Hamas Says It Will Not Hold Truce Talks

DRoseDARs · June 6, 2003, 06:29

Bedtime for DRoseDARs, but before I go...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...d=540&ncid=716

Quote:

Hamas Says It Will Not Hold Truce Talks
19 minutes ago

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - In a surprise move, the Islamic militant group Hamas said Friday it will not hold talks with the Palestinian prime minister on halting attacks on Israelis.

The Palestinian prime minister, Mahmoud Abbas, has been trying to persuade militant groups to end shooting and bombing attacks, and was to have held a new round of talks with leaders of Hamas and other militias this weekend.

A Hamas leader, Abdel Aziz Rantisi, said Friday that the group has decided not to begin talks with Abbas, even though only a day earlier Hamas officials said they were ready to hear the prime minister's proposals, and Abbas had expressed optimism he could obtain a truce within a week.

Rantisi suggested that Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, made too many concessions to the Israelis in his speech at a Mideast summit held earlier this week in Jordan under the auspices of President Bush (news - web sites). At the summit, also attended by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - web sites), Abbas called for an end to the "armed intefadeh," or uprising, against Israel.

"Abu Mazen closed the door to dialogue by himself," Rantisi told The Associated Press. "He committed himself in front of Bush and Sharon (to) what Palestinians refused."

---

That last sentence is my emphasis. If the "silent majority" of Palestinians REALLY want peace, now would be a good time to make their voices heard...once and for all. A few weeks ago, they started, but now is the time to not mince words. They must say, "ENOUGH," and be done with it. Methinks this is their last good chance at peace for the next few decades...

*End Is Forever* · June 6, 2003, 06:32

Why would Hamas want peace talks? The only settlement Hamas are interested in is the complete and utter destruction of Israel and the formation of a Greater Palestine (which, incidentally, would include "claiming back" Jordan and usurping the PLO - a secular(ish) organisation).

You can't negotiate with terrorists.

TheStinger · June 6, 2003, 06:34

Unless their Irish

Solly · June 6, 2003, 08:05

Their Irish what?

TheStinger · June 6, 2003, 08:10

Unless the're Irish terrorrists.

Daz · June 6, 2003, 08:18

...which brings us to another topic. But before we do that, allow me to say that the only solution I see is a "civil war" within the palestinian teritorries, and maybe Syria.
Drose is right. Only the arabs themselves can sort this one out....

DanS · June 6, 2003, 10:56

Civil War!!!

Arrian · June 6, 2003, 11:00

Of course Hamas won't stop. Did anyone seriously think they would?

-Arrian

MichaeltheGreat · June 6, 2003, 11:01

Just a slight purge would do...

The diplomat · June 6, 2003, 11:03

If the Palestinians are trully committed to peace, then now is the time to seriously crack down on Hamas once and for all. Let's see if Abbas and co. trully eliminate these terrorist organizations, like he promised.

I suspect that even if Abbas wanted to, that he does not yet the power to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure. This may mean a Palestinian civil war.

dannubis · June 6, 2003, 11:05

funny how their leaders always refuse to enter peace talks and at the same time seem to have a profound dislike for martyrdom. it would be a lot sooner over when they blew themselves up ... perhaps they should be helped a little bit.

PLATO · June 6, 2003, 11:12

Quote:

Originally posted by The diplomat
If the Palestinians are trully committed to peace, then now is the time to seriously crack down on Hamas once and for all. Let's see if Abbas and co. trully eliminate these terrorist organizations, like he promised.

I suspect that even if Abbas wanted to, that he does not yet the power to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure. This may mean a Palestinian civil war.

Who against Who? Fatah vs. Hamas for control of Palestine? Not as long as they have a common Enemy. If the UN was worth a crap and had any balls, they would say that the first terrorist to fire a shot causes an introduction of a large multinational force to hunt them down regardless of national boarders. Obviously neithier the Palestinians or Israeli's have the werewithal to finish the job. The current punch-counterpunch philosophy will never solve anything and as long as terrorist organizations exist in the area this pattern will continue.

Ned · June 6, 2003, 11:50

Quote:

Originally posted by *End Is Forever*
Why would Hamas want peace talks? The only settlement Hamas are interested in is the complete and utter destruction of Israel and the formation of a Greater Palestine (which, incidentally, would include "claiming back" Jordan and usurping the PLO - a secular(ish) organisation).

You can't negotiate with terrorists.

Now there is a twist of which I was not aware. Hamas wants Jordan "back" as well?

It seems that Abbas could have Jordan and perhaps Egypt as allies in any upcoming "civil" war. Israel would be wise to permit Jordanian and Egyptian troops to help Abbas if he called for help, which I think he would sorely need.

GePap · June 6, 2003, 12:04

.....

