Yes, sometimes it's "the worse, the better".

Of course, that's easy for me to say, since I don't have to live in Israel.

Here's hoping the accommodationists in the West are no longer able to avert their gaze from the mass psychosis of the Palis--and begin to act accordingly. Oh, who am I kidding?

The "Palestinian state" is generally called the U.N.

For the most part, their "actions will have consequences" only as long as there are free elections. Our main goal should be to see that they keep voting, and any aid money should be contingent on that.

Probably most Palestinians, like most people everywhere, would prefer good government and economic opportunity over Jihad.

Actually, keeping the money flowing is exactly what must not be done. That's part of the "actions have consequences" bit.

If we cheat them of that, then we cheat them of the responsibility that forms the key link between democracy and forcing political movements to live in reality.

The UN and the Euros, whose share Hamas' goal of Israel's destruction and the end of the Jewish Problem, will continue to shovel money their way.

Those Palestinians sure love sucking the giant government nipple which is the United Nations, don't they?

The key to breaking CoDependent behavior is sometimes you have to let somebody crash and burn based on their own actions. Let Hamas wreck the Palestinians and be there to offer a constructive alternative when they hit rock bottom.

Historical precedent regarding rabid genocidal ideologues who ascend to positions of political power would seem to disagree with you.

Hitler's ascension from failed beer hall putsch-er to the height of power in the German political structure of early twentieth century pulled him from his "fantasy worlds" because his actions had "real consequences."

Didn't seem to happen with Pol Pot either.

Ideologues tend to try and impose their ideal reality upon the objective structure, often with horrendous, disastrous consequences.

This is an unmitigated disaster. The Palestinian people (while some indeed may have used their vote to protest against widespread Fatah corruption) seem to have chosen the path of war.

It also good to see - from the perspective of entrenching the concept of democracy in Palestine - that Fatah look like they are going to hand over power without a fight.

Lets hope that, while Hamas are in power, the system remain stable enough to ensure that Hamas can't turn Palestine into an electocracy.

Sorry, the above comment should read:

Hitler's ascension from failed beer hall putsch-er to the height of power in the German political structure of early twentieth century hardly succeeded in pulling him from his "fantasy worlds" because his actions had "real consequences."

I’m with you on this one Armed Liberal it was obvious that the current group was a dead end. So why not change

Best case highly unlikely is either Hamas becomes the peacemakers or maybe a little more likely Fatah becomes a capable alternative driven by peace.

Worst-case most likely Hamas funded by Iran/Syria go terrorist open new campaign and do to the Palestinians just what the Iranian pres has done to Iran show the squishy left EU/UN/LLL who they really are and their real goals.

Either way is better than the current delusion the west and the world in general is living in held up by a corrupt hollow mask of a group called Fatah.

I think this could be a good thing, ultimately. Hamas is going to have to either accept (at least pay lip service) to the former Palestinian agreements to renounce violence, or they will abandon them. This provides a perfect pretext for the US to cut off aid and pressure the Europeans to do the same. The Euros actually seem to be in a mood to give the finger to terrorism lately so this might actually make some hay. If the Europeans can be pried away from enabling the terrorist groups, it will really flip the playing board. Hamas may be just the pry bar necessary, and without US, European, and UN funding the Palestinians are going to have big financial problems. Some of that Hamas bomb making money might just have to be diverted to other things, but that might be hoping too much.
Israel should be pleased as well. Even the EU cant expect them to engage a government sworn to decimate them. Can they?

I'm betting this is also one of those "one man, one vote, one time" things. They have a democracy and they elect a dictatorship. Doesn't surprise me though. Savages are like children, they need a strong man kicking ass or nothing gets done. What was it Kipling said? "Half devil and half child."

Hamas is going to have to either accept (at least pay lip service) to the former Palestinian agreements to renounce violence, or they will abandon them.

"Negotiations with Israel is not on our agenda," said Mushir al-Masri, who won election in his home district in the northern Gaza Strip. "Recognizing Israel is not on the agenda either now."

http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/feeds/ap/2006/01/26/ap2478053.html

Even the EU cant expect them to engage a government sworn to decimate them. Can they?

