Well it looks like we took our eye off this ball.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

While everybody's been getting down and dirty in Iraq and Afganistan Gaza seems to have had a little Civil War of it's own.

This one may be won already and peace in the Middle East is one step further away.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1929392.ece

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1930829.ece

Note: For anyone who wants to poo poo the Times, fine, but that's where I read it an hour ago so that's what I'm posting.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I'm not sure it was our ball to ignore.

Whilst I have my reservations about the real reasons that Israel pulled out of Gaza, the simple truth is that the Palestinians have proven themselves incapable of running an independent enclave, just as they have proven themselves insufficient to step up to the responsibilities attendant on running the interim Palestinian Authority.

I know there are huge mitigating factors with the occupation, poverty and economic impacts, but nonetheless, each time they have the opportunity to prove to the powers that can affect their future that they can be a responsible partner in a two-state solution, they fail miserably.

Ordinary Palestinians have a miserable life, yet it is not going to be improved by letting the madmen fight like feral dogs. Until they give their blood to stop the lunatics running the asylum, the lunatics will cause their blood to be eternally spilt for nothing.

[Don Corleone]

It's all Israel's fault. I have no idea how but I'm certain it must be. Perhaps you wiser gents can explain to me how. [/sarcasm]

[sapi]

Ouch

I'd be surprised if even an Israeli invasion could unite Hamas and Fatah

They've had their chance, imo - now it's up to us to clean up their mess...again.

[Odin]

They've had their chance, imo - now it's up to us to clean up their mess...again.

Who Sapi?

[sapi]

Anyone and everyone

Got to love those blanket statements

Seriously though, an Arab-led peacekeeping force would be perfect, but that's never going to happen. The best we can hope for is probably strong western pressure, condemnation and all that meaningless nonsense.

If things weren't so bad in Israel I'd almost wonder if a re-occupation wouldn't be better off for everyone - what they've got now definitely isn't working; the danger is the damage may already have been done...

[Odin]

Anyone and everyone

Got to love those blanket statements

Seriously though, an Arab-led peacekeeping force would be perfect, but that's never going to happen. The best we can hope for is probably strong western pressure, condemnation and all that meaningless nonsense.

If things weren't so bad in Israel I'd almost wonder if a re-occupation wouldn't be better off for everyone - what they've got now definitely isn't working; the danger is the damage may already have been done...

It seems to me the economic sanctions have killed the palestinians, perhaps to the point of no return, I dont know. As a U.S. citizen i want no more to do with the middle east other then purchasing oil. that said I think its high time the U.S. pressued israel to ease thier economic grip by releases the tax collections, and opening up the palestinians ability to trade.

[econ21]

I am not sure anyone took their eye off the ball - the US have apparently been arming Fatah (I noticed the Fatah kidnappers in the West Bank included some with shiney new looking M16s). And Israel/EU etc have been putting restrictions and sanctions on the Hamas government. But the elections showed that Hamas had more popular support and more importantly the current fighting shows they have more determined fighters. The New York Times quotes one bewildered Palestinian Authority soldier saying it was 70,000 PA soldiers vs 10,000 Hamas fighters and Hamas won. The PA soldiers just disappeared, suffering from lack of morale and poor organisation/leadership.

At one level, as someone who wants peace in the Middle East, I am appalled by the ongoing conflict and the idea of the more ideological (Islamist) and anti-Israel Hamas becoming entrenched in power.

But at another level, that seems to be the logic of some of these conflicts. People opt for the hard-liners, perhaps in part because they believe they will prove the tougher negotiators. Perhaps because the hard-liners can always outflank the moderates and win over the hot-headed young men who will do the fighting. I am thinking here in part about Northern Ireland, where the more hardline nationalist (Sinn Fein) and unionist (Democratic Unionists) have gradually elbowed out the moderates from power.

