Published Jan 26, 2006

It’s a good thing that Hamas won the latest Palestinian Authority election. I’m all for it. I’m a Jew, and sympathetic to old-fashioned Zionism, but, most of all, I’m an American and, by birthright, I believe in democracy and opportunity for everyone, and this is the best way to give democracy to the Palestinians and opportunity and, even, security, to the Israelis.

We’re big into the form of democracy these days, putting on elections everywhere, as if the administrative fact of the election delivers freedom and equality and a nice house in the suburbs and an SUV in the garage and a private school education for the kids. As we’ve seen in countries around the world, from Colombia to Pakistan to, yes, the Palestinian Authority, elections may only put the corrupt in charge, sustain fractures within society, and lead to nothing so much as alienation and revolt within certain segments of a state’s populace. Parties and groups form to fill the cracks in the ruling society through which these segments fall.

Hamas is a great example of such an organization. The Movement, which is publicly and militantly opposed to both Israel and the formerly-ruling Fatah party, has struggled against both with violence and with a network of schools, hospitals, and food banks that provide services that Fatah has been unable to, thanks to corruption, and Israel has preferred not to. The virtually exclusive availability of these services outside the existing structure of the state organ through which Palestinians were intended to make peace with Israel made that peace unacheivable by providing a party and a reservoir of people whose quality of life, if not survival, depended on the continuance of the conflict.

But, now that Hamas is in power, many things will change. The elected members of Hamas, as well as the Hamas leadership, will have some skin in the game — unless they totally discount the Palestinian Authority as a tool with which to advance their goals, they will attempt to preserve the power of the Authority, which means no Israeli tanks in Hebron. The only way to keep the tanks in their depots is to continue the peace process. And the same is true for Hamas’s constituents too — while they may once have felt that no state could represent them and accomplish their goals, but now they have proof in action that there is a state that can do both things, because the people they’ve trused for years and for whom they’ve voted are now in charge. What could give more hope than that?

It’s a story similar to what we now see in Bolivia, where former coca grower Evo Morales has just been elected. While Bolivia has one of Latin America’s longest- and best-functioning democracies, the question “should we just give up and be ok with being a cocaine exporter?” hasn’t exactly been asked. At the same time, most Bolivian coca farmers are growing cocaine’s basic ingredient because it’s their only option, apart from subsistence farming. The mere act of starting a conversation on this topic means that people who had felt they had no choice but to engage in illegal activities and opt out of the normal activities of the state may find the state suddenly start to represent their true interests.

So, it looks bad, but what we have is the kernel of some hope for the future. Sometimes we need to ask the hard questions and let the unpleasant people pursue their unpleasant policies, because that will lead to the growth of true, inclusive democracy.

6 Comments

in order to continue with the peace process, Hamas will have to do a political bait-and-switch that will likely upset the constituents who voted the party into office. Hamas sailed into power with the platform of “destroy israel,” and there is no indication whatsoever that it will suddenly switch its tune and agree to the peace process, as that would go against everything the party was founded on. i like democracy as much as the next person, but i’m not feeling the optimism of this news.

Well, we need to distinguish between the short-term and long-term goals of the destruction of Israel. Hamas has always been focused on destroying Israel in the short term, with few negative consequences as the Israeli tanks and helicopters have always knocked down Fatah’s buildings in retaliation. Now they’ll knock down Hamas’s buildings. If Hamas attaches any value to what they’ve just gained, they’ll focus on the long-term destruction of Israel, which can best be accomplished by building a prosperous and stable Palestinian state that can train and support a high-quality army; it’s that prosperous and stable state that will be least likely to actually want to bother to invade Israel, rather than, say, getting rich.

Plus, let’s not forget, Fatah was all about destroying Israel but they took that clause out of their constitution when they took power, and suffered no serious backlash; putting that value aside a bit should present little challenge for Hamas, a lot of whose support comes from either their position as the opposition or their ability to provide the social services that the Palestinian Authority has been unable to deliver, not their outspoken opposition to Israel.

i gotta disagree with you, babe. Hamas rode into office primarily because of their outspoken opposition to Israel, so they cannot just take that out of their platform without anyone noticing. if anything, being elected will give them validation that they were right all along and that Fatah failed by being too lenient, which is why they were ousted.

not that it will be easy for Hamas to 1) destroy Israel or 2) build a prosperous Palestine. but something tells me they will try for the former because of the history of that land and its people. that appears to be the biggest problem of the middle east — the people there spend too much time fixated on the past than they do comtemplating the great possibilities of the future. it’s all about vendettas because someone somebody knew was killed by the israelis/palestinians, causing a vow for revenge that just perpetuates the cycle of violence. and so it goes — more human nature than business sense.

in any case, we won’t know until they start politicking. but if past actions are an indication, Hamas will keep doing what it’s always done: perpetuate terrorism.

i really hope i’m wrong on this one, and i hope you are right in that Hamas will see this for the great opportunity it can be. i suppose time will tell.

Like Milla, I’m hoping you’re right, but I’m worried. It’s not unheard of for the people to elect monsters, or for those monsters to stay monstrous. The Nazis rode to power on landslide electoral victories.

Also, I’m concerned that the Bushies will manage to screw things up somehow. Recall that this is the administration that, when a coup was staged against Hugo Chavez, and then he returned to power through a counter-coup organized by his personal guards (see The Revolution Will Not Be Televised), issued statements about how Chavez’s supporters should “respect the democratic process,” and that sort of BS.

I can understand both of your skepticism. I guess I feel like Hamas can only change if it has an investment in the success of current structures and processes, and this election victory is the only way to make that happen.

But then I am rather the optimist.

Re: the Bushies’ response to this: yes, I’m worried too. The Huffington Post characterized his speech about Hamas’s victory as equally appropriate for the election of a new Prom Queen, and it’s clear that they don’t consider others’ policies valid or acceptable if said policies vary from the way the Bushies believe that things should be run. Treating Hamas like children will not work, and a coup will not work.

To make a comparison, having the IRA’s political arm share power in Northern Ireland has had mixed results — it looks like it may be paying off, but some of their die-hards continued to make trouble, and it’s never been entirely clear whether that was with or without the blessing of the supposedly reformed, moderate parts of the party. Some IRA cells have morphed into mobsters, with no real political agenda. Kinda like what happened with the “communist guerillas” and “anti-communist paramilitaries” of South America, which eventually just turned into competing narco gangs. :-P