Why Can’t Hamas Be in the Palestinian Unity Government?

Posted on September 29, 2006
Filed Under General Thoughts |

I don’t get it you know. Yes, they have committed terrorist acts against innocent Israelis but why can’t they be in the Palestinian unity government? I understand Hamas still maintains its retarded position of not recognizing Israel and I think they’re really dumb for doing that but don’t they have a right to be in the unity government? Yes? No? Not even a little bit? Isn’t keeping them out unconstructive? At least by keeping them part of the unity government, they won’t be isolated. Isolating them into a corner might cause problems and violence in the long term run. Plus, not so long ago Margaret Thatcher declared South Africa’s ANC a terrorist organization but at the end they did end up being in the South African government didn’t they? Anyways, it’s just a thought. On another note, I think Palestinians need to form some new political party. Fatah are corrupted as hell and Hamas won’t accept the fact that Israel exists. Both of them suck big time especially “lovely” Hamas. Sigh!

Comments

13 Responses to “Why Can’t Hamas Be in the Palestinian Unity Government?”

  1. The Raccoon on September 29th, 2006 11:20 am

    They’re not in the unity government because Fatah and Hamas hate each other almost as much as they hate the Joooooz. Each one wants the whole pie and doesn’t want to share - it’s Mogadishu all over again.

    BTW, strangely enough, Fatah also doesn’t accept the fact that Israel exists. Destruction of Israel is still a very important item of their manifesto. They made some taqiyya noises about removing it, and utterly failed to do so. You know, these red pens are so hard to find in all them drawers in Arafat’s desk…

    And hey, they have other parties. One of them actually had good social and economic agendas and - *gasp* - was against violence! They were still racist as hell, of course. And they got 2.7% of the votes.

    Look, Hamas rules Gaza and Fatah rules the West Bank, more or less. Each wants to kill the Joooz and lord it over everything in sight. But both are a bunch of incompetent managers and mediocre murderers. These warlords coudn’t run a state of 1000 Jains with a fetish for obeying the law and 100 billion $ DGP - they’d just kill each other and their subjects, squander the money and then whine and seethe. You can guess about their chances of success in ruling the Palestinians.

  2. Drima on September 29th, 2006 11:36 am

    Fatah doesn’t recognize Israel???!!! Then why the hell does the US treat them so differently? Is it because they’re secular… Damn, now there’s something I never knew.

  3. Andrew Brehm on September 29th, 2006 1:18 pm

    “Why Can’t Hamas Be in the Palestinian Unity Government?”

    They can be.

    But such a government should not be treated like one that adheres to treaties.

  4. Finnpundit on September 29th, 2006 2:48 pm

    There will be no progress towards an independent Palestinian state if that state doesn’t recognize the existence of Israel: that is an Israeli pre-condition for further independence negotiations. So Hamas’ inclusion in the government would prevent these negotiations.

    The foolish decision of the Palestinian electorate to vote Hamas a majority, while democratic, did not take into account the significance such a move would mean for Palestinian peace and independence. Sometimes democracies make mistakes. Luckily democracies can easily correct mistakes, in the next elections, provided the parties in power do not prevent that.

  5. tommy on September 29th, 2006 3:08 pm

    I don’t get it you know. Yes, they have committed terrorist acts against innocent Israelis but why can’t they be in the Palestinian unity government? I understand Hamas still maintains its retarded position of not recognizing Israel and I think they’re really dumb for doing that

    Sounds like you’ve answered your own question, Drima.

  6. Mantra on September 29th, 2006 3:42 pm

    Fatah is treated differently now because Arafat is dead. Before that the Israeli stance was that they had no one to neogtiate with (the same stance that they hold today).

    As far as Hamas and Fatah forming a unity government, its unlikely because the two parites can’t agree on what the final shape of Palestine should be. Hamas has made some indications about recognising Israel but I doubt they’ll do it for nothing as happened with Oslo Accords.

    Both sides (Palestine and Israel) must reject violence for anything to actually work.

  7. Andrew Brehm on September 29th, 2006 4:33 pm

    “Both sides (Palestine and Israel) must reject violence for anything to actually work.”

    If Israel rejected violence, all the Jews in the region would be dead a few days later.

  8. Mantra on September 30th, 2006 4:19 am

    And if the Palestinians were pacific, then tye’d remain stateless.

  9. tommy on September 30th, 2006 6:55 am

    Mantra,

    They are stateless. If they would calm the hell down and show that they weren’t going to use their independence to further their war with Israel, the Israelis would have already given them a state and be glad to have gotten rid of them.

    As it stands, the Palestinians are never going to get full independence so long as they remain the way they are: violent, deceitful, and corrupt.

  10. a from berlin on September 30th, 2006 6:26 pm

    “We won’t start talks before our right to live as a people in our country is recognized!”

    Now my question: Who would say this? Israelis or Palestinians?
    - or maybe even both?

    I do not mean to exclude everything else. And I am pretty aware, that the situation is much more complex than this question. But to be honest, I see this question as a big problem for the start of negotiations.

    And tommy: With all due respect, describing a whole people as violent, deceitful and corrupt is simply racist. At least in my dictionary.

  11. tommy on September 30th, 2006 6:59 pm

    That is OK, berliner, I have my own definition of a racist: “anyone who is winning an argument with a liberal.”

    Call me a racist anytime!

  12. a from berlin on September 30th, 2006 7:50 pm

    tommy-
    nice definition - but I won’t accept it for me, because I would have to call too many friends racist..
    well, I guess less pc makes life simpler and more straight forward.. the world is much easier to classify that way.
    My question is: Does it help in the long run?
    I still rather go for the attempt to differentiate. More complex - less rewarding (at least at first sight). But it gives me the chance to learn about things that are not yet part of my world and help me to get a better orientation. And I call this learning aptitude. Maybe it won’t get me as far as I wish. But I have not given up hope.
    - and for me it is not about the “snuggly-huggly-we-all-love-each-other”-attitude, but about the serious question, how I want the world to look like in the future and how I can fight for my rights and values. Just rather keeping to the values I want to “survive” by myself.

  13. Tsedek on September 30th, 2006 7:59 pm

    Drima, they only have to recognize Israel’s existence but can’t do that. I’ve seen this documentary on tv with a tv reporter who was Hamas’ guest for a day and the “behind the scenes” human (as in non-political) reasoning behind it. The foundations of the Hamas movement are religious and call for making an Islamic Waqf outta Israel and, of course, Israel is not interested in becoming such.

    Actually I personally appreciate such honesty. I hate being hypocrite and pretend all is swell and open for discussion while lying - which would have served their goal I think.

    Tse.

Leave a Reply