If the Palestinians want Hamas, then perhaps the world must deal with Hamas. Trying to shore up Fatah does not seem to have worked. And Fatah itself does not seem to be a particularly edifying organisation (corrupt and incompetent; and including elements that are no less keen on terrorism than Hamas). At least with Hamas, you may be dealing with an entity that is more unified and in control.

But it is an awful mess, I agree.

[Tribesman]

Well it looks like we took our eye off this ball.

How is it taking the eye off the ball ?
This is entirely the intended result .

[Husar]

I am not sure anyone took their eye off the ball - the US have apparently been arming Fatah (I noticed the Fatah kidnappers in the West Bank included some with shiney new looking M16s).

To me they look like shiny new M4 SOPMODs or at least regular M4s

On the radio they said this morning that there is talk about peacekeepers being sent there by the UN or so.
Makes me wonder how they will interprete all those peacekeepers around Israel. While we may have only good intentions, those extremists might go all "oh noez, another group of infidel invaders in our country!!!1111"

[Devastatin Dave]

an Arab-led peacekeeping force

Good one!!! That would be like going to a Taliban barber to get your beard trimed with a very large knife.

[econ21]

Channel 4 News interviewed a former EU negotiator to the region today and he was surprisingly "pro-Hamas". He made the point that Hamas won the election and should by rights have taken over responsibility for security (via the Minister of the Interior). He said the Fatah President, encouraged by US pressure, tried unconstitutionally to deny that responsibility and to claw back other powers from the Hamas government.

This is entirely the intended result.

Intended by who? It seems US policy at least has spectacularly backfired.

[Don Corleone]

I heard Abbas has declared a state of emerggency and dissolved the Hamas led government. He's also asked for a multi-national peacekeeping force. Does he really think ANYBODY out there is dumb enough to put their tongue in that electrical outlet?

[Tribesman]

Intended by who? It seems US policy at least has spectacularly backfired.

backfired ??????lets see.......Abbas has declared a state of emerggency and dissolved the Hamas led government.
wow I didn't even have to write it .

[Don Corleone]

Oh come on, Tribesman. You know as much about this situation as anyone. Surely you know what's going on in Gaza right now is more about finding Arafat's successor, and personal emnities, than any shadow conspiracy. You can blame the US for every last skinned knee around the globe if you like, but I think the more outlandish your statements are, the less support you're going to find for them.

[econ21]

But, Tribesman, like the ex-EU negotiator said, what Hamas sought to do with the fighting is to create new facts on the ground. They have done that today. There is no Fatah presence left in Gaza. The President can declare a state of emergency and dissolve what he likes, but he is now confined to the West Bank.

Like Don said, outsiders will not want to go into to Gaza restore Fatah. Israel may feel compelled to go in at some future date, but after the bloody nose they got in Lebanon, I don't see them being eager to do so just yet. And I doubt re-installing Fatah will be high on their agenda. (It surely would be the final kiss of death for Fatah if it was.)

[Devastatin Dave]

Why send in a peace keeping force. Let 'em do what they do best and whoever come out on top will be more easily identifiable for , um... intensive diplomatic negotiation?

[Shahed]

I just wanted to say I appreciate the zero tolerance I've seen by the mods/admins in the past 2 threads. Congratulations. You guys totally ROCK !

As far as the topic itself I have'nt been following it, but I'm guessing Fatah can't handle getting beaten by Hamas in every single way. Now Abbas, is trying to further delegitimise Hamas by dissolving the government. He will fail, of course.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Why send in a peace keeping force. Let 'em do what they do best and whoever come out on top will be more easily identifiable for , um... intensive diplomatic negotiation?

And what better way to fight the war on terror than have them fight eachother?
I dont see Israel breaking this up. Their probably selling tickets.

I love this from one of the closed threads

One of the few points of agreement between Fatah and Hamas is that Israel (and by extension the USA) are the root cause of all of the extant problems they face. Hamas and Fatah are merely applying "traditional" methods for selecting a leadership to deal with these problems.

