
Can you believe this?
On the wrong side lies the kind of deliberate destabilization that, according to a report by our Times colleague Steven Erlanger, Washington and Jerusalem are now discussing. That would involve a joint American-Israeli campaign to undermine a Hamas government by putting impossible demands on it, starving it of money and putting even greater restrictions on the Palestinians with an eye toward forcing new elections that might propel the defeated and discredited Fatah Party back to power.
Set aside the hypocrisy such a course would represent on the part of the two countries that have shouted the loudest about the need for Arab democracy, and consider the probable impact of such an approach on the Palestinians. They are already driven to distraction by fury, frustration and poverty. Is it really possible to expect that more punishment from the Israelis and the Americans, this time for not voting the way we wanted them to, would lead them to abandon Hamas?
In the long, sorry history of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, there is not a shred of evidence to support the notion that pushing the Palestinian population into more economic desperation would somehow cause them to moderate their political views. In fact, experience teaches the exact opposite.
Fatah lost last month’s election because its incompetence and corruption drove Palestinian voters into the arms of the more austere, social-services-oriented Hamas. If the new government fails to deliver because it puts continued terrorism over the well-being of the Palestinian people, it may indeed be booted out of office. But a Hamas that could explain continued Palestinian misery by a deliberate American-Israeli plan to reverse the democratic verdict of the polls would be likely to become only stronger.
Washington publicly asserts that no such plan is being discussed. A far wiser course for the United States to pursue would be to step back and desist from deliberately provoking the Palestinians, and give Hamas a chance to reconsider its own options. Some hints about its intentions may emerge from the way its leaders respond to overtures by the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Last week, Mr. Putin indicated that he intended to invite them to Moscow for a visit.
Mr. Putin’s move was controversial in the West, and perhaps he should have provided more warning. But that would be a minor snub indeed if he prods Hamas toward renouncing terrorism, accepting Israel’s right to exist and reviving the peace process.
Oh sure, like that’s going to happen.
Is the NYT being willfully ignorant here or what? I can’t figure it out.
Related Toldjah So posts:
RSS feed for comments on this post.
The only thing that you can’t do, is that which you believe that you can’t do. More talk and less bombs could bring Peace, if you think it can. Peace
You sound like a York Peppermint pattie commercial, steve.
The NYTwits are on a never-ending quest to push the envelope of lunacy on the left.
Hey Steve at the bong again or is mushrooms today? The only ones that are using bombs is Hamas they are called suicide bombers killing innocent children, women and men you nitwit. If you think you can negotiate with terrorist be my guest that would be one less liberal in this country so take so friends. The NYT must be reading Jimmie Carters mind as he has not met a Dictator or a Despot he didn’t like.
Oh and Steve could you give us your definition of “Peace”?
Sister, how sweet. Peace is the absence of war. What your searching for is Freedom, and that is something you cannot have without Peace. Peace
It would be interesting to see if the NYT’s current editorial staff could, somehow, teleport back into time and try to convince its readers that the increase in NAZI representation in germany prrior to 1933 would be a good outcome and, more importantly, wether we should deal with such monsters based on their elected outcome.
Best Regards, CHOW
I love this line: “Fatah lost last month’s election because its incompetence and corruption drove Palestinian voters into the arms of the more austere, social-services-oriented Hamas.”
I hadn’t realized that their suicide bombers were on the austere side. Ah, the things you learn from a Times editorial.