Background on the 2006 Palestinian Elections

Middle East Democracy — The Hamas Factor

“...It goes without saying that Palestinians, and those who have genuinely supported their democratic insurgency, have many reasons to be proud. Evidently, those who used democracy as a decoy to justify their grievous foreign policies or to defend their unwarranted military occupation are now being forced into an unpleasant era of ‘soul searching’ - as proposed by the Financial Times.

Hamas, not knowingly, perhaps, has abruptly deprived Washington of its last card in a Middle East foreign policy game, which was already in tatters. Delivering democracy was - until Hamas‘ political rise - Washington‘s strongest, albeit murkiest pretext to justify its military presence in the Middle East...”

Statement on the results of the Palestinian Election

“Jews for a Just Peace calls for immediate recognition of the democratically elected government of the Palestinian people by the Government of Canada.

The refusal of Israel and other governments to acknowledge Hamas as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people on the grounds that Hamas is a ‘terrorist organization’ is hypocritical. It is true that Hamas has perpetrated terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians. It is also true that Hamas has observed a unilateral cease-fire for almost a year while Israel continues to terrorize Palestinian civilians with attacks on refugee camps, housing blocks and farms...”

Respect of Election Results is the Only Way Forward

“International reactions to Hamas' election victory in the occupied Palestinian territories, in particular statements issued by the United States, the EU and the Quartet, have been very disappointing... Many were and are still stunned by Hamas' victory, who won 74 seats out of 132 in the Council. However, all of us understand that the vote for Hamas was a vote for internal change towards good governance and respect for the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people, and a vote for a fundamental change of the relationship between the international community and the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people have sent a message that we want to be treated by the international community like any other people, in accordance with international law and UN resolutions...”

U.S. and Israelis Are Said to Talk of Hamas Ouster

“JERUSALEM, Feb. 14 - The United States and Israel are discussing ways to destabilize the Palestinian government so that newly elected Hamas officials will fail and elections will be called again, according to Israeli officials and Western diplomats.

The intention is to starve the Palestinian Authority of money and international connections to the point where, some months from now, its president, Mahmoud Abbas, is compelled to call a new election. The hope is that Palestinians will be so unhappy with life under Hamas that they will return to office a reformed and chastened Fatah movement.

The officials also argue that a close look at the election results shows that Hamas won a smaller mandate than previously understood.

The officials and diplomats, who said this approach was being discussed at the highest levels of the State Department and the Israeli government, spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly on the issue...”

Hamas to give up arms if Israel leaves West Bank

“The head of Hamas’ politburo Khaled Mishaal said in an interview published in a Russian journal that the movement would halt its armed struggle if Israel were to withdraw from the West Bank and East Jerusalem, occupied in 1967.

‘If Israel recognises our rights and pledges to withdraw from all occupied lands, Hamas and the Palestinian people will decide to halt our armed resistance,’ he stated. Mishaal, a hardliner who lives in exile in Damascus, has clearly adopted the moderate line taken by the founder and spiritual mentor of the movement, Shaikh Ahmad Yassin, and the senior figure in Gaza, Abdel Aziz Rantisi, both of whom were assassinated by Israel in 2004.

In previous statements, Mishaal had said that Hamas could agree to a ‘long-term truce’ with Israel if it pulled back to the border of June 4th, 1967...”

On Hamas Victory

“Palestine was hit with a powerful political Tsunami which has the promise of dramatically changing the Middle East and beyond. This is the first time ever that an Islamic movement rises to power in the Arab world and in very peaceful and clean democratic elections. The religion part contribution to victory was not more than 15%, the rest was a beating vote against the Authorities and Fatah for their dismal record on all fronts and a defiant call against the Israeli occupation and the American policies.

The fight was between Hamas and Fatah with extreme polarisation. The rest of competitors were almost neglected. Many big names in all local constituencies lost their seats. Barghouti who was sure of winning 12 seats got only 2 and Hanan Ashrawi list won only two seats. My list did not score much as expected any way. But the crushing defeat of Fatah has made other losses incomparable.