Yes its our fault their fighting each other, I should have known. We are so brilliant.

[Tribesman]

You can blame the US for every last skinned knee around the globe if you like, but I think the more outlandish your statements are, the less support you're going to find for them.

What is outlandish about it Don ?
Who are the main players in trying to forment unrest by blocking funds(legitimate funds) to the elected government because they don't like the election results ?
Who has been arming the opposition ? an opposition BTW that still has two branches of it listed as proscribed terrorist organisations by the very people who are sending it weapons .
Why have they done it if not to forment a situation where the elected government ceases to be .
So Don show me what it is that you could possibly think is outlandish ?

But, Tribesman, like the ex-EU negotiator said, what Hamas sought to do with the fighting is to create new facts on the ground.

Yep and what have they got , Gaza , a completely unviable area by itself . While they gained political support in the West Bank due to the backlash against the corruption of the PLO they have very little real presence there , it remains the domain of the Fatah (Al-Asqa) and PFLP (and of course the IDF) . It will be interesting to see which way Islamic Jihad jumps in the civil war as they have a relatively strong presence in both territories .

[Crazed Rabbit]

I recall a BBC article on how Palestinians in Jerusalem would rather live there, under Israeli dominion, and have the city remain under Israeli control, then to be in the Palestinian run parts (West bank, etc.).

Oh, Tribesman - funny how you don't mention that the 'elected government' is a terrorist organization, much more so than the opposition.

If it was the intended result of US policy that Gaza dissolve into civil war between the two big terrorist groups, then I applaud it for the practicality. However, I'm guessing they are not playing realpolitik in this arena.

Econ - why should the world have to deal with Hamas, whatever the Palestinians want?

Crazed Rabbit

[Tribesman]

Oh, Tribesman - funny how you don't mention that the 'elected government' is a terrorist organization, much more so than the opposition.

Is a country that designates it as a banned terrorist group giving it weapons Rabbit ?
How is Hamas much more of a terrorist group than other terrorist groups ?

[Whacker]

Why send in a peace keeping force. Let 'em do what they do best and whoever come out on top will be more easily identifiable for , um... intensive diplomatic negotiation?

You know, this is one area that I pretty much agree completey w/our dearest daveyboy on. They've been at eachothers throats for years, based on millenia of religious and cultural hatred that we're trying to simply "talk" away through diplomacy. Color me pessimistic, but I don't see it working at all. Rope it off, let em go at it like the have been itching to. We'll deal with the winner.

[Pannonian]

I recall a BBC article on how Palestinians in Jerusalem would rather live there, under Israeli dominion, and have the city remain under Israeli control, then to be in the Palestinian run parts (West bank, etc.).

Oh, Tribesman - funny how you don't mention that the 'elected government' is a terrorist organization, much more so than the opposition.

If it was the intended result of US policy that Gaza dissolve into civil war between the two big terrorist groups, then I applaud it for the practicality. However, I'm guessing they are not playing realpolitik in this arena.

Econ - why should the world have to deal with Hamas, whatever the Palestinians want?

Crazed Rabbit

Thus speaks someone who has not the first clue of how terrorism is dealt with. Here's a starter.

Unless you manage to eradicate the radicals, you will need to do a deal sooner or later. There's no point in holding out for the moderates, because the radicals, those who do the bombing, won't obey the orders of the moderates. Any deal that doesn't bind the people who do the actual bombing might as well not exist. Therefore the logic points towards seeking out a reputed hardliner who has the respect of the radicals, but who is willing to talk. There have been at least 3 examples of such in the past 2 years, that I have pointed out. Of course, ivory tower moralists like Rabbit here didn't see the opportunities for what they were. Now there's not likely to be a deal any time soon, as whichever side wins this struggle will have the impression that they are militarily strong, and have no need to come to terms with Israel.