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=23fd0063-dfd3-4570-a0b8-2bbabf291705

Seems like they can.

While the second link above is hardly an official EU position, it doesn't sound out of character.

Though I suppose in an abstract sense, and using my above example, Hitler coming to power was ultimately a good thing, because the world saw him for the war-mongering genocidal maniac he really was, and his fall shook Germany free from the grip of fascism, it's only fair to say that that's a long term viewpoint, and only arrived at through the lens of those of us who are far removed from it in time.

I certainly never heard my grandfather (a combat medic who landed at Normandy on D-Day) speak in such terms. He had much more colorful language to describe the likes of the German National Socialists.

And the road to that sunny 'ultimately the glass is half full' conclusion is paved with death, blood, immense suffering and tears.

Perhaps I'm wrong, in fact, I hope I'm wrong. I honestly do.

But my initial take is that this is a dark day indeed.

The UN and the Euros, whose [who?–AJL] share Hamas' goal of Israel's destruction and the end of the Jewish Problem, will continue to shovel money their way.

Ah, Joe, what have you been smoking lately?

As to Armed Liberal's point, I think it's possible to be cautiously optimistic. The entrenched PA was a hopelessly corrupt institution whose level of incompetence and theft precluded any possibility of bringing normal life to Palestinians. I think it's good to see democracy in action, even if the regime swept away was more conciliatory towards Israel. If needs be, the Israelis can build the Security Fence two feet higher. The idea that Israel is on the verge of destruction from the Ramallah satrapy really isn't worth discussing (Teheran is another matter).

Hamas is an Islamofascist organization. If Hamas sticks to its charter: the obliteration of Israel, a scenario similar to WWI will begin.

Just as the assasination of Arch Duke Ferdinand was the spark that lit match to WWI, a Palestinian attack (on say) Jerusalem will be the spark to ignite another world conflageration.

The only way this will not happen is if Hamas and their new Palestinian government eats a lot of humble pie and accepts an Israeli State.

Hmmm... I just can't see that illusion taking place.

A bit off topic but this piece may be similar with whats going on in Iraq

Response to Juan Cole

Some of that Hamas bomb making money might just have to be diverted to other things,

Well, a LOT of the bomb $$ has been diverted to other things for quite some time. That's why these guys are in power. If there are less terror attacks then expect more UN/EU funds to actually reach Palestinians in need.

I don't think the Hamas victory in any way will speed up their terror-activities or those of their proxies. Fatah was a sham anyways, and if anything provided cover for Hamas to carry out attacks. Now they can and will be held responsible. This is a good thing.

I don't have an informed opinion on Hamas or the situation in Gaza or the West Bank so all I can venture is that we should hope for the best. I've always assumed that the “social services” aspect of Hamas's program was a Maoist strategy. That doesn't mean that their victory will in any way change their aspirations to drive the Israelis into the sea.

My suspicion is that either this will be the beginning of a political settlement of the conflict or the beginning of the extermination or ejection of the “Palestinian people”.

Andrew Lazarus #14,

The entrenched PA was a hopelessly corrupt institution whose level of incompetence and theft precluded any possibility of bringing normal life to Palestinians.

While their corruption and incompetence played a role, the fact that they terminated liberal democrats and decided to wage war on the source of the majority of their citizens' income should not be understated in their destruction of a normal life for the Palestinians.

I think it's good to see democracy in action, even if the regime swept away was more conciliatory towards Israel.

A typical democratic election does not include the murder of politicians, as was reported on the front page of the WSJ yesterday. This has happened throughout the "electioneering" process.

Having an election every decade or so, particularly when this does not conform to the election timetable, is not democracy in action either.

The Fatah regime is no more or less conciliatory to Israel than the Hamas regime will be. Both reject peace deals with Israel. The only difference is that Fatah creates and signs deals while violating them whereas Hamas refuses to sign deals with the "Zionist entity". From that perspective, the Hamas win provides some upside - there can be no more pretending, at least for honest interlocutors.

I agree with Joe that Hamas/PA should receive no aid until Hamas has formally accepted Israels right to exist, and accepted the Oslo accords. Im not sure that disarming their militia matters much, now that theyre the govt - so they fold their militia into the security forces, so what?

