Rival Palestinian groups said they reached an agreement Wednesday on reuniting their governments in the West Bank and Gaza after years of bitter infighting that weakened them politically and caused the deaths of hundreds in violent clashes and crackdowns since. Even as the tentative agreement revived hopes among Palestinians that they might be able to form a unified front, unity between the rival groups Fatah and Hamas appeared unlikely to jump start negotiations with Israel for an independent Palestinian state.

There’s no way that Hamas and Fatah will be able to avoid going at one another.

Update: Why this deal is bad news for Israel.

“There is widespread support for Fatah,” Dr. Jamil Rabah, director of Near East Consulting in the PA, told The Media Line. “They support the Fatah political process and don’t think Hamas is on the right path politically.” 

[ . . . ]

“It doesn’t surprise me that the sentiments of the people are in this direction,” Abdallah Abdallah, chairman of the Palestinian Legislative Council’s Political Committee, told The Media Line. “Over a year has passed since the Gaza war and still people are living in the streets. People want those responsible for this to go and I think the sentiments of the people after three or more years of this is that it’s about time that those who are not capable of running the affairs of the people – go.”

Hamas swept to power in Gaza first by exploiting people’s frustration with the corruption of the Fatah administration, and then through a violent show of force. Popular support for suicide bombings and attacks on Israeli civilians was high, and Hamas was able to claim to the world (though maybe not with an altogether straight face) that it was a “legitimate” political party. Now, after promising to “crush” Israel and succeeding in doing little more than crushing Gaza, it seems that the Hamas option has lost its shiny lustre to a lot of disillusioned Palestinians.

But it would be a mistake to take this polling data at face value. People vote out of ideology, sure, but also out of self-interest. And in the Palestinian territories, where hatred is a powerful weapon that can be stirred up almost at will to redirect people’s frustration, these things can shift quickly. There will be those who will back the strongest horse, those who go looking for the options that are even more extremist than Hamas, and those who will get disgusted with voting altogether in a place where democracy doesn’t exactly have deep roots.

We’ve seen this before. Support for a political approach rises among Palestinians when there appears to be no threat of any progress actually being made. The minute this threat arises – whether at Camp David in 2000, or after Oslo or Wye – the people balk and something triggers another wave of violence. And if it’s not Hamas out in front, then support will go towards whoever is shouting the loudest, shooting the most, and inspiring the most fear.

And what the poll won’t tell you is that the bigger picture in the Middle East is also a factor – maybe the factor. As Iran battles Saudi Arabia for regional dominance, Hamas is engaged in something of a proxy war against Iran-sponsored Hezbollah, jockeying for power using the gruesome metric of dead Israeli civilians as credentials.

But, for the moment at least, Hamas’s popular support is way down. And if the Palestinians actually had real elections, this might actually have implications.

Saudi Arabia and other Arab states are expected to speed money to the Palestinian Authority within days to help it pay its employees after Israel halted tax payments, Palestinian officials said.

[ . . . ]

Hamas, which has carried out nearly 60 suicide bombings since a Palestinian uprising began in 2000, trounced Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s long-dominant Fatah movement in the January 25 parliamentary election.

In a joint statement issued in Islamabad, Islamic allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia urged the world to accept Hamas’s victory and “avoid premature judgments and hasty conclusions.”

Hamas has urged foreign donors to maintain aid but says it could still find other sources of funding in the Arab world. It has sent a delegation on a tour of Arab countries to urge them to keep the money flowing.

Unemployment in the Palestinian territories runs high, at 22 percent, and half the Palestinian population lives in poverty. In Gaza, many Palestinians live on an average of $2 a day.

Let’s see… we’ve got the requisite reference to Palestinian poverty, to Israel’s withholding of financial transfers, and to the election results and their aftermath. The implication, of course, is that it’s Israel’s fault that the Palestinians are living in poverty.