Israel can still come out well from this, by standing aside and letting them fight it out, then go to the victor immediately afterwards with offers of talks and civil aid. The idea is to not let them get any delusions that they might be able to fight a winning war against Israel, but to charm and bribe them while they are still off-balance and exhausted. But if Israel does not take the initiative in promoting talks, there isn't likely to be any such from the Palestinians (most likely Hamas), and each passing month makes that less likely still. And without talks, the bombs will come again, and people like Rabbit will ask the question: "Why talk to terrorists?", while people like me throw up our hands at the idiocy of it all.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Unless you manage to eradicate the radicals,

This is the point. Their doing it for us. Funny how they still blame us for them slaughtering eachother.

[Whacker]

And without talks, the bombs will come again, and people like Rabbit will ask the question: "Why talk to terrorists?", while people like me throw up our hands at the idiocy of it all.

Of course there's always the Bush Regime Method©; Bomb them into oblivion/invade and occupy regardless of whether or not you have 'proof' and if the international community is supportive.

[Pannonian]

This is the point. Their doing it for us. Funny how they still blame us for them slaughtering eachother.

You've got it wrong. They're not eradicating the radicals for you, they're eradicating the people whom you could have done a deal with, leaving the radicals in power and emboldened by the experience of winning a fight. Continue watching the news, and you'll see that what came before was far perferable to what's about to come now.

Letting your enemies fight it out only makes sense when there's a finite amount of resources to go round. Terrorism doesn't require much material resources, it requires a lot of will. A fight like this generates a lot of the willpower needed to pursue and ramp up a terrorism campsign, and there will still be plenty of material resources left over to make that possible. One would have thought Iraq would have taught you this lesson, but I guess not.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

etting your enemies fight it out only makes sense when there's a finite amount of resources to go round. Terrorism doesn't require much material resources, it requires a lot of will.

And people. Just how do you come to the conclusion its the moderates who are fighting while the radicals sit back and multiply?

[Crazed Rabbit]

Is a country that designates it as a banned terrorist group giving it weapons Rabbit ?
How is Hamas much more of a terrorist group than other terrorist groups ?

Hmm, doesn't relate to your poor defense against outlandishness, does it? Nope.

Thus speaks someone who has not the first clue of how terrorism is dealt with. Here's a starter.

Lol, I suppose you've been a negotiator for years, hmm?

Unless you manage to eradicate the radicals, you will need to do a deal sooner or later. blah blah blah

Oh, you mean like Arafat? I bet he was really negotiating in good faith. And if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Israel can still come out well from this, by standing aside and letting them fight it out, then go to the victor immediately afterwards with offers of talks and civil aid.

The idea is to not let them get any delusions that they might be able to fight a winning war against Israel, but to charm and bribe them while they are still off-balance and exhausted.

They've had, and continue to have that delusion, partly due to the interference of the west.

And without talks, the bombs will come again, and people like Rabbit will ask the question: "Why talk to terrorists?",

I never said that. I asked why the world - ie the west that heavily funds (or funded) the Palestinian gov't should have to deal with Hamas, a terrorist group.

Crazed Rabbit

[Pannonian]

And people. Just how do you come to the conclusion its the moderates who are fighting while the radicals sit back and multiply?

Who won the fight in Gaza? What did they do once they'd won the fight? What do you think they're going to do in the future once they've had a chance to have a breather?

I never said that. I asked why the world - ie the west that heavily funds (or funded) the Palestinian gov't should have to deal with Hamas, a terrorist group.

There's the ivory tower mentality showing up again, combined with playing with words. Firstly, what is the practical difference between what you've written above and "Why talk to terrorists?". Secondly, the answer is: because that's how you stop the bombs. Are you so eager to keep your hands clean that you'll be willing to see this drag on forever? Do you really think that, if Europe steps away from this, other countries like Iran won't make up the difference? The terrorisrs will never lack for funds, thanks to states who have a vested interest in keeping this going, and thanks to mindsets like yours, they'll never lack for will either.