Peace requires forgiveness. Jimmy Carter’s meeting in Damascus last week with the leadership of Hamas has aroused strong emotions. If compromise of principles disqualifies parties from peace making, the Middle East is doomed forever. The Damascus visit involves five main parties: Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, Israel, the United States, and former President Carter.
There is no uncompromised party among the five listed. Hamas compromised in violence, the Palestinian Authority in corruption, Israel in a harsh occupation, the United States in nursing erosion of justice, and Jimmy Carter in over-tolerance of Arab autocracy.
I am a strong critic of Hamas for not recognizing Israel and for not exploiting non-violent resistance – the most powerful weapon that Palestinians can muster for liberation from an oppressive Israeli occupation. But whether one supports Hamas or not, this grassroots movement did win the last parliamentary national elections. This historical election authorized Hamas to lead the government of the Palestinian communities – under Israel’s occupation – in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza.
The election of Hamas in January 2006 was a remarkable event in Arab democracy-building. It is rare that a corrupt Arab regime, the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority, is ousted through ballots rather than bullets. However, since the surprise victory of Hamas, Israel and the United States have been working with the (rival secular) Palestinian Authority and its artificially formed government in the West Bank. In contrast, Hamas, which now controls Gaza by force, is being isolated, pauperized, and targeted militarily to force it to accept Washington and Tel Aviv’s recipe for peace. Although it has shown subtle signs of moderation, Hamas refuses to yield.
The news this week that Israel and Syria have started a new round of indirect peace talks (mediated by Turkey) is too good to be true. Similarly the news that President Bush is confident about “defining the contours of a viable Palestinian state before he leaves office remains a trip to the land of fantasy. But fantasy is all we have got to live for in an increasingly gloomy Middle East. Why is Carter’s attempt to open dialogue with the most important segment of Palestinian leadership perceived in some quarters as a threat to peace in a region that is hard to reach with understanding but easy to manipulate with force?
Carter is trying to help Israel by softening Hamas’ hard line position, but, regrettably, many in the Jewish community and outside it do not trust the former US president anymore. They brush aside the Nobel laureate’s breakthrough peace work of the late seventies.
Not many in Israel realize that their state can not achieve peace without creative compromise with Hamas, without political reconciliation within the leadership of the Palestinian community. Hamas is a grassroots movement that is bound to gain power through martyrdom; as a policy to restrain violent rebellion, the Israeli occupation continues to make living condition for all Palestinians unbearable. In conditions of extreme deprivation Hamas thrives politically, a David and Goliath phenomenon.
The peace process has been deadlocked for eight years and needs innovation to be revived. Former President Jimmy Carter is morally compelled to continue his mission of peacemaking. He initiated the progress toward peace in the Middle East four decades ago. His initial role in conflict resolution should not be forgotten as he marches onward in trying to break barriers between Arabs and Israelis.
Carter met with Hamas leaders last week defying a US government ban on formal negotiations with the Islamic Resistant Movement, better known as Hamas. Even in his capacity as a private citizen, Carter has antagonized the US congress by his meeting with the leaders of Hamas. This latest Carter mission follows his controversial 2006 book entitled: Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.
The book is about the erosion of justice in the Occupied Territories. Carter’s comparison of Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian Territories with the former South African apartheid regime was considered unfair and inflammatory by many Israelis and friends of Zionism. Some members of the US Congress are upset with Carter for what they consider unauthorized “presidential behavior. As a punitive measure, a group of congressmen is considering legislation to cut funding for the Carter Center.
Before critics lose patience with Carter they should realize that he is a man of faith, and that he is applying his biblical principles in peacemaking. The former President is against the militant resistance strategy of Hamas. In fact, he is opposed to any form of resistance that exposes civilians to violence.
Carter remains a true friend of Israel. His talks with Hamas were an attempt to jump-start a dying peace process. The visit should be commended, not condemned. The former president is reminding the world that there is no short road to peace. Hamas has to be included in a democratic march toward peace.
Dr. Ghassan Rubeiz ([email protected]) is a Lebanese-American Middle East analyst. He was previously the secretary of the Geneva-based World Council of Churches for the Middle East. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
