Thursday, January 26, 2006

The End of the Peace Process?

I just read this article from the Christian Science Monitor, and it scared the hell out of me. I don't even have a response at the moment. Hamas has just won the Palestinian election. They now legally control that territory. A fundamentalist Muslim terrorist group is now a legitimately elected government!!! Does this undermine democracy? Perhaps not, but it does undermine the theory that the spread of democracy in the Middle East will help the United States' standing in the region.

Alas, I don't have anything constructive to say, except that if ever there were a time for prayer...

6 comments:

Sandalstraps said...

Good question, and an important one.

However, alas, they do habe enough seats that they don't have to form a coalition to govern, which means that there won't be many internal checks on them to deradicalize them.

Tom said...

I'm tempted to quote an REM song here. I'll bet you could guess which one. Only time will tell what this really means.

Yes, Hamas won enough votes. I don't believe that they are that interested in a coallition government no matter what they might say to the contrary right now. But we won't know until they take power.

Oddly enough, it may very well be the end of the world as we know it, but I feel fine. The Middle East was unstable prior to the Palestinian election. The Middle East is unstable now. This could be a round-about path to some stability, or it could lead to an even more open hostility between Palestine and Israel forcing the US's hand in defending Israel and further undermining our standing in the Middle East.

But we won't know anything until we know.

Sandalstraps said...

Personally I see here only doom and gloom, so I'm forcing myself to write at least hope hopelessly optimistic forecast. Here it is (in keeping with some neo-con assumptions, though not quite as strong as Brians D = L):

Hamas, having been legitimately elected to lead (and represent) Palestine, decides that they need to compromise some in order to gain some external legitimacy to match their overwhelming internal legitimacy.

The US and Israel, seeing Hamas' dedication to their own people (and, as such, their willingness to cooperate more with the peace process) decide that it would be unwise to categorically rule out negotiations with Hamas.

Peace talks resume, with willing (if leery) partners in Isarel, Hamas, and the US (along with whoever else wants to/is able to join). During the peace talks, encouraged by their newfound participating in both the democratic and diplomatic process, Hamas grows less militant and more diplomatic. The learn, in other words, how to be a legitimate governing body.

This is not probable, but it is possible. It is made more likely by the overwelming nature of Hamas' victory in the election, because now everyone knows that when Hamas speaks they speak for Palestine, and so they (if we are wise) cannot be excluded or frozen out.

At least now we know where we stand, and that is one positive. We also have demonstarted to Hamas that democracy "works" at least in the sense that if you participate in the democratic process your voice will be heard more clearly than if you bomb busses.

In other words, the D = L hypothsis could be ammended to D = moderate tolerance without sending the Middle East into chaos.

That said, this election does show one fundamental flaw in democracy: "the people" do not always know what is in their own interests. While democracy gives many potentially marginalized people a voice, it does not, by itself, help them use their voice with any wisdom. So, in the US we have (at least the second time) a legitimately elected president of questionable (at best) wisdom.

Now in Palestine Hamas has been legitimately empowered by the election, but they are not obviously in the best interests of Palestinians (though they do "take care of their own" and, as the cliche goes, "all elections are local"). I say this because Palestinians should know that it is ultimately in their best interests to make peace with Israel, and Hamas does not seem too interested in peace, unless that peace is brought about by the destuction of Israel.

But I said I would present a more optimistic picture. So, maybe this victory will encourage Hamas to participate in the peace process, and maybe the nature of this victory will teach the US and Israel that there is no way to get around dealing with Hamas.

Tom said...

This entire process reminds me somewhat of the culture war (particularly in light of new comments posted by our beloved dissenter).

How can you peacefully coexist with "infidels" who have stolen your land, which is rightfully yours according to the God you know (not just believe) to be on your side? How do you get along with those who take your "sacred" and treat it as a lie? There is no common ground or good will here.

When we're protecting our homes and families we will stop at nothing. When we're defending our land (or ideology) in the name of (and according to the will/with the help of) our God, what can stand against us? Think of the power of a passage like Romans 8 (beginning at verse 28). Religion (especially the absolutist religions practiced by conservative Christians and groups like Hammas) spurns the worst thoughts and deeds performed by all of humanity. There is no common ground when defending what is absolutely right.

I see no room for or hope of peace from both fronts.

(Maybe I'm just having a bad day, and will return to optimism soon. Who knows?)

Sandalstraps said...

I did not say that it is in Palestine's best interests to recognize and accept Israel's statehood, nor did I say (as has not been claimed yet) that it is in Israel's best interests to recognize and accept the eventual statehood of Palestine. I did not say that, yet... So let me say it now.

It is in the best interests of both Palestine and Israel to recognize and accept each other. This is not the case just as an end, but also as a means to a more obviously good end: peace.

Israel isn't going away just because Hamas wishes it would (and acts on those wishes); and, now that Hamas is now legitimately in control of Palestine, it isn't going anywhere just because the US and Israel say they won't negotiate with Palestine under Hamas leadership.

For there to be true and lasting peace the hardline elements calling for destruction of the "other" need to realize that the destruction their aiming for is a mutual destruction.

Now that Hamas has to hold Palestine together, my innate (and often repressed) optimism says that perhaps they'll realize that for Palestine to prosper there must be peace (and cooperation), and that peace can't be brought about by their violence. They simply aren't capable of destroying Israel, no matter how many suicide (homicide) bombers they send out.

And maybe, now that Hamas controls Palestine, Israel and the US will also realize that they must cooperate with the "other" (Hamas) in order to bring about that true and lasting peace which is in the best interests of all parties.

Sandalstraps said...

Yes, well all suffer for our foolish choice to follow fools.

As Obi-Wan once asked (in what was once simply Star Wars, and is now Episode IV: A New Hope):

"Who's the more foolish: the fool or the fool who follows him?"

But, as we've seen in America, the results of the democratic process in one country can be disasterous in many others. Much of the world has suffered because of American elections. Now much of the world stands to suffer because of the Palestinian election, and the decisions that very well could be made as the US and Israel respond to that election.

Those of us who wish to follow less foolish fools must make our voices heard, and soon! As Brian Cubbage has noted here before, we all stand (to a degree) condemned when those elected by our fellow citizens (and by extension us, even if we voted for "the other guy") do stupid stuff.