Hamas now is challenged by its history in order to enter the future...”

CNI Calls on U.S. to Deal With New Democratic Forces in Middle East

“WASHINGTON, February 10, 2006 ­ A delegation from the Council for the National Interest that participated as international observers to the recent Palestinian elections and met with government and opposition figures in six Middle East countries called yesterday on President Bush and his administration to deal honestly and openly with the new Islamist opposition that has been brought to power by democratic means in several Middle East countries.

The members of the delegation, including two ambassadors, were among the first American retired foreign service officers to meet with Hamas leaders Mahmoud al-Zahar and Khaled Meshaal, whom they described as eager to talk to American officials, and even to reach a peace with Israel...”

The Hamas Election Victory – What has changed? What remains the same?

“The Canadian Observation Mission reported ‘ordinary Palestinians proved their commitment to shaping their future at the ballot box... Palestinians turned out to vote, often in an atmosphere of exuberance and celebration.... Voters were presented with real choices following a vigorous and competitive campaign.’ Israeli peace activist and former member of the Israeli parliament, Uri Avnery, wrote ‘These elections are a huge achievement... a badge of honor for a people suffering under occupation... Everyone who has a hat should take it off.’

But as Robert Fisk, the most knowledgeable English-language reporter in the Middle East wrote satirically, ‘God damn that democracy. What are we to do with people who don’t vote the way they should?’ ”

Democracy and Violence

“Don’t get me wrong. I am not advocating violence as such. But when I heard on the news and read in the newspapers about Jack Straw, Condoleeza Rice, Kofi Annan and others lecturing Hamas on the incompatibility of democracy and violence it nearly made me choke over my breakfast. The hypocrisy of it all. And some of our own leader writers joined in the general chorus. It takes two to tango. I did not see, in any of these calls to Hamas, reciprocal calls on Israel to stop its continuing daily violence against Palestinians. As if democracy and violence have never existed together. As if democracy and violence do not go simply and always hand in hand. Which present day democratic state does not employ violence and terror? ...”

Letter to Condoleeza Rice from the the World Council of Churches

“I write this letter to you at a critical juncture in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We address your office with deep concern that all the members of the Middle East Quartet work in new ways to meet the new situation emerging from last month's Palestinian election... We would like to call your attention to three features of the new situation, which present opportunities for genuine progress toward peace.

First, in an earnest exercise of democratic rights by people denied rights, a sizeable majority of the Palestinian people has expressed their will through elections adjudged by international observers as free and fair. The vote sends a democratic warning to those in the international community who hold responsibility for the long-delayed fulfilment of international obligations to the Palestinian people...”

Why Hamas won and what the victory means for Palestinians

Show Notes:

“Israel and other governments are threatening reprisals against Palestinians for voting so strongly for Hamas. Mordecai Briemberg says there are more opportunities than dangers in the new government. Mordecai Briemberg is a member of the Redeye collective and active in Canpalnet - the Canada Palestine Support Network.”

Why Hamas Won

“Although it is still unclear what the future holds for Israelis and Palestinians, a few things can be said about the processes that enabled Hamas to win a landslide victory in the January 25 democratic elections and how the organization?s triumph will likely affect the local political arena.

Founded in Gaza at the beginning of the first Intifada (December 1987) by Sheik Ahmad Yassin, Hamas is a direct extension of the Muslim =rotherhood. Although in the media Hamas tends to be identified with its military arm, Izzeddin al-Qassam, which is well known for its suicide attacks against Israeli targets, the organization?s popularity in the Occupied Territories actually stems from its being seen as the voice of Palestinian dignity and the symbol of the defense of Palestinian rights at a time of unprecedented hardship, humiliation, and despair.

People who voted for Hamas emphasize not only the heroic acts of its combatants, but also its reputation for clean conduct, modesty, and honesty, which have been pointedly contrasted with the corruption of the Palestinian Authority. Many of its followers do not subscribe to religious fundamentalism, but rather support the organization due to its pragmatic approach characterized by support for the short-term objective of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, while still maintaining the long-term goal of establishing an Islamic state that would replace Israel and offer a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem.

