What to do with Hamas? Part IV

Charles Krauthammer wrote a very interesting OpEd in Friday's Washington Post. Instead of crying about the situation in Gaza he provides, what seems to be, a good solution.

With Hamas now clearly in charge, Israel should declare that it will tolerate no more rocket fire -- that the next Qassam will be answered with a cutoff of gasoline shipments. This should bring road traffic in Gaza to a halt within days and make it increasingly difficult to ferry around missiles and launchers.

If that fails to concentrate the mind, the next step should be to cut off electricity. When the world wails, Israel should ask, what other country on Earth is expected to supply the very means for a declared enemy to attack it?

What do do with Hamas? Show them who's boss. If they really are there to provide leadership for the Palestinians, then now that they've consolidated power there, let them do something. If the attacks continue, cut off gas and then electricity.

What Krauthammer fails to mention - though I'm sure he knows - is that no matter what Israel does they're always blamed. But at least it's a plan that deserves thought.

I also found this interesting: "Historian Michael Oren points out that the Palestinian Authority has received more per capita aid than did Europe under the Marshall Plan." If true, than that's pretty telling of the political situation in Gaza. If there are still Hamas supporters out there, I think it's time for them to wake up.

What to do with Hamas? Part III

It's been a long time since I posted regarding Hamas (I, II); basically, I advocated a position that the elected officials of any group of people should be regarded as the legitimate governing body of that population regardless of their past history. That is not an easy position to argue when talking about Hamas.

Since then, Hamas has clearly lapsed back into their previous modus operandi. Instead of believing that we need to give them a second chance, they have clearly relapsed into terrorism and kidnapping because they are incapable of being the government they pretended to be. In my opinion the IDF's current operation in Gaza is perfectly justified and a necessity.

Unlike bluke (who, while providing good analysis, is overly pessimistic), I think the current situation is one of strength. I have yet to hear of the world criticizing Israel for their operation, we went in hard, stopped to allow negotiations, and when those failed went back in-all the while maintaining our determination and position of strength. I, like Harry (with whom I agree with on many issues), am very proud of Israel right now.

What to do with Hamas? Part II

Almost a month ago I posted about our need to recognize Hamas as the government of the Palestinian people. In short, it seems to me that due to the democratic process we cannot approve of the elections without approving of the elected; however, what I left out was that there are some things that Hamas needs to do in order to keep that approval.

Former President Clinton, reported by Haaretz, probably feels the same way, yet I find his needs to be a little off base.

So if Hamas would say, suppose they say, 'OK, look, we can't change our theory, we can't change our document, we can't change our history, but we're in government now and the policy of the Palestinian government is no to terror and yes to negotiations. As long as we're in government, we'll honor that policy.' If they did that, I would support dealing with them," Clinton said

What I don't like about Clinton's statement is that, as soon as Hamas leaves power he's okay with them resorting to terror. He's also okay with them leaving their Constitution the way it is. I'm not; I don't think Hamas needs to change it as a precursor to dialogue, but they are under obligation to do so. And once you're a peaceful political party then you are going to be just that forever.

What to do with Hamas?

I'm very conflicted about the current situation with the Palestinian government. On one hand, Hamas is a terrorist group that has avowed the destruction of the State of Israel; therefore, no dealings whatsoever. On the other hand, elections were held and Hamas was elected by the populace, therefore as a democratic society Israel needs to respect it.

If Israel refuses out of hand to ignore the results what would it say to the whole democratic process? Elections are only as good as the people elected? No, democracy is a process it does not guarantee results.

In 1977 the new Likud Party formed a coalition with DASH and allowed Menachem Begin to become the Prime Minister. Begin is still considered by many to be a terrorist (among those is David Ben-Gurion); what would the Israeli public say if Begin's government was not recognized on the basis that Likud won the majority of seats? This is exactly what we are telling Hamas. We won't deal with you because you're terrorists, but we want you to deal with our government even if you think we're terrorists.

Like I said, I'm very conflicted. But in the end, I think we are obligated to recognize the Hamas government.