What’s missing? That’s right: no reference whatsoever to the fact that the billions of dollars of aid that have poured into the Palestinian coffers to-date used to finance terrorism, urge suicide attacks, build explosives and rockets, purchase weapons, and train militias. Oh yeah, and to line the pockets of the Palestinian Authority, and to finance Suha Arafat’s shopping habits. And no mention of the fact that Israel, if it were to release the money, would be contributing financially to attacks on its own citizens.

And the high Palestinian unemployment? No mention of the fact that, prior to 2000, unemployment was much lower because so many Palestinians were working in Israel and crossing the border daily without any problems. Nothing about how the chosen strategy of violence forced Israel to close these borders and therefore cost so many Palestinians their livelihood. No reference to how all the jobs were in Israel because the Palestinians haven’t built any industry, infrastructure or opportunity – in short, necessary ingredients for a sustainable state. Or how, despite claiming to want statehood, it doesn’t seem to have occurred to the Palestinians that a viable state can’t live forever on handouts. It’s so much easier to talk about destroying Israel than to talk about actually building a state, isn’t it?

And it’s more convenient to imply that Israel is to blame for Palestinian poverty than it is to tell the truth, I guess.

Bullshit.

The Palestinian people have chosen one form of terror over another form of terror. The only difference between Hamas and Fatah is that Hamas is open about its aims, while Fatah carries out terror attacks and then pays lip service towards “condemning” them. The people chose Hamas because it is perceived as less corrupt than Fatah, not because of any failings of the peaceful alternative. There was never a peaceful alternative.

The real question is, now what? There will be an element who insists on turning a blind eye to the truth and fooling itself that Hamas will reform, suddenly giving up its weapons because it’s got a role in government. These are the same people who keep insisting that there’s been a truce effective this past year.

The United States will refuse to deal with Hamas… maybe. Expect a lot of waffling on that one in the coming months. Europe will deal with them, probably with lip service about how much they’ve “changed”. Again, these are the same people who repeatedly insist that there’s a truce.

For Israel – dare I say – little is likely to change. Negotiations were a non-starter even with Abbas, and Israel will still have to prioritize security measures in defence of its citizens, just as before. Maybe there will be less hypocrisy now. But don’t count on it.

Tim Blair has a roundup of reactions. Jonathan has some day-after musings. And, as usual, Meryl has lots to say.

There’s little I could add that isn’t being said all over the media or the blogosphere already. So I’ll just say this: While the results aren’t yet in and the implications are still to come, today’s election was both good news and bad news: Good news that democracy, of a sort, is beginning to take root for the Palestinians. Bad news that so many are flocking to candidates bent on extending the self-destructive path of violence and rejectionism that got the Palestinians to where they are today. After all, Hamas’s main goal is Israel’s destruction, and despite what the world media is saying, Fatah – far from being a force for peace or moderation – is not much better in the terrorism department. It kind of makes our Canadian party choices seem a whole lot more attractive by comparison.

“I am fine, I am fine … They gave me cigarettes and tea,” Bernardini told reporters, looking shaken but unhurt.

“I will never change my idea about the occupation,” he said, referring to Israel’s occupation of land that Palestinians seek for a state. “I am with the Palestinian people.”

An armed offshoot of Abbas’s own ruling Fatah movement said it carried out the kidnapping.

Fatah. Not Hamas. Not Islamic Jihad. But Fatah’s “armed wing”. Did any of the people relentlessly promoting Mahmoud Abbas as a “moderate” ever stop to think about why Fatah has an armed wing in the first place?

Oh, and there’s more:

Hours earlier, gunmen stormed a United Nations club in Gaza City and blew up the bar — the only place where alcohol is served openly in the conservative Muslim territory. Nobody was hurt, but the attack added to security fears.

The United Nations is generally seen favorably in Gaza, where it is the second biggest employer after the Palestinian Authority.

Wow, talk about shooting yourself in the foot! The Israelis leave Gaza and suddenly the Palestinians are attacking their best friends, the United Nations?

My predicted U.N. response: “We will never change our idea about the occupation. We are with the Palestinian people”.

S.S.D.Y.