And from then on recognition and aid will depend entirely on their behavior. No PA supported terr acts. A PA/Hamas crackdown on Islamic Jihad. No incitement. A serious stance in negotiations.

Also agree with A Lazarus, this isnt the end of the world, and Israel can and should complete the security fence.

For once I agree with Andrew J. IMO Hamas in power won't do any more than Fatah would have let Hamas do when Fatah was in power. Fatah was just a corrupt facade. The vote in Gaza was for the party perceived as less corrupt. The main difference is that now we'll find out how corrupt Hamas can be given the opportunity.

what's the difference hamas or fatah both are a bunch of terrorists with no real interest in peace.
If Bush has any sense he can stop the forgien aid and plan on an invasion. of course the UN will never agree

This is the decade that's going to test a lot of peoples' faith in democracy and self-rule, isn't it? Over, and over, and over again. Mine, too.

If the stakes weren't so large, I'd be cynically amused at the way some can simultaneously decry the United States' support of less than savory regimes during the Cold War and yet simultaneously decry the policy of democracy spearheading in the Middle East on the grounds that we might not like the results of other peoples' choices. (I never could figure out the underlying logic, if it's anything beyond blind fear of doing anything for dislike of the consequences-- the old isolationist impulse at its worst-- or that we're only supposed to support benevolent tyrannies. And to be fair, I have been complacent in the past about our support for less than savory regimes, myself.)

For the record, I still believe that, long term, the spearheading of democracy is the best way to go. I do not believe it will be easy. I do not believe that every state and territory in which it occurs will be transformed into a garden overnight. I am sure some will go in directions we do not prefer, perhaps catastrophically, and that it will be decades before we fully appreciate the fruits of these labors.

But it is as harrowing as it is necessary.

"Hitler's ascension from failed beer hall putsch-er to the height of power in the German political structure of early twentieth century hardly succeeded in pulling him from his "fantasy worlds" because his actions had "real consequences.""

Of course it did. Granted, one might have wished that the process of pulling Hitler from his fantasy world of the Fourth Reich into reality had been less painful or destructive, but pulled harshly from that fantasy he - and the German people - certainly were.

The dark day in Palestianian history was the triumphant entry into Palestian of the victorious Yassir Arafat. The dark days of Palestian history is Bill Clinton shaking hands with Yassir Arafat. That was the day when the hopes for peace in the ME were dashed so utterly that it was and remains beyond anyone's ability to see when such hopes might be resurrected. Let us never forget that the people that enabled that victory were in the US State Department - well meaning fools meddling in things that they didn't understand, and ambitious politicians trying to forge a 'legacy'. Everything that has happened since then, is merely the fulfillment of what happened on that day - as many others and I predicted.

In a very real way, this changing of the guard does not necessarily represent a substantive change. In fact, no substantive change is probably the most likely - and least favorable - result of the Hamas victory. I never believed that there was considerable difference in the goals of Fatah and Hamas. I think that Hamas will move comfortably into the old roles, and comfortably accept the world's bribes, while continuing to have much the same practical policy as the former terrorists that held those offices.

One should never imagine that Hamas represents a greater danger that Arafat's Fatah. The greatest danger to peace is always fantasy. Whether it is the belief that Hitler is a 'man of peace' or whether it is belief that 'Arafat is a man of peace', the result is the same. If there is any hope for change with Hamas coming to power, it is this: I do not think it is possible for Hamas to lead the Palestinian people into deeper wells of fantasy than they are already in - a decade of Fatah propaganda and control of the school curiculem has seen to that - but it is possible that they will lead the West out of its fantasies.

In the book of Revelations, Christ tells the writer to send a letter to the Church in Laodacia, in which he blasts that congregation for being neither 'hot' nor 'cold' but rather 'lukewarm'. He says that he would rather that they were either hot or cold, but since they are lukewarm they are unusable. I think that in this ancient truth is the secret to peace in the Middle East. The problem with the Middle East is that it is in a state that is neither war nor peace. I would much rather it be in a state of peace, but if it were not in a state of peace then I'd rather it be in a state of war. Wars by there very nature come to a conclusion. Wars have a way of burning away fantasy and forcing people to the ugly or uncomfortable truth. Wars end conflict, and the hotter the more the more likely it is to resolve the conflict once and for all. If there is one great lesson to take away from the 20th century it is that the only way to peace is to first resolve the war once and for all. Anything less leads either to more wars or something which has the violence of a war, either internally or externally, but not a war's conclusiveness or even the justness of open conflict.