A palestinian "civil war" is highly unlikely. No major palestinian orgs want to be seen as leading the Palestinains towards such an outcome.

The porbem is that Abbas has no base. He is not charesmatic, he was not elected, and for many, he is simply an impossed leader to please US and Israeli interests and "begotiate" on their terms. So they are unwilling to give him the benefit of the doubt, and then he goes to Aqqaba and sounds concialliatory (which he had to) and that totally undermines him at home.

Abbas needs to try to show some results on the ground before he can politically challenge Hamas in Gaza. It's a nice little circle, Hamas has the power to act, having the Isralei counteract, and thus undermining Abba's ability to get concrete steps. Just with this statement they porbably bring to a halt most Israeli moves to ease up restrcitions on Pals, which then brings into question Abba's abilities.

Quote:

If the UN was worth a crap and had any balls, they would say that the first terrorist to fire a shot causes an introduction of a large multinational force to hunt them down regardless of national boarders.

Funny how it would be Israel that wou;ld mpst vehenmtly oppose this, since it would mean foreigners coming into the occupied territories and taking control away from the IDF. Israel has always been the party to oppose armed anything from anywhere else coming in.

PLATO · June 6, 2003, 12:28

Quote:

Originally posted by GePap
Funny how it would be Israel that wou;ld mpst vehenmtly oppose this, since it would mean foreigners coming into the occupied territories and taking control away from the IDF. Israel has always been the party to oppose armed anything from anywhere else coming in.

So true.

It seems to me that this is the only way we are ever really going to get peace. Neithier party in this conflict has the ability to do it on their own and I doubt they can accomplish it together without outside intervention.

*End Is Forever* · June 6, 2003, 12:50

Quote:

Now there is a twist of which I was not aware. Hamas wants Jordan "back" as well?

Yes. Hamas, Islamic Jihad et al believe in a return to the "true" Palestine under "true" Islamic rule. This necessitates firstly the secession of large chunks of Jordan (if not all of it, I'm far from certain about the geography) and, secondly, the removal of the PLO from any future Palestinian state; whilst the PLO are Muslims they're far too secular for Hamas' taste, and are almost in effect being supported as the lesser of two evils.

Az · June 6, 2003, 13:04

well, if they want the territory of Israel, it's only fair that they'd want the territory of Jordan as well. It was always considered a single unit.

Cruddy · June 6, 2003, 14:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
Of course Hamas won't stop. Did anyone seriously think they would?

-Arrian

I think it unlikely, but no impossible.

IIRC Hamas got started back in the 80s when Israel was occupying Beiruit and forcing a lot of Palestinians out.

Given the situation then, it's no wonder they don't trust Arafat.

HOWEVER, given their recent losses (and the lack of any real military impact of their operations) they MIGHT at least agree to a ceasefire, if they can see it as a possible way to lever Arafat out. What really infuriates them is the thought of the Pals being sold out yet again.

Like I said, unlikely. But, one of the reasons the PIRA declared a truce was their losses were very high - if you are on the losing end of a military campaign, peace looks like a more attractive route to justice.

Sirotnikov · June 6, 2003, 20:25

Quote:

Funny how it would be Israel that wou;ld mpst vehenmtly oppose this, since it would mean foreigners coming into the occupied territories and taking control away from the IDF. Israel has always been the party to oppose armed anything from anywhere else coming in.

The only reason that Israeli would oppose it is because we don't trust the UN to do a half decent job, esp. when it comes to fighting terrorism. When it comes to combating terrorism, we only trust ourselvse.

If we really knew the UN would be dead serious in their pursuit of terrorists, and would pursue them, instead of ignoring them, and even defending them (see UN treatment of Hezballah men who abducted 3 Israeli sodliers) , we would happily let the UN in.

blackice · June 6, 2003, 22:36

Do you think finally the world will be able to separate the wheat from the chaff?

CyberGnu · June 6, 2003, 23:03

Sadly, the one thing that made this roadmap different from the previous ones seems to be missing from the last versions...

Early on, it was emphasised that in the first phase, each side should carry through with their respective obligations regardless of whether the other side did so or not.

This would be the only way to solve the deadlock: As Gepap pointed out, Abbas can't crack down on Hamas unless he can show that Israel for the first time in its existance actually does take a real step towards peace.

The way I expected it to go would be for Bush to force Sharon to go ahead with the roadmap. The first 4-6 months I wouldn't expect anything substantial to happen in palestine. After that, when palestine had been protected from Israeli aggression for a while, it would be made clear that unless Hamas is taken care of Israel would be let loose again, with the barbarities that would follow... And the palestinian people would see that there is actually an alternative to violence.

But, since this is missing, I don't have the greatest hopes for this turn either...