Israeli commandos killed eight Palestinian policemen in “eye for an eye” shootings three years ago that were ordered to avenge comrades slain in an ambush on an army checkpoint in the West Bank, a newspaper said on Friday.

[ . . . ]

After gunmen from the Palestinian faction Fatah killed six soldiers at a checkpoint outside the West Bank city of Ramallah on Feb. 19, 2002, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon approved stepping up the scale and variety of retaliations.

“The feeling was that this would be ‘an eye for an eye’,” an ex-soldier who took part in the shooting spree three years ago told Maariv.

Eighteen Palestinians were killed in various retaliatory attacks, including eight policemen shot while manning their checkpoints near Ramallah and Nablus, another West Bank city.

Whether this is true, sensationalized by the media, or even completely out of context, you can be sure we’re looking at a disaster. Palestinian terrorists will create a story of mythic proportions out of this, and nobody in the world will be surprised when they take to murdering innocent Israeli children in “revenge”. And the worst part is that, despite the pejorative spin that Reuters has inevitably tacked on, it seems to be based on fact this time.

As I said when details of the Abu Gharib prison scandal emerged in the media, if we condemn our enemies for wrongs, we must condemn our friends even louder. Not that the two episodes are on the same plane, but the point is that there can be no excusing wrongs or trying to explain them away. The Israeli army gets falsely accused of wrongdoing on a daily basis, but that’s no excuse.

Maybe it’s not “fair” that the world excuses terrorism while holding Israel to a higher moral standard. But the problem there is the excusing of terrorism, not the higher moral standard.

I’m already dreading the fallout of this.

Of course, the day was marked by gunfire… shots into the air in celebration by Fatah gunmen. I admit I’ve never quite understood that one. Is it like firecrackers? Or is it done in order to be able to blame Israel for anyone killed accidentally by the stray bullets? Or both?

Foreign doctors rushed to Yasser Arafat’s side on Thursday to tend to the seriously ill Palestinian leader, who for decades has symbolized his people’s struggle for statehood. [ . . . ] The ex-guerrilla, loved by most of his people and reviled by many Israelis, has had stomach pains since last week.

Let’s deconstruct that short, seemingly innocuous excerpt, shall we?

Symbolized his people’s struggle for statehood – is that so? Then why has he repeatedly not only rejected every single offer that would have led to Palestinian statehood, but done everything in his power to sabotage them? Why did he walk away from 97% of the West Bank, all of Gaza, and half of Jerusalem at Camp David in 2000 without so much as a counter-proposal, and instead launch a 4-year campaign of terror? Because he doesn’t symbolize the Palestinian “struggle for statehood”, he symbolizes the Palestinian struggle to wipe Israel off the map.

Ex-guerrilla – really? In one sense, Arafat is still a guerrilla, strictly speaking. He’s not the legitimate leader of a state, because he has no state. He’s not reformed. He hasn’t renounced violence – in fact, he encourages violent guerrilla tactics. In another sense, he was never a guerrilla, because that term implies that he’s fighting a war against a military enemy. By directing his fight against innocent civilians, Arafat never earned the description of guerrilla. Isn’t it time to call a terrorist a terrorist?

Loved by most of his people – only in his own mind, perhaps. Certainly not according to a recent PCPSR poll, which puts his popular support down at around 35%, and support for his Fatah party at about 25%. Anecdotal evidence suggests widespread disgust with Arafat among Palestinians, belief that he led them astray, and contempt that his Palestinian Authority is corrupt and lines its own pockets. Many believe he isn’t extreme enough, and cast their support with groups like Hamas. But to suggest he’s “loved by most of his people” is a gross misrepresentation, to say the least.

Reviled by most Israelis – I suppose Israelis revile him for the colour of his keffiyah. Yeah, that must be it. The thousands of Israelis who he was directly responsible for murdering must have nothing to do with it.

Look for more of this nonsense if Arafat’s condition worsens. In fact, most newspapers keep pre-written obituaries handy for public figures in poor health, just in case. I can’t imagine what praises and glorifications the staff at Reuters, the Guardian, and the CBC are working on now.

