Israel’s rejection of a new offer for a cease-fire by Hamas again shows the total rejection with which Tel Aviv will greet any peace deal. The Hamas plan would provide for a protracted peace with Israel, in return for a full Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. Hamas founder and spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin has said the movement would be willing to end armed resistance in return for a “true and genuine” Palestinian state.
Yassin’s remarks were echoed by the second highest-ranking Hamas official who said the movement had concluded “it is difficult to liberate all our land at this stage.”
These remarks are a departure from Hamas’ traditional all-or-nothing approach and indicates that the group, which might be joined by Islamic Jihad, may be willing to join a unity government and may well be moving closer to the mainstream strategy adopted by the PLO - the creation of a viable Palestinian state in accordance with UN resolutions and land for peace. Hamas’ overture is also likely to facilitate any effort for a cease-fire or truce between Palestinian resistance groups and Israel and should have been met by reciprocal bold initiatives by Israel. It was instead dismissed out of hand.
This Israeli rejection is not limited to Hamas. It also rejected and lashed out at UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, Ambassador Dan Gillerman saying he was “disappointed and dismayed” that Annan had failed to deplore explicitly a suicide bombing last week. But had Gillerman noticed, Annan spoke out against “those who resort to... violence and terror.”
And shortly before Gillerman’s comments in New York, Annan said in Brussels: “I have always condemned suicide bombings without reservation.” Nor did Annan mention Israel’s recent incursion into the Gaza Strip in which eight Palestinians were killed. Gillerman’s rare public rebuke of Annan shows outright bitterness and was probably the result of an appeal issued by the secretary-general for more aid, saying that deteriorating conditions were making the situation bleaker for Palestinians. Indeed, in the occupied territories, life has grown increasingly desperate. Food consumption has fallen by one-third since the start of the Intifadah in late 2000. Nearly a quarter of young children are malnourished.
Two-thirds of Palestinians have no job. Annan also warned that the Palestinian Authority could collapse because of the stalemate in the Middle East peace process, saying he was extremely concerned about the situation on the ground and the existing impasse. The impasse, however, is being cemented.
The wall is going ahead at full speed as Israel challenges the right of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague to rule on its legality. This is a simple land grab of huge proportions and the wall will become a de facto border if Sharon carries out his threat of unilateral separation in the absence of a peace settlement. Thus the ICJ has full jurisdiction to handle the issue of the wall. It is in flagrant violation of the Geneva Conventions and of the UN charter. The ICJ is expected to consider the barrier in late February. Until then, and probably beyond, the barrier will continue to grow. Having become a most visible symbol of the Middle East conflict, the wall has also become one of the many ways in which Israel is preventing all attempts at settlement.
