Post: The "essence" of Hamas is to liberate Palestinians, not to destroy Israel.'>

False hope on Hamas

EU's Solana to Post: The "essence" of Hamas is to liberate Palestinians, not to destroy Israel.

October 29, 2006 20:53
3 minute read.
False hope on Hamas

solana cool angle 298.88. (photo credit: AP)


Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analyses from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user experience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Report and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew - Ivrit
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief

UPGRADE YOUR JPOST EXPERIENCE FOR 5$ PER MONTH Show me later Don't show it again

Israel and the member-nations of the European Union, it need hardly be pointed out, often have very different interests and policy imperatives. It is entirely unsurprising, and entirely legitimate, for them to view certain unfolding events via different prisms and to draw differing conclusions about how best to grapple with changing realities. Yet Israel and the EU see themselves as fundamentally allied in innumerable areas, including the global struggles against terrorism and for greater democratization and improved human rights policies. And the EU, along with the US, Russia and the UN, constitutes one of the Quartet members overseeing the quagmired efforts to achieve Israeli-Palestinian peace. In this context, it is dismaying to recognize the degree to which the EU's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, views some of our realities in this region differently from the way they are perceived not only by most Israelis but by many informed outsiders, too. Solana, who is currently on a multi-nation tour of the Middle East and visited Israel late last week, gave a brief interview to The Jerusalem Post immediately after a joint press conference with Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on Thursday. In the course of that interview, he made vague comments to convey the sense that Israel was being heavy-handed, and in some cases counterproductive, in imposing certain security restrictions on the Palestinians. On occasion, he asserted, Israel's understandable emphasis on security produced policies that actually undermined its security. He cited procedures at the Rafah border as a case in point. Such arguments are far from unprecedented, and are often raised by domestic critics as well as overseas players. Critics at home and abroad, too, have protested the route of the West Bank security barrier, arguing that it should have been built along the pre-1967 "Green Line." But few self-styled friends of Israel argue, as Solana did, that Israel should not have constructed the barrier at all, and that the hundreds of Israeli lives saved by its construction could have been safeguarded in unspecified "other ways." On Iran, meanwhile, Solana suggested that the crisis over Teheran's nuclear program had not yet reached the "red zone" and he responded quite mildly to questions about how seriously Israel should take President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's threats to eliminate our country. Again, such stances are far from unique, although the absent sense of urgency and outrage were noteworthy. Where Solana's thinking seemed most striking, and most problematic, however, was in his comments on the extremist Islamic ideology that holds sway in the Ahmadinejad regime and is followed by Hamas. He was adamant that Hamas could yet recognize Israel, and cited as evidence on which to base such a hope the shifted positions of other hitherto hostile Middle East nations and organizations. What he was not prepared to countenance was that the perceived Islamist imperative of the likes of Hamas and Ahmadinejad's Iran preclude such a shift. He could not "imagine," he said, that any religion could impel anybody to try and destroy another nation. Anyone invoking their religion to seek such a goal, he said, was abusing it. Isn't that precisely what Hamas is doing? Isn't that precisely what the 9/11 bombers were doing? Isn't that precisely the problem the free world is facing in the war on terror? Solana became a little testy when pressed on this. He insisted that the "essence" of Hamas was not the destruction of Israel but the liberation of the Palestinians. And when pushed as to what exactly Hamas might mean by the liberation of the Palestinians, he responded, "We are turning around the same question 20 times. I have not lost my hope that people will change." Solana, of course, is entitled to his opinion. But it would be unfortunate indeed to be basing EU policy on what appears even to the most optimistic players is the frankly untenable hope of a dramatic reformulation of Hamas and the Islamic extremist mind-set. Politics is "the art of the possible," in Bismarck's resonant summation. A Middle East view predicated on the hope that Hamas will change is a departure from that formulation that serves nobody's interests.

Related Content

Israeli flag
August 14, 2018
The Nation-State Law: A challenge to be faced