11/01 – Update: I guess I don’t have to wonder anymore what drivel the BBC will come up with. This makes my point nicely. Excuse me, I think I’m going to be sick.

In a West Bank university election for the student leadership that focused on which party had killed the most Israelis, the violent Hamas swept to victory Wednesday, defeating Yasser Arafat’s Fatah.

[ . . . ]

At a debate, the Hamas candidate asked the Fatah candidate: “Hamas activists in this university killed 135 Zionists. How many did Fatah activists from Bir Zeit kill?”

The Fatah candidate refused to answer, suggesting his rival “look at the paper, go to the archives and see for yourself. Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades have not stopped fighting the occupation.”

Fatah set up models of Jewish settlements and then blew them up with fireworks. The display was meant to emphasize the group’s focus on attacking settlers and their communities – considered by Palestinians to be one of the most provocative elements of Israel’s occupation of territory they claim for a state.

Hamas countered by blowing up models of Israeli buses, a tribute to the dozens of suicide bombings its members have carried out in the past three years, killing hundreds of Israelis. Activists held samples of the group’s homemade Qassam rockets – often fired at Gaza Strip settlements and Israeli towns that border the coastal area.

Student issues were barely touched on because the Palestinians’ main problem is the Israeli occupation, candidates said.

[ . . . ]

[A university spokesperson] said the student elections have wider significance. “The Bir Zeit elections are like a barometer to measure the political mood on the Palestinian street.”

Suddenly, voting scandals, ripped-down posters, and debates over club funding don’t seem so bad. How many indications do we need like this one that the Palestinians have absolutely no interest in making peace? How much more crystal-clear does it get?

When I first heard about this about a year ago, I thought it was a bad idea from the start. I’d hoped it would disappear.

Unfortunately, it’s resurfaced – with a vengeance. This week, we hear people starting to refer to it as the “Geneva Accord”, giving it legitimacy that it does not deserve. To compound that, world leaders have been over themselves to ratify it. Even Colin Powell has agreed to meet with the plan’s authors.

Now, as if any more proof were needed to show that this is a catastrophically bad idea, Fatah has admitted that its main purpose is to divide Israel:

Fatah official Hatem Abdel Khader, who was deeply involved in the secret talks that spawned “Geneva,” told The Jerusalem Post Sunday the Palestinian side had helped author the agreement primarily in order to cause a rift in Israeli society and to undermine the Sharon government.

“Our aim was to create divisions inside Israel and block the growth of the right-wing,” the Post quoted Khader as saying.

Well there you have it. A plan not backed by the official elected Israeli leadership or even by the dictatorial Palestinian leadership, overwhelmingly opposed by both sides, and designed to weaken Israel.

For the record, I do think that the terms of this plan are likely to be more or less what the two sides end up agreeing on eventually. Israel will have to concede the settlements and allow East Jerusalem to become the capital of a future Palestinian state sooner or later. The Palestinians will have to renounce their goals of destroying Israel, whether through terror or through the equally transparent “right of return”.

But the bottom line is, you can’t circumvent leadership and the will of the people to sign a meaningless piece of paper behind everyone’s backs. There can only be one government with the political authority to negotiate, otherwise you have mutiny or civil war on your hands. Think about it: what would happen if tomorrow, some Canadian group without any elected authority decided to sign a deal with the US promising to give them Quebec?

If the Altalena was the test of Israel’s state control over its military, then this might very well be the test of state control over politics and external affairs.

As for the Palestinians, they have an even more fractured leadership and no true democracy, but the will of the people is to continue terrorizing Israel until they succeed in their goal of eliminating it, or die trying. Nobody really expects the Palestinians to hold up their end of any bargain struck based on the Geneva principles. This will merely turn into another Oslo; another Road Map… another propaganda tool for people to use against Israel to point out its “violations” while ignoring the Palestinian noncompliance. Only that this one goes much further than either Oslo or the Road Map.

This is a catastrophe for Israel, and the fact that so many people can’t see it appalls me.

