When Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas recently spoke in Washington
and publicly condemned the killings of four Israelis by Hamas terrorists near
Hebron, it generated a feeling of cautious optimism: “What happened yesterday
and what is happening today is also condemned. We do not want at all that any
blood be shed, one drop of blood, on the part of the – from the Israelis or the
Palestinians,” Abbas said.
After years during which glorifying terror and
honoring terrorists has been a backbone of PA culture, was this statement
heralding real change? Unfortunately, an examination of the internal PA
responses to the attack, when not under the watchful eyes of Barack Obama,
Binyamin Netanyahu and the world media, quickly erased hope that the PA had
distanced itself from terror.
A comparison by Palestinian Media Watch of
the PA response to the murders of four Israeli civilians to their reaction to
the deaths during the flotilla confrontations, emphasizes that the PA’s response
to Hamas’s attack was not a condemnation of terror or violence at
all.
The central and recurring theme of PA leaders and PA-controlled
media in response to Hamas’s attack was criticism of the timing of the attack
because of the damage done to the Palestinian cause, and not criticism of the
killings themselves. The PA’s central and recurring theme in response to the
deaths on the flotilla was strong condemnation of what the PA repeatedly defined
as “a massacre” and “a crime.”
The day after the Hamas killings, official
PA media reported that “Prime Minister Dr. Salam Fayyad said that the operation
which took place tonight in the Hebron area and its timing, harms the efforts
being made by the PLO to gather international support for the Palestinian
position… He said: ‘We condemn this operation, which contradicts the Palestinian
interests and the efforts of the Palestinian leadership to gather international
support...’” [PLO news agency Wafa, Aug. 31, 2010]
Abbas, when he returned to
Ramallah, like Fayyad, lashed out at his political rival, Hamas, for the timing
of the shootings: “He [Abbas] said that the recent shooting operations in the
West Bank did not constitute resistance: ‘… For why isn’t [Hamas] resistance
happening every day, and isn’t happening at all, except on the day we went to
negotiations?!… Why did resistance become legitimate only today?” [Al- Ayyam,
Sept. 6, 2010]
The PA Minister of Religious Affairs Mahmoud Al-Habbash in his
Friday sermon after the killings continued this PA line as he condemned the
timing, even accusing Hamas of trying to help Netanyahu: “What is the secret of
the timing for carrying out armed operations in the West Bank? We want to know
the secret of the timing… Suddenly! – the moment that President Abbas reaches
Washington, the moment that Netanyahu finds himself in the corner, pressed,
forced to adapt and accommodate himself to the international approach, suddenly
there is a respite for Netanyahu, and the Palestinians are in distress [because
of the attacks]…” [PA TV (Fatah), Sept. 3, 2010]
SO THE PA objected to the
timing of the killings. Actually, were the PA sincere in their intention to
condemn the killings, the attack in Hebron was a great opportunity for them to
send a clear message to their people that violence is wrong and immoral. If it
was violence that they wanted to condemn, timing could not have been better.
Yet, none of the PA leaders seized this opportunity to condemn violence because
it is wrong.
When the Palestinian Authority wants to send a clear message
and seriously condemn what it perceives as terror, it knows how to do it. After
the flotilla confrontation in May, the PA controlled daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida in
a series of articles called Israel “pirates, murderers, barbarians,
transgressors of international law, lacking any connection with humanity,” [June
3] and referred to Israeli conduct as “more than piracy and more serious than a
massacre in its ugliness and its inhumanity. It is worse than a crime… a gang
dressed up as a state,” [June 5] and called to “protect humanity from Israeli
fascism… Another barbaric Israeli massacre, bringing shame upon humanity and the
civilized world… Israeli savagery… a massacre against humanity.” [June 1]
Tayseer Tamimi, then PA Chief Justice of Religious Court “denounced the shameful
crime,” [Al- Hayat Al-Jadida, June 5, 2010].
Abbas himself demonstrated
that when motivated, he too knows how to send a clear message of
condemnation.“Israel has carried out a great crime” [Al-Ayyam, June 17,
2010], he said, referring to “the killing of innocent people,“ [Al-Hayat
Al-Jadida, June 27, 2010], terming it “premeditated and with determination to
kill” [PA TV, May 31, 2010] and that Palestinians were “subjected to state
terrorism” [Al- Hayat Al-Jadida, June 3, 2010].
WHEN THE PA wanted to
condemn Israel’s conduct in the flotilla confrontations, the recurring themes
were “a new crime”, “a great crime”, “a long list of crimes”, “enemy crimes”, as
well as “massacre”, “bloody massacre” and “massacre against humanity.”
On
the other hand, never once was the murder of four Israeli civilians called a
“crime” and certainly not “a massacre.”
No PA leader condemned these
killings saying simply that killing is wrong. In fact, even Abbas in Washington
in his condemnation spoke not about a crime, a killing, or a shooting but chose
to condemn “what happened yesterday.”
Confirming the perception that the
PA has not ceased its terror glorification, the PA Minster of Prisoners visited
the homes of prisoners serving life sentences for murder, right after the Hamas
killings. The celebrations over Abbas’s “condemnation” of terror and the killing
of Israeli civilians were clearly premature.
This PA focus on the timing
of terror must be understood not as a shift in PA tactic but as part of the
long-term ongoing Palestinian policy. Senior member of the Palestinian
negotiating team, Nabil Sha’ath, after the Palestinian Authority called for the
cessation of violence a few months ago, explained repeatedly that the “armed
conflict” had to be temporarily put on hold “because of the inability to engage
in the armed struggle, which has become undesirable now, although it is the
right of the Palestinian people…” [May 20, 2010] “The current distancing from
the armed struggle does not mean its absolute rejection … especially since the
armed struggle at the present time is not possible, or is not effective…” [May
20] “It is our right to return to the armed conflict whenever we view that as
our people’s interest.’” [June 7, all in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida]
THE WORST problem
about the PA’s criticism of the timing of the Hamas attack is that far from
being the condemnation of terror that the world cheered, it is just the
opposite: it is a reiteration of terror. The message Palestinians take from
their leaders following this murder of four civilians is that terror remains a
valid political tool – when the timing is right and when there is political
gain. As senior PA leader Muhammad Dahlan explained: “This [the violent
resistance] is our right, a legal right. The international community affirms it
for us. But it is the responsibility of the leadership to use it when it wants,
in the proper place and at the proper time.” [PA TV (Fatah) July 22, 2009]
If
the PA wants to be a peace partner it must sincerely renounce and condemn
terror, and the PA must stop honoring terrorist murderers and turning them into
Palestinian heroes. This must be done not in Washington but in the PA areas and
in Arabic. If the PA continues to glorify terror and condemn only its poor
timing, then Israel still does not have a peace partner.
Itamar Marcus is
director of Palestinian Media Watch (www.palwatch.org).
Nan Jacques Zilberdik is
an analyst at Palestinian Media Watch.