"If the stakes weren't so large, I'd be cynically amused at the way some can simultaneously decry the United States' support of less than savory regimes during the Cold War and yet simultaneously decry the policy of democracy spearheading in the Middle East on the grounds that we might not like the results of other peoples' choices."

It's this lack of internal coherence as well as the complete lack of any sort of alternate plan which tends to cause me to dismiss out of hand most objections to current US policy.

I think we should all put down the Godwin's Law munitions for a moment. This is not WW2 redux and is only remotely analagous because some nasty people won an election. Hamas is not going to start a world war, for the simple reason that they cant. Israel has mopped the floor with the Arab world quite enough times to make it pretty certain their neighbors wont be rallying to the Hamas flag any time soon to push Israel into the sea. The Israeli nuclear arsenal just seals that deal.
The Palestinians are no different than they were yesterday: tiny, poor, and angry. They wont be turning out Tiger tanks or jet bombers any time soon. If Israel ever decided to push the Palestinians into the Jordan, on the other hand, they could do it in a matter of weeks and nobody short of the US would be able to stop them.

The dark days of Palestian history is Bill Clinton shaking hands with Yassir Arafat.

The problem with the Middle East is that it is in a state that is neither war nor peace.

The winners have been the Fatah and Hamas leaders who've stuffed millions or billions into their bank accounts.

For all the rhetoric of blood and sacrifice, I note that few Hamas leaders have strapped on explosive vests, or stood on top of buildings thumbing their noses at missile-equipped Israeli fighters. My bet - in the intermediate term - is on reality.

A.L., you can't be serious. When did a Hamas or PLO leader ever become a voluntary martyr? They send poor people and the children of poor people to do that.

I have to disagree with your hopeful thesis entirely. Facing up to non-ideological reality is no requirement for political existence. The Marxists spent the last century proving that. In fact, the Palestinians were used for toy soldiers in that grand experiment, too.

Still, I'm also glad. Maybe this will help us face up to some reality: namely, that a Palestinian State would be our mortal enemy, and we are under no obligation to approve of - let alone help bring about - the existence of such a thing.

Celebrim #25

It's this lack of internal coherence as well as the complete lack of any sort of alternate plan which tends to cause me to dismiss out of hand most objections to current US policy.

Yeah, well.
I'd feel a lot more cynically amused if I also felt more pure about my own past attitudes.

Granted, one might have wished that the process of pulling Hitler from his fantasy world of the Fourth Reich into reality had been less painful or destructive, but pulled harshly from that fantasy he - and the German people - certainly were.

Which is my point exactly, if you see my follow-up post:

Though I suppose in an abstract sense, and using my above example, Hitler coming to power was ultimately a good thing, because the world saw him for the war-mongering genocidal maniac he really was, and his fall shook Germany free from the grip of fascism, it's only fair to say that that's a long term viewpoint, and only arrived at through the lens of those of us who are far removed from it in time.

That's why I believe the landslide victory of Hamas is a bad thing.

And it wasn't just the German people who paid the price.

Millions paid with their lives as a result of Hitler's insane fantasy ideology. That's not hyperbole. That's literally.

So while I agree that in the grand sweep of history this might ultimately prove to be a positive development, I fear for those of us who live in these times might view it in a less positive manner in the short run.

One of the stated aims of Hamas is the destruction of Israel. Their actions to date seem to indicate that it's far more than just rhetoric.

It takes a lot more to make a functioning democracy than just holding an election. Iran has elections. Saddam had elections. This election wasn't quite as rigged; the Palestinians had their choice of which terrorist organization would govern them.

As for hoping that the Palestinians would adopt a reasonable negotiating position: Why? The history of Palestinian negotiations is that they make promises (in English, never in Arabic) that they never intend to keep. In return, they expect real concessions. Until the Palestinians make real concessions of their own, and until they say in Arabic on Arabic news media that they renounce terrorism and accept the existence of Israel, then there will continue to be nothing to talk about.

