The usual partisan articles and rallies have sprung up over the past few weeks regarding Israel’s devastating incursion into Gaza. The well worn labels of “terrorism”, “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” are being thrown around by people desperately trying to swing public perception favourably in one or another direction. Israel has been branded the heartless monster crushing the poor and innocent for no reason at all, while Hamas has been vilified as a cowardly terrorist group hiding behind their own people.
While it is ever tempting to delve into the past and try to build a case for ownership of the land and make sense of it in terms of fairness — be it in Palestine or even here in South Africa — the intractable reality is that throughout history, for multitudes of reasons, people migrate, settle and the resulting societies entrench themselves. Whether the Jews following Hertzl to Palestine all those decades ago were “right” or “wrong” at that time has no direct bearing on the fact that they are now there. They are settled and will not and cannot simply leave.
Both sides have a history of suffering, long lists of good reasons why they should fight for their rights to exist. Both sides cling to so many historical acts of violence against their own that almost any present and future actions have some kind of reasonable justification if one simply picks through the copious pile of offences. Isolated instances of atrocities against each other become the propaganda tools of those who need to radicalise their followers on both sides; the bedtime stories told by Israeli and Palestinian mothers to their impressionable infants to perpetuate the mess.
So, if we leave the history and entitlement issues aside, we are left with the reality on the ground in January of 2009. That reality is this: Israel is militarily way more powerful than Hamas. The reasons are complex and largely irrelevant unless you truly believe life should be fair, which it is not. The greatest local threat to Israel’s existence is Iran and vice versa — as stated explicitly by Iran and calculated by Israel. Iran is an emerging power developing long-range missiles and going nuclear. Iran supports Hamas because Hamas opposes Israel. Iran supplies arms to Hamas and in so doing fights a proxy war with its regional enemy Israel without direct risk to itself. This war keeps Israel’s attention focused on its borders and away from Iran. Hamas, Iran’s expendable and excitable tool at the rock face, foolishly fires Iran’s arms at Israel in a brazen display of arrogant stupidity that scuppers any hope of it being taken seriously by the impartial world.
Israel knows the pattern, be it Hezbollah or Hamas, and knows it can’t eradicate the threat completely but also knows that it must periodically project its power to trim the threat to acceptable levels to both pacify it’s electorate and maintain its sovereignty. It must do this to prevent an escalation of hostility and to persuade others to refrain from trying the same thing. It has just done so in a nasty, ruthless and efficient manner. At times Israel steps over the boundary of what impartial observers deem to be acceptable and justifiable violence in pursuit of their strategic objectives. Israel, however, feels that it can’t afford to show any weakness.
Israel’s entire justification for war revolves around the stance that Hamas and Iran both take almost any opportunity to denounce the right of Israel to exist as an entity. Again, it now hardly matters what historical justifications are hurled around for these views. Israel consists of a population of roughly 5.5-million Jews who are now firmly settled in Israel. Upon hearing that their more militant neighbours wish to drive them into the sea, it is hardly surprising that they act with enormous aggression to counter those who hold this view. If Israel truly wanted peace, it would take steps to offer Hamas recognition in exchange for negotiations. It would recognise the plight of Gaza and take the steps towards giving Hamas the opportunity to act in a new role. It would require a radical departure from the norm but surely it is a risk worth taking. Strategically Israel has nothing to lose since it is the stronger power.
If Hamas, in turn, truly cared about the Palestinian women and children, it would be slowly nurturing and developing diplomatic ties with the world. It would be radically changing its image from gun-wielding militants on a Jihad to people who have suffered. Hamas could peacefully and rightfully demand change. It should be projecting the Palestinian story — for it is a compelling story — and it should be offering real world solutions to real world problems. But it prefers idiotic bravado, a policy of genocide and firing rockets indiscriminately against civilians to make a pointless point that has already been made thousands of bloody times.
So Hamas fires rockets daily at Israel, knowing full well that a powerful Israel will take the opportunity to react when it sees fit to do so. Hamas members know that their mothers and wives and sons and fathers and children will die when this finally happens. Hamas knows that it will not dent the machine yet it is content to spend its misguided fury against Israel in a show of angry, religion-fuelled, impotent machismo that is all too easy to deflect. And Hamas lamely announces victory when Israel pulls out of the shattered city. They are as much to blame for those deaths as the Israelis that planned the attacks and executed them. They knew what they were doing.
Hamas needs the moral high ground to be taken seriously. They are not going about attaining it in anything like the right way. That is why they are called terrorists. They behave like terrorists, project an image of radicals and fight a war with no scruples while loudly demanding them from Israel. Palestinians gave speeches in the UN accusing Israel of war crimes. Israel may well be guilty of “using white phosphorus in a built-up area” but where does the Geneva Convention stand on suicide bombings on buses and in cafes and the indiscriminate and perpetual firing of rockets at civilian settlements? Lets cut the crap. It has to work both ways.
Hamas and the world demand that Israel show restraint and use appropriate force. But why should they have to play by rules when Hamas refuses to do so? What is appropriate anyway? Who decides? If Hamas sees fit to send a suicide bomber onto a bus and kill civilians, why should Israel refrain from doing likewise? Why do the rules of engagement differ? Are Palestinian civilians supposed to be exempt from attack while Israeli civilians are fair game simply because Israel is a bigger more powerful state? That hardly seems right.
The world will not respond to the calls for help from Hamas with any great seriousness when they show such immaturity in approaching the problem. That’s a great pity because large portions of the world are very sympathetic to the Palestinian plight. Israel will certainly not respond while Hamas holds the view that they should not exist. So the choice quite clearly belongs to Hamas. Did they honestly believe that firing rockets daily into Israel for years on end would convince the Israelis to pack up and relocate? In this question lie a million answers and the key to the motives of Hamas.
A cynic would point out that, from the evidence at hand, Hamas quite obviously do not want peace or a solution that requires any kind of compromise, which means they don’t want peace at all. It would seem that their inability to govern Gaza was slowly becoming obvious and only provoking the old enemy could regain the support of the people around them. Much like Mugabe played the race card and sacrificed white farmers and the food production of his country to mask his incompetence and win an election, Hamas played the Israeli card and sacrificed the lives of their people and brought about the ruin of their city. In the rubble, however, they gained the invaluable support of the angry, grieving, suffering Palestinian. They have power once more and a renewed purpose to avenge the recent attacks.
A place like Gaza should not exist in a decent world. In an ideal world, Israelis and Palestinians would come together, forget the past, erase the borders and forge a new and vibrant democracy in the Middle East. That is not going to happen soon, if ever. The only feasible solution for a people that hate each other this much is the two-state solution. Negotiation brings them closer to this solution; war takes them further apart. It is time that Hamas and Israel soften their stances, widen perspectives and start negotiating.
Author
A prince with dignity and determination
Prince Ngarambe’s goals are to become Rwanda’s first transgender model and to uplift the country’s youth
The EFF’s principles are unshakeable
Unlike the ANC, the core values of the freedom fighters do not change with each leader it elects