Most importantly, perhaps, Hamas acquired much of its political credit from its charity and social service networks...”

Hamas: A Discussion

Enright speaks with Amos Oz, Israeli novelist, about his latest work “How To Cure A Fanatic” and about his reaction to Hamas’ victory in the Palestinian elections; then with Professor Azzam Tamimi, who was born in the West Bank city of Hebron and is a Hamas supporter.

“In the aftermath of the stunning Hamas victory in the Palestinian elections, all sides are moving carefully. The United States is threatening to cut off all aid to the Palestinians and Hamas unless it renounces its intention to destroy Israel. A former Israeli Prime Minister compares the Hamas victory to the election of Adolf Hitler in 1933. There is turmoil in Gaza and the West Bank as supporters of the opposition Fatah party, the party of Yassir Arafat, storm the Palestinian parliament. And a Hamas leader says his group would sign a peace treaty if Israel withdraws to the pre-1967 boundaries and releases all Palestinians in Israeli jails. In other words, politics, once again, being played out in a cloud of fear, uncertainty, determination and frustration...”

In the Footsteps of Arafat - An Interview with Hamas’ Ismail Haniya

“There was no point asking Ismail Haniya, head of the victorious Hamas list, whether his movement would recognize Israel’s right to exist, for two reasons. First, the answer was obvious — no, the movement would not recognize Israel’s right to exist. Some say for religious reasons, as Palestine is a Muslim WAQF. Others say the reason is purely nationalist — the banished party cannot recognize the occupier’s right to usurp its land. Others still say Hamas is umbilically tied to the Muslim Brothers movement, which alone is authorized — but unlikely — to alter the basic position.

The continuation to this answer is also obvious. Hamas, as a pragmatic movement, cannot ignore reality and its nation’s desires. When the Palestinian state is established in the West Bank and Gaza Strip — that is, when Israel recognizes the Palestinians’ right to a state in a practical way — there will be place to talk about the relations between the two states. Reality is stronger than any principle and theory, and if the two have good neighborly relations, why would anyone want to destroy them?

The second reason is that the question derives from Israel’s supremacist and patronizing position. From this position Israel dictates the agenda of media issues, which portray the Palestinians as yet another persecutor in a historic chain of persecutors of Jews, and Israel as a victim. The issues distort reality rather than illuminate it...”

Barghouthi: Israel no longer only democracy in Middle East

“Ramallah, 27-01-06: The first press conference given by Independent Palestine head, Mustafa Barghouthi, in Ramallah today, focused on the results of Wednesday’s legislative elections and their implications for the future of Palestine, and for the region as a whole.

Dr. Barghouthi, who gained a seat in the new legislative council along with fellow candidate, Rawia Al-Shawa, began by thanking all those who had supported, and voted for the Coalition, and said that he was proud to form part of the new Palestinian parliament.

He hailed the elections as a great day in the history of Palestine, and praised the Palestinian people for their determination in ensuring that elections were free and fair, and that they passed off without incident despite the many obstacles facing them, including the ongoing Israeli occupation, manifested partly through movement restrictions and limitations on campaigning and voting in East Jerusalem, as well as acute poverty and unemployment, and the threat of internal disorder.

Dr. Barghouthi stated that legislative elections were the culmination of a democratic revolution that had begun with last year’s presidential and local council elections, and that Israel could not longer claim to be the only ‘democracy’ in the Middle East. He added that this revolution would have profound implications for the development of the democratic process in the rest of the Arab world...”

The End of a Political Fiction?

“Hamas’ landslide victory in the January 25 elections for the 132-seat Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) is an unprecedented turning point for politics in both Palestine and the broader Middle East. Arguably for the first time since the establishment of Israel in 1948, an official administrative power in the West Bank and Gaza Strip has strong popular support and is not directly beholden to Israeli or Western interests.

