to anger the fundamentalist parties and lose majority in the Knesset. Abbas thinks about negotiations more than reconciliation with Hamas. Hamas thinks about Syria and Iran more than thinking about reaching a deal to reach a Palestinian State.
President Bush is one of the few men in this world who believes that a Palestinian State will be reached by the end of this year. In Abbas´ last visit to Washington; they talked about bases or framework for the Palestinian State not about the Palestinian State itself. Bush´s administration does not take any serious steps towards pressing Israel to stop building new settlements.
Palestinian leaders should answer the question of reunion and negotiations. Which is best for the higher Palestinian cause reunion of factions or continuing the non-productive negotiations? As negotiations are non-productive then reunion with other Palestinian factions including Hamas will empower the Palestinian Authority even if Israel withdraws from the negotiations. At the same time as Hamas accepted peace then why it did not accept legality and annuls the consequences of its coup.
The Americans are more occupied with what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan more than what is happening in Palestine and Israel. For the first time since sixty years, American citizens will go to the next election to choose what is best for their troops more than what is best for Israel. This is a warning to Israel. The Americans started to understand that the road to Baghdad passes through Jerusalem. Palestinian leaders should put this into minds when they either negotiate or talk about their reconciliation.
Is this a message from the Democratic Party that if one of its nominees became the next US president, the new administration might talk to Hamas? When Foreign Secretary Rice criticized Carter for meeting with Hamas leaders, he denied that the present administration asked him not to meet them. Then the present administration took a path of a "wait and see" then followed by criticism. Personally, I do not believe that ex-President Carter may cross red lines of the American National Security. He will not meet Osama Bin Laden or any high rank Qaeda leader whatsoever the cause. Both Qaeda and Hamas are blacklisted as terrorist groups. Carter described Gaza siege as a crime.
Did the present American Administration send a message to Israel that talks with Hamas is inevitable if peace process is to be successful? On the other hand, the new cons send a different message to Israel and to the Zionist Lobby that if Democrats won they would talk to Hamas so that the Lobby that usually supports Democrats may change its stance during the forthcoming elections.
An Israeli Minister expressed his willingness to negotiate with Hamas about the kidnapped solider. Khalid Mashaal, the exiled Hamas leader agreed to a Palestinian State within borders of 1967 if the Palestinian people agreed to it in a referendum. This means that Hamas accepts the peace process. No one has the right to oblige Hamas to recognize Israel as there are extremist parties in Israel do not recognize Palestinian people and its right to have an independent state. Israel threatens Mahmood Abbas that it would halt negotiations if he talks to Hamas. While its negotiators talk to it through a third party, which is Egypt to reach a truce.
Israel announces tenders for building new settlements when there is a slight hope of reaching anything. Olmart thinks about saving his weak government more than thinking about the peace process. He is reluctant to take serious steps towards peace not to anger the fundamentalist parties and lose majority in the Knesset. Abbas thinks about negotiations more than reconciliation with Hamas. Hamas thinks about Syria and Iran more than thinking about reaching a deal to reach a Palestinian State.
President Bush is one of the few men in this world who believes that a Palestinian State will be reached by the end of this year. In Abbas´ last visit to Washington; they talked about bases or framework for the Palestinian State not about the Palestinian State itself. Bush´s administration does not take any serious steps towards pressing Israel to stop building new settlements.
Palestinian leaders should answer the question of reunion and negotiations. Which is best for the higher Palestinian cause reunion of factions or continuing the non-productive negotiations? As negotiations are non-productive then reunion with other Palestinian factions including Hamas will empower the Palestinian Authority even if Israel withdraws from the negotiations. At the same time as Hamas accepted peace then why it did not accept legality and annuls the consequences of its coup.
The Americans are more occupied with what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan more than what is happening in Palestine and Israel. For the first time since sixty years, American citizens will go to the next election to choose what is best for their troops more than what is best for Israel. This is a warning to Israel. The Americans started to understand that the road to Baghdad passes through Jerusalem. Palestinian leaders should put this into minds when they either negotiate or talk about their reconciliation.
Print
Email
