Posted on 08/06/2014 5:01:47 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
CAIRO — Battered by a month of Israeli assaults on its fighters, rockets and tunnels, the militant Palestinian group Hamas is turning its attention to surviving the peace.
As both sides prepare for talks about extending a three-day truce, Israel is coming to the negotiating table emboldened to demand that Hamas surrender its weapons completely — what Israel calls the “demilitarization” of Hamas’s stronghold, Gaza. Without disarmament, Israel says, it will not ease its blockade of the territory.
Egypt, the broker of the talks and once a friendly face to Hamas, has now joined Israel in pushing to cripple the militant group. It favors putting Gaza under the control of a unified Palestinian government formed by a recent deal between Hamas and its secular rival faction, Fatah, in the hope that the new government could disarm Hamas.
But Mousa Abu Marzook, a senior Hamas political leader, said during an interview in Cairo that Hamas would still come out ahead. He said the group welcomed the new coalition government but would keep its military wing distinct — and allow it to prepare for another potential war with Israel.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
We know that Hamas is losing when Hamas states that it wants to negotiate. “Negotiate”, to Hamas, is nothing more than “let’s take a break so we can regroup and rearm for the next war.”
“The Hamas brigades “are completely separate,” Mr. Abu Marzook said......the Hamas fighters would remain outside the new government’s control. “Of course, they are outside the unity government,” he said.”
It’s business as usual - absurd.
Since there are no uniforms to distinguish the Hamas military from the civilians, the course is to assume all are military. That means that there are no civilian casualties in Gaza, only military.
Hmm, notice how it is an Israeli "assault" on hamas? Not a defensive action, apparently all one-sided if you believe the NYT. Also noteworthy - the complete lack of even a mention that oh, by the way, those rockets were being fired into Israeli civilian population centers and those tunnels were being used to infiltrate suicide bombers and terrorists into Israel. Guess that slipped by ya NYT?
...the militant Palestinian group Hamas is turning its attention to surviving the peace...
Oh, as if hamas is the injured party here? They brought it on themselves. For the record NYT, hamas isn't "militant" THEY ARE TERRORISTS. Look at their goals, look at their tactics - terrorists. But then, when has the NYT ever let a little thing like facts and the truth get in the way of a good story that supports their agenda?
...Israel is coming to the negotiating table emboldened to demand that Hamas surrender its weapons completely..."
I see, Israel is "emboldened" and issuing demands on poor little hamas. No, no bias here. Move along, nothing to see.
...what Israel calls the “demilitarization” of Hamas’s stronghold, Gaza. Without disarmament, Israel says, it will not ease its blockade of the territory.
Oh those poor hamas guys and gals! ;-/ Big bad Israel is going to continue to blockade them trying to keep weapons out of Gaza. ... Hmm, that sounds familiar. Oh yeah, Oslo I and Oslo II accords put together by the Clintons back in the 90s were supposed to de-militarize Gaza. Guess that one slipped by you too NYT? Seems hamas and the Palestinians aren't supposed to have rockets in there at all. Gosh, how dare Israel expect the Palestinians and hamas to keep to an agreement...
Egypt ... has now joined Israel in pushing to cripple the militant group...
Cripple? Really? No, no bias in the language here.
Mousa Abu Marzook, a senior Hamas political leader, said during an interview in Cairo that Hamas would still come out ahead. He said the group welcomed the new coalition government but would keep its military wing distinct — and allow it to prepare for another potential war with Israel.
In other words when people say hamas only agrees to cease fires in order to rearm and regroup it isn't just a bad joke. That is in fact the stated policy of hamas' leadership. So why would Israel ever agree to a cease fire? I believe Israel should have a 3 part plan for their security.
Maybe instead of a Two State Solution, we need a Three State Solution.
Gasa can become Hamasastan. It can keep it’s military intact and arm itself as much as it likes.
The West Bank can become Palestine, but it must exist as a demilitarized state, with no army, no militia and no weapons.
Residents of the West Bank and Gaza should be given a six-month period to decide which state they prefer. Do they want to live next to Hamas rocket launchers, or do they want to live in peace on the West Bank?
After six months, the borders would be sealed, and each country would be responsible for what happens in their own territory.
The result would be a stable peace with the West Bank, leading eventually to a reasonable prosperous and independent Palestine, which would provide a decent life to its citizens.
Gaza, of course, would become a militarized hell-hole, right up until the time they could not help themselves anymore, and they launch an attack on Israel. I give them about two weeks. At that point, as the attacked party, Israel can just move in and take over under any rule you could imagine.
The advantage of the Three State Solution is that anybody in Gaza at the time the Israeli tanks roll will be there voluntarily, and will have endorsed military opposition to Israel. There will not be any nonsense about non-combatants caught in the cross-fire, because everybody in the cross-fire will have volunteered to be there.
Thus the Three State Solution becomes the Two State Solution again.
I don’t think the Arabs there would accept it. There seems to be two schools of thought: drive out the Jews openly and immediately (Hamas approach), or drive out the Jews gradually (PLO and European approach, using a 2-state solution as a step in that direction).
Within those schools, there seem to be different long-term preferences for extermination, expulsion or enslavement. I don’t see any serious support for a long-term two-state solution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.