"Let's not verbally “air-brush” that picture. Itzhak Rabin was there, too. I agree with your analysis, however. The image made me literally physically ill: three men who could not deliver on the commitments they'd made and who knew it but were posing for the cameras anyway."

I think Rabin was not cynical. He didnt think the existing strategy was working, and he thought that this was a better path, that had to be tried, and that it an upward dynamic would start. What he didnt count on was A. The extreme cynicism of Arafat B. How alienated the Pal population was from peace on the one hand, and from the "Tunisians" at the top of the PLO on the other. C. His own death

This last is not insignificant. Rabin might well have managed to do what neither Bibi, Peres, nor Barak were capable of.

It should also be remembered that when Rabin took the Oslo path, it was an alternative to the Madrid process, which had been initiated by Bush, Sr.

That said, Im still not sure Israel would be better off if the Oslo deal hadnt been made.

#32 liberalhawk

I'm still not sure Israel would be better off if the Oslo deal hadnt been made.

You're not?!

After the democratic elections I expect both sides to be making only unilateral moves.

Israel will move to further cut itself off from all contact from the Palestinians. It will strengthen the wall, adjust the boundaries. It will become the defacto border.

Hamas will declare an independent State of Palestine and the world will rush to fawn at their feet. Everyone except Israel, USA and a very few ultraclose allies will recognise the new state. Europe will join the rest of the world in increasing funding to the new Palestinian government as the "true voice of the Palestinian people".

#13 Citizen Duck,

Here is an explanation of how to handle urls in html.

CE Design - HTML Cheats

#20 Mark,

I'm with you Godwin's Law rules!

Palestinian Role in the Holocaust

HAMAS's 76/132 election is actualy Israel's best-case scenario. BY FAR.

Now, no-one worldwide can say rationally that:
1: the Palestinians do not support terrorism and would be peaceful if only Israel left them alone.
2: the Israeli's have a partner in peace if they'd only stop retaliating after every bombing with missile strikes.
3: Palestinians deserve respect as reasonable people.
4: Israel should act retrained or else be externally restrained.
5: That the PA deserves to run their own borders, immigration, crossings, airports + flights (9/11)
6: that Israel does not need the wall.
7: that the majority of Palestinians can be trusted and that the bombers are aberrany exceptions.

Either HAMAS will be reconstructed as a sane-ish modern-ish government and the attacks will diminish orHAMAS will act as they've promised and Israel will seal the borders, rapidly finish the wall, and totally isolate the PA-controlled areas. My suspicion is that after the VERY next attack, the PA will be sealed in in total lockdown (Olmert does not want to lose to Netanyahu).

With the wall up, the borders sealed and no Palestinians allowed to enter Israeli land, the only 2 attack vectors are from Arab Israelis and rocket attacks.

Israel will counter this by:
1: announcing a family-ejection/deportation policy so as to "ethnically cleanse" themselves of militant Arab families.
2: rapid mass deployment of THEL or MTHEL laser defence systems that can each shoot down large barrages of mortars or rockets.
3: declare un-annexation of the PA ... that the PA is now a soverign government on what land they Israel declined to wall off ... and that any attack crossing the wall would be considered an attack by one soverign country on another to be met my massive military retaliation against both the areas at and near the launc site and against government and civil-infrastructure targets.

And because HAMAS is the duly elected government of the PA, eurpoe and the rest of the world will agree with Israel's actions, however reluctantly.

#35 M. Simon

Thanks for the heads-up! Being a web programmer by trade, I'm intimately familiar with html, however, so many sites have different conventions for links, blockquotes, text formatting, etc. I generally just stick to the basics.

