The starting point was Gilad Shalit. In his opinion, if the Shalit deal goes through, it will remove obstacles between Israel and the Palestinians: "it will be impossible for Israel to maintain the blockade on Gaza," he said, "and Israel and the world will be forced to come to terms with how to deal with Hamas."
He said the option of erasing Hamas has been tried and failed. In Israel's dealings with the Palestinians, they must ensure that Hamas is part of the solution and not part of the problem. He encourages reason and logic when dealing with Hamas, and refraining from dealing with the ideological issues. "Our right to exist does not depend on them," he said, "this should not be a condition to talking with them."
He believes that Hamas is effective, credible and logical, but most of all, have shown they are capable of being in control in Gaza, something which he believes is not the case when it comes to Fatah in the West Bank.
He is not interested in convincing Hamas that their ideology is wrong, but rather, that it is in their self-interest to have an agreement with Israel. He believes that Hamas' proposal of a long-term truce and accepting provisional borders on the pre-1967 line is "a fine idea," because they are capable of implementing it, and because a provisional agreement might be the only thing possible right now.
And what about Iran's influence over Hamas? "Yes," he said, "Hamas receives aid, training and equipment, but Hamas are not a proxy of Iran, they do not take orders from Iran, they do not even have religious leadership."
So voila, insights from the heart of the Israeli intelligence community. What is your take on Israel negotiating with Hamas?
8 days to go...
Hi Carin,
ReplyDeleteOf course Israel must negotiate with Hamas, and with Fatah, and with whatever future party will have authority. Whether it is an interim approach, or a staged approach, Israel's political leadership will not always be acceptable to the Palestinians and the Paletinian leadership not always acceptable to Israel. But both will have to accept the need to negotiate for many years to move to a comprhensive and livable peace, recognizing that it is a long road from the absence of armed conflict to the actualization of peace.
What is most interesting to me in what you write today is the rejection of the idea that the negotiations had to include a statement on Israel's right to exist. Of course, some notionally ideological issues also have very real pragmatic elements, the so-called right to return of the Palestinians being one such issue. But I think he is right that some do not really mean much more than the symbolic.
Very interesting comments. It reminds me of the old notion: those who have seen the most of war know best the value of peace.
thanks.
Howie
Howie
I don't think you heard anything that can make you believe that we are getting close to "comprehensive and livable peace".
ReplyDeleteOn the contrary.
Cairn
ReplyDeleteA short add on - two answers Halevy gave in an interview in Canada last week (Maclean’s Interview: Efraim Halevy 23 December, 2009)
Q: What are the real chances of peace between Israel and the Palestinians?
A: I think peace between Israel and the Palestinians hinges on the Palestinians proving the capability of nationhood. I don’t think that nationhood can be thrust upon the Palestinians from without. A nation has to be built from within—and it has to be purely Palestinians who create and build their own nation. The way things are at the moment, the Palestinians are not creating their own nation. The nation is being created from without. The United States is training their military forces; Tony Blair is chaperoning them and helping them build their economic and political institutions; the European Union is helping in other fields. In other words, what is being done is the Palestinian nation is being built with outside help. This, I think, cannot succeed. Whether the Palestinians have it within their capacity to transform what they have into a nation that has an in-built hierarchy, that has an in-built structure of discipline and orderly conduct—this is something that we don’t know yet.
Q: Do you have a sense whether they’ll be able to do it?
A: I don’t know. I think that if it is not the case, then they’re in for a lot of trouble. I think it is in Israel’s interest that there should be a Palestinian state—I think it is in Israel’s interest that there should be a Palestinian people that is capable of sustaining a Palestinian state. But what has been going on in recent years is not very encouraging.