Handling Hamas

Handling Hamas

Rather than undermine Hamas, the Bush Administration should accept the results of the Palestinian election and pursue a policy of cautious engagement.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

After it was conclusively determined that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the Bush Administration announced that the most important purpose of its invasion was to further the cause of democracy in the Middle East. It declared that stable, democratic regimes were the best deterrent to terrorism and the best hope for peace. WMD, it seems, stands for We Meant Democracy.

A milestone in this march toward the open society was Palestine. The Administration supported the participation of Hamas in the recent parliamentary elections there, reasoning that the Islamist movement’s widely predicted new role as minority party in the Palestinian Authority’s legislature would help to tame its ideological rejectionism. But now, after Hamas’s stunning triumph, the Administration has changed course, threatening the PA with diplomatic isolation and a cutoff of all aid unless Hamas recognizes Israel, renounces violence and agrees to abide by previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements. It has been reported that Washington and Tel Aviv are planning an economic destabilization campaign to force a collapse of the new government, though the Bush Administration has denied it.

Such a hard line is shortsighted and dangerous. Respect for the United States in the Muslim and Arab world, already at dismal levels, will plummet further if Washington refuses to accept the results of what were, after all, remarkably free and fair elections. US attempts to isolate and demonize Hamas will only increase public support for it among Palestinians. A cutoff in aid to the PA, whose salaries are the life support for several hundred thousand people, could cause both a humanitarian catastrophe and widespread violence. Threats to isolate the PA will only throw Hamas into the arms of other rejectionists like Iran.

A policy of cautious engagement, while not without risks, is much more likely to strengthen Hamas’s pragmatic tendencies. The movement has made clear that it wants to concentrate on improved governance and continue the cease-fire with Israel, which it has held to with commendable discipline for a year. Hamas won the elections not because Palestinians want Islamist rule and the destruction of Israel but because of widespread public disgust with Fatah’s corruption and mismanagement. Polls consistently show that a large majority of Palestinians want a two-state solution to the conflict. If the Bush Administration truly supports democracy in the Middle East, it will give Hamas a chance to fulfill these reasonable desires, and to succeed or fail on its own merits. That’s the best hope for peace.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x