Compounding my natural 'keep it simple' posting tendency in this case is the fact that I read the 'post a comment' verbiage a little too quickly and, as a result, missed this crucial bit:

"...though you can also use proper HTML tags"

Though evidently the 'style' attribute is parsed out of things such as blockquotes, as evidenced by the lack of a dashed border above :P

You hit one out of the park today AL.
The Jewish contingent and pro israeli to the point of stupidity that reads and supports the witers here this has got to deal with some reality.(1) The creation of Israel was accomplished by violently expeling many Palestinian families off their homes,farms etc and out of Israel, so from the very beginning the aims of Zionism were dependent on Palesitianraum(if you doubt it read Dayan's autobiography where he talks about how conflicted the socialist raised troops of Israel were or the Irgun's and Stein groups actions). peoplesimply do not forgot this, it falls under the Machiavellini idea of a man forgets the death of his father sooner than his patrimony. (2) The settler wave in the territories was a further extension of jewish lebensraum. It was doomed to failure for the same reason Sharon was forced to acknowledge, Palestinian birthrates are higher than Israeli ones. Further acerbating the situation was the idiotic response of the Palestinians calling for the destruction of israel made everyone aware of the fact that in some way a second national state had to come into exsistence and neither state could continue calling for the genocide of the other. (3)Hamas was orginally an Israeli creation to offset PLO influence under a religious guise to provide social services to the Palestinians. Hamas quickly became the organization it is today dedicated to the destruction of Israel and providing real services to the Palestinian people.

That said the world Israeli's and Palestinians are now all sitting on the knive's edge. Hamas will be forced to continue to provides services to the Palestinian people. regardless of what the various conpeting factions of the world do w/ their money Hamas has shown an ability to deliveer. Killing the military actors will not stop the social service arm as long as they don;t become corrupt like the PLO did. everyday Hamas is forced to provide services forces a discussion internally of what to do. Like Ho Chi Minh in 1945 they must decide what"shit" to deal w/ and unlike Ho their options are more limited. Every day of limited prosperity forces Hamas' hand.

The Israelis are finding their hands tied as well. Military action and withdrawing to a garrison state doesn't provide any prosperity. The lack of it has forced Israeli society into one where corrution and criminality are the norm in the larger social society as there is no way to make money in a resticted society with heavy security costs. Israel can no longer hide behind the Malemoudian precepts of victimization. both the Israeli's and Hamas must find ways to contact one another regardless of written charters.
In the short run Hamas' solution will likely be someone like the woman Asway Hawali(she was often seen on television here and ran as an independent) as the de facto public leader. She is acceptable to both sides as a known quantity and knowledgeable about the power players in the US, Europe, Israel and Palestine(yes Palestine is a state get used to it). She also provides a secular face to Hamas.
Israel's is more problematic. Sharon's party seems to lack another public face let alone one the Israeli's trust. If they win the election they can open back door channels w/ the Palestinians to keep the truce going and expansion halted period. Tactically it helps out pressure on both Hamas and the West(US) to keep the peace process going. If Likud wins look for the genocidal war to resume overnight. If labor wins it will take longer to resume as they must feel pressured to prove they are the security party.

As a businessman I always ask when someone says they have an idea write it down to prove your serious. After I read it I ask can they revise it on their own to see if they are looking into the future. given that both sides have written genocidal ideas into their body politic and we now from history people whom write their ideas down are serious, it is time to see if they can revise them and move forward. A little straight forward honest optimism is in order now. Let's see if we can nurture it along

SAO - Charitable giving converted to guns, not the other way.

Robert M. Propoganda such as yours is fun to read in a novel but rather dry if your reader knows a little more about the subject than talking points.

"32 liberalhawk

I'm still not sure Israel would be better off if the Oslo deal hadnt been made.

You're not?!"

No, Im not. The intidada would still have bubbled along, Israels would have been even more viewed as the bad guy for rejecting the PLO's "moderation" (and not just by the Eurolefties, but by Americans), Israel would have been more divided, etc. I dont think the situation pre-Oslo, of complete Israeli control over all the territories, was sustainable.

Points of view are propaganda by definition. If you wish to refute go ahead. In any case you will find you have to deal w/ Hamas the longer you stick your head in the sand the bigger and more difficult the challenge will become.

Robert M.,

No doubt Hamas will have to be dealt with.

That is why Israel has an Army.

Robert M.,

Israel does have prosperity problems. It was the fastest growing economy on the planet last year.

A couple more years of problems like that and they will be in real trouble.