The Hamas landslide
lemonde: Hamas' landslide win at the Palestinian elections on 25 January has been greeted with indignant warnings and commentaries from the United States and the European Union, including France. We need to put this event in context.
Though the election was held under foreign occupation, more than three-quarters of registered voters cast their vote. It was a victory for democracy and proof that Palestinians care about it. Some 900 international observers reported the election to have been free and fair.
Voters expressed their rejection of the policies of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Fatah on at least two levels. They condemned their inability to create sound institutions, eliminate corruption or improve daily life. Everyone in Palestine is aware of the permanent constraints of an occupation that has been in place for nearly 40 years but, even taking that into account, the PA's record is poor. It is equally poor in regard to negotiations with Israel since the 1993 Oslo accords.
Mahmoud Abbas' whole gamble since he was elected president in January 2005 was that a moderate position would kickstart the peace process. That didn't happen. Ariel Sharon, having said for so long that Yasser Arafat was an obstacle to peace, offered nothing to his successor. With the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza came further expansion of settlements and faster building of the separation wall, regardless of condemnation by the international court at The Hague. That was the whole point of the withdrawal. The checkpoints and restrictions have continued to make daily life impossible for Palestinians, the number of political prisoners increased to several thousand and so on.
It is therefore strange to hear US and European leaders pondering how to "continue the peace process". But no process existed before the elections: it had stopped with Sharon's election. Read more
Though the election was held under foreign occupation, more than three-quarters of registered voters cast their vote. It was a victory for democracy and proof that Palestinians care about it. Some 900 international observers reported the election to have been free and fair.
Voters expressed their rejection of the policies of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Fatah on at least two levels. They condemned their inability to create sound institutions, eliminate corruption or improve daily life. Everyone in Palestine is aware of the permanent constraints of an occupation that has been in place for nearly 40 years but, even taking that into account, the PA's record is poor. It is equally poor in regard to negotiations with Israel since the 1993 Oslo accords.
Mahmoud Abbas' whole gamble since he was elected president in January 2005 was that a moderate position would kickstart the peace process. That didn't happen. Ariel Sharon, having said for so long that Yasser Arafat was an obstacle to peace, offered nothing to his successor. With the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza came further expansion of settlements and faster building of the separation wall, regardless of condemnation by the international court at The Hague. That was the whole point of the withdrawal. The checkpoints and restrictions have continued to make daily life impossible for Palestinians, the number of political prisoners increased to several thousand and so on.
It is therefore strange to hear US and European leaders pondering how to "continue the peace process". But no process existed before the elections: it had stopped with Sharon's election. Read more
posted by exoplanet at 3:14 PM
<< Home