“Neither I nor Zakariya received orders from Arafat to make a cease-fire with the Israelis,” said Atta Abu Rumeyli, the Fatah leader in the Jenin refugee camp and one of the city’s strongmen. Abu Rumeyli was referring to Zakariya Zubeidi, chief of the Aksa Martyrs Brigades in the West Bank.

“Arafat,” Abu Rumeyli continued, “does not believe the struggle should end. We have to continue to fight for our land.”

Fatah’s Jenin organization was surprisingly disbanded on Tuesday night, and many of its fighters were incorporated into the renegade Aksa Martyrs Brigades northern division, which is headed by Zubeidi.

And the media stubbornly continues to insist on denying Arafat’s direct encouragement of terrorism.

Question: “Do you support resistance within the 1948 areas as well [as in the occupied territories]?”

Al-Qaddoumi: “It is the Palestinian people’s right to resist in all territories of the Palestinian land as long as Israel does not completely cease [its actions], and as long as it has no mercy on children, the elderly, trees, roads, institutions, and security personnel who have entered [the territories]… The resistance is legitimate; we are struggling for our national rights. It is Israel that bears the responsibility.”

“… Even if there is a single shot in a month, it is good for us, because we want the emotional and social pressure in Israel to continue, so that a message will be sent to the international community that there is an alternative to third-party intervention so that we can begin to arrive at a just arrangement.”

Question: “What is your opinion on martyrdom operations?”

Al-Qaddoumi: “We are fighting as a popular movement. We cannot stop every operation. We are not an army and we cannot prevent the martyrdom operations…”

Question: “Must a solution [to the Palestinian problem] come from America?”

Al-Qaddoumi: “No, not only [from America]. This problem was created by the United Nations when it decided on the partition resolution. The superpowers and the entire world are also party [to this].”

It goes on like this for a while. But the most telling quote is this one:

Question: “Then in effect your ideology is no different than that of Hamas.”

Al-Qaddoumi: “We were never different from Hamas. On the contrary; [Hamas] is a national movement and is part of the national movement. Strategically, we are no different from it.”

Now, this is old news for most people who have known for decades that there is no difference between Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, Fatah, or whatever incarnation terror takes. But Arafat likes to tell the world that this is not so. He likes to claim that his Fatah movement is against terror, even when attack after attack belies this.

Al-Qaddoumi made his position very clear: terror until Israel is obliterated. 1948 lines, 1967 lines, they make no difference to him. He just wants no more Israel – as is evidenced by his reference to the U.N. having “created” the problem when they voted on Partition in 1947. In other words, if those pesky Jews would just disappear into the sea, there wouldn’t be a problem, right?

The poll also showed that, while there is widespread mistrust of Palestinian leaders, Yasser Arafat was the most-trusted leader, with 25% support. More importantly, the second- and third-place leaders were Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, leader of Hamas, and Marwan Barghouti, a leader of Fatah in jail in Israel for terrorist attacks.

So much for claims that suicide bombers are extremists on the fringe with no mainstream support.

In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. The Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, the militant (read: terrorist) wing of Fatah, is strongly in favour of suicide bombings, but only within what they refer to as the “occupied territories”. Hamas sees all of Israel as fair game, and doesn’t draw territorial distinctions.

Well, neither do I. Since when is it okay to kill innocent people in some zip codes and not others?

Lynn at In Context phrases it better than I ever could:

There’s this thing, this distinction, going around about terrorist attacks that happen “in Israel” versus attacks that happen “in the territories.” Or between attacks on “civilians” versus attacks on soldiers or “settlers.”

It seems that if you live in Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights or the Gaza Strip, you’re fair game anywhere, according to this philosophy. And if you happen to be in any of those places at any given time, regardless of where you live, you’re also fair game. It’s this philosophy that led some to suggest that the attack on Kibbutz Metzer last week was somehow more repulsive than a similar attack would have been in, say, Kiryat Arba.

There are no “good terrroists” and “bad terrorists”. There are only bad terrorists.