Three brief observations on the Hamas shocker














Sorry, but I was a little busy "doing Hamas," that is providing newsbites, for a few broadcasting outlets. I even had to interrupt my pilates exercise to give a three-minute interview to radio station CJOB-AM in Winnipeg, Canada... And I'm working on a long analytical piece for the American Conservative on the topic as it relates to the Bush Administration's crusade to "democratize" the Middle East. The three recent mostly free elections in the region gave us a nutty president in Iran, his radical Shiite pals in Iraq, and now Hamas... Since you've been following the news from the Holy Land and reading what all the "usual suspects" -- always wrong! -- have to say about the subject, let me just make three brief and contrarian observations:

1. Why did the media, pollsters, etc. failed to predict the Hamas victory? Two main reasons: First, they relied on unreliable Palestinian pollsters like Dr. Khalil Shikaki director of the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research who receive their funding from western sources and have an interest in providing their clients with the good news they want to hear (not to mention the fact that they aren't very professional). The other reason is that western officials and pundits just have a mental problem accepting the idea that religion remains such a powerful force in the politics of nations. I read that these guys realy "shocked" at the Davos meeting upon hearing the news.

2. Is it the End of the World? There wasn't any "peace process" taking place since the start of the second intifadah. So it's not like we're going to bring an end to something that hasn't been happening. The Bushies and the media are going to spin the news by suggesting that perhaps we could co-opt the Hamas, that they would tend to adopt a more accomodative approach after coming to power, that there is the "good Hamas" (Hamas figures who can convese in English on CNN and use the internet...) as opposed to the "bad Hamas" (those who cannot do that) and so on. That's a lot of b-s. These guys believe in what they say and say what they believe in. They live in an entirely different universe from the one you and I live in and don't share our dreams and values. Sure, we can reach some ad-hoc deals with them but please don't start with all the wishful thinking (and add a question mark if you do that). Yes, in Turkey we have an Islamic Democratic (a la a European Christian Democratic) party that seems to be reasonable (we hope). But that happened after a century of revolution and nation creating. It's not going to happen in Palestine in a few months or weeks.

3. So what will happen? The media misses the point again by focusing on Israeli and Western reactions. I'm more interested in following how the ousted Fatah guys are going to react. Remember these are very corrupt individuals who make our own Abramoff look like Mother Theresa. They basically steal money the Palestinians receive from the U.S. and EU and put it in their bank accounts. And they have a lot of guns. So do you really think that they are going to become the "loyal opposition" in the Palestinian "parliament." Like the ex-Baathists in Iraq they are pissed off and I won't be surprised that they'll start shooting very soon. Civil war? Perhaps.

What we need in Washington is a serious debate on whether the Democratic Crusade is advancing U.S. national interests, especially in the Middle East.

Comments

Anonymous said…
The other simple thing that so many people missed is that, under the status quo, the Palestinians were screwed. Israel would slice up their territory, take it piece by piece, and grind them down in numerous little ghettos. So the Palestinians picked somebody who'd promise something else.
7:01 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...

Image
Matt Barganier desconstructs Andrew Sullivan's mea sorta culpa on Iraq in Time magazine (Sullivan seen above in a thoughtful pose on Bill Maher's "Real Time"). There have been many of those in recent weeks (including by WFB and Fukuyama ). In an commentary published last year, Oops! I helped start a War which was about one of the earlier apologizing-war-aplogists, I pointed out to the contrast between the way the losers who operate in the market (including financial analysts) are punished and the reality in which the losers in the political game (including foreign policy analysts) rarely get punished: Imagine: for a few years you were investing the money you had saved for your daughter's college education in one of those moderately conservative plans that provided some increase in the value of the investment without exposing it to major risks. But then your financial planner – let's call him Ken P. – got in touch with you and came up with a really great ide...
Read more

When will Israel attack Iran?

Image
I'm not an "Intelligence analyst" and I don't play one on television. But I urge you to study the following items: 1. Seymour Hersh new piece in The New Yorker, "The Next Act: Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?" 2. Tony Karon's "Israel's Domestic Political Games Raises the Danger of a U.S.-Iran War." 3. Aluf Benn's "Olmert's Drums of War" in Haaretz . 4. Bush:I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran. 5. Michael Oren's op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal on November 16 which is only accessible to subscribers. So here are a few interesting quotes: Much like 1967, Israel faces a Middle Eastern leader who has repeatedly sworn to wipe it off the map, and to that end is assiduously trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Like Nasser, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can cripple Israel economically by keeping it in a state of alert, driving away foreign investment and tourism. In the absence of interna...
Read more