Jimmy Carter and the Hamas-Fatah Unity Agreement

            It is difficult to be more wrong more frequently about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict than former President Jimmy Carter.  In a column in the Washington Post dated May 3, 2011, Carter makes an argument for supporting the Palestinian unity agreement between Fatah and Hamas.  If the international community and the United States were to support this unity arrangement, they, according to Carter, would be able to help Palestinian democracy and establish the basis for a unified Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza that can make a secure peace with Israel.  If the West remains aloof or undermines the agreement, the Palestinian situation (actually he uses the phrase “situation in occupied Palestine territory”) may deteriorate with a new round of violence against Israel.  Carter asserts that the Hamas-Fatah agreement supports Palestinian rights and democracy.

            Carter is ignoring several key elements that comprise democracy.  The essence of democracy has to be significantly greater than merely holding elections one time, regardless of whether they are freely conducted.  You have to be able to disagree with the government in power and be able to voice that disagreement as peaceful dissent without feeling threatened by the government.  Can anyone rationally state that the ability to dissent has ever been part of Palestinian society?  Is it possible to believe that in all of Palestinian society no one is in favor of negotiating with Israel or that perhaps, some of the problems that Palestinians face are actually of their own making?  Could someone in the West Bank or Gaza publish an opinion piece in Arabic in those locations advocating positions like those and still be alive the next day? 

            How about the peaceful transition of power from one party to another?  When an Israeli party loses an election, it peacefully goes into the opposition, such as the last transition from a Kadima led coalition to a Likud led one.  Has that ever happened in a Palestinian society? 

            I make this point because Carter’s argument about aiding Palestinian democracy is meaningless until the institutions of democracy, such as a free press and the freedom of assembly, have been put in place.  The second part of Carter’s argument is that failure to support Palestinian unity may result in new rounds of violence against Israel.  Let’s not equivocate here.  What he is talking about is a Hamas/Fatah sponsored policy of terrorism and murdering of innocent Jews, whether they are inside the green line or not.  In a recent poll of Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem conducted jointly by the Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah, 32% of Palestinian Arabs supported the brutal murder of five Fogel family members in Itamar, including children ages 11, 4, and 3 months.

            How about examining some facts about Hamas?  According to Carter, “In my talks with Hamas leader Khaled Meshal, he said Hamas would accept a two-state agreement that is approved in a Palestinian referendum. Such an agreement could provide mutual recognition — Israel would recognize an independent Palestinian state and Palestine would recognize Israel. In other words, an agreement will include Hamas’s recognition of Israel.”  According to Mahmoud Zahar, a senior Hamas official, “Our program does not include negotiations with Israel or recognizing it.  It will not be possible for the interim national government to participate or bet on or work on the peace process with Israel.”  Now that seems like a reasonable basis to support Hamas-Fatah unity.

            Is it necessary to mention Hamas’ kidnapping of Gilad Shalit in 2006?  The illegal kidnapping occurred within the 1967 borders, which are nothing more than armistice lines at the end of the 1948 war and have not ever been an established international boundary.  Carter of course has repeatedly ignored that fact.  What about no observance of any form of human rights regarding Shalit?  Did Carter mention that?  Do I need to mention the number rockets that have been fired from Gaza into pre-1967 Israeli boundaries, terrorizing citizens of Sderot and Ashkelon?

            You cannot get around the fact that Hamas is an antisemitic terrorist organization with total disregard for human rights that not has been asked to compromise any of its fundamental principles in order to join up with Fatah.  Hamas has not been asked to amend its charter, which even Carter finds repugnant.  The charter goes way beyond not recognizing Israel.  It calls for Muslims to murder Jews (Article 7).  The list of antisemitic canards in the Charter is long – controlling the media, accumulation of wealth, use of wealth to stir revolutions, including both the French and Communist revolutions, taking over control of imperialist states, establishing clandestine organizations, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs and B’nai Brith in order to destroy societies and carry out Zionist interests (Article 22). 

I fail to see any benefit to supporting Hamas-Fatah unity.  Carter is once again way off the mark.

(c) 2011 Douglas J. Workman