Pre-election polls had consistently forecast a tight race between Hamas and the ruling party Fatah...”

The reality of democracy

“In December 1991, the militant Algerian Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) surprised everyone by winning the first stage of national legislative elections.

The victory stunned the West and, before the FIS could win the crucial second round of elections, the Algerian army stepped in and, with the tacit approval of the U.S. and Europe, cancelled the elections.

Several years of savage civil war followed, in which not only tens of thousands died, but also a fresh generation of Islamic militants was born.

In attempting to curb Islamic militancy in Algeria, the actions of the United States and Europe achieved the exact opposite...”

The Problem with Democracy

“Oh no, not more democracy again! Didn’t we award this to those Algerians on 1990? And didn’t they reward us with that nice gift of an Islamist government - and then they so benevolently cancelled the second round of elections? Thank goodness for that!

True, the Afghans elected a round of representatives, albeit that they included some warlords and murderers. But then the Iraqis last year elected the Dawa party to power in Baghdad, which was responsible - let us not speak this in Washington - for most of the kidnappings of Westerners in Beirut in the 1980s, the car bombing of the (late) Emir and the US and French embassies in Kuwait.

And now, horror of horrors, the Palestinians have elected the wrong party to power...”

Sharon’s Last Victory

“Hamas’s decisive victory in the unquestionably democratic elections held in the Palestinian occupied territories is the result of many factors. However, above all else, it is a great victory for Ariel Sharon’s policy.

For decades the destruction of the PLO has been a strategic objective for the former Israeli PM, and this was not his first attempt; Sharon’s bloody venture in Lebanon in 1982 represented a major effort to achieve this goal. However, despite both Israel’s military might and ruthless brutality-- exemplified by its role in the Sabra and Shatila massacres-- the Lebanon invasion failed.

Back in power in 2001, Ariel Sharon was determined to succeed where he failed two decades before...”

The Palestinians’ democratic choice must be respected

“Hamas’s triumph in Wednesday’s Palestinian elections is the best news from the Middle East for a long time. The poll was a more impressive display of democracy than any other in the region, outstripping last year’s votes in Lebanon and Iraq both in turnout and the range of views that candidates represented.

Whereas in Iraq parties that opposed the occupation had to downplay or even obscure their views, Palestinian supporters of armed resistance to Israel’s expansionist strategies were able to run openly. It is true that Hamas candidates did not make relations with Israel the centrepiece of their campaign. They focused on reform in the Palestinian Authority. But few voters were unaware of Hamas’s uncompromising hostility to occupation and its record in fighting it.

Wednesday’s election was remarkable also in owing nothing to Washington’s (selective) efforts to promote democracy in the Arab world...”

The New Hamas: Between Resistance and Participation

(Graham Usher, a contributing editor of Middle East Report, covers Palestine for Middle East International and al-Ahram Weekly.)

“In March 2005, Hamas, the largest Islamist party in Palestine, joined its main secular rival Fatah and 11 other Palestinian organizations in endorsing a document that seemed to embody the greatest harmony achieved within the Palestinian national movement in almost two decades. By the terms of the Cairo Declaration, Hamas agreed to "maintain an atmosphere of calm" -- halt attacks on Israel -- for the rest of the year, participate in Palestinian parliamentary elections scheduled for July and commence discussions about joining the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). In the eyes of many, the Islamist party had not come so close to reconciliation with Fatah since it emerged as a political force in the late 1980s, and certainly not since Fatah became the dominant party within the Palestinian Authority (PA) created in 1994. “This is a turning point for the region,” said top PA negotiator Nabil Abu Rideina of the Cairo Declaration.

In July, Hamas and PA police forces squared off in armed clashes in Gaza that left two dead and scores wounded in the worst intra-Palestinian violence since the second intifada erupted in the fall of 2000, and arguably since November 1994, when the PA police shot dead 14 Palestinians during a Hamas demonstration outside Gaza’s Palestine mosque.

What brought about the fall from concord in Cairo to confrontation in Gaza? ...”