Though he has acknowledged that his government is virtually broke, Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas is standing tall and firm. Haniyeh’s refusal to recognize Israel or to accept peace agreements, leading the United States and the EU to cut off hundreds of millions of dollars in crucial aid, puts a brave face on the dire financial situation the Palestinians are facing. Now that the EU and US have made good their threats to sever assistance, the question is what can Hamas do other than retort that that it will not bend.
Behind the bluster, Haniyeh and his government must be worried. It was bad enough that Hamas inherited a Finance Ministry with no money and mounting debts. Without foreign assistance, the Palestinian Authority will not be able to pay the salaries of some 140,000 government workers. These salaries support about one-third of the Palestinian population. Israel has also suspended the monthly transfer of about $55 million in customs duties it collects for the Palestinians.
Hamas must thus seek alternative routes for urgent cash inflows. Help from Arab and Islamic countries is paramount. If and when such aid arrives, if pledges are indeed met and whether they will actually materialize in the end are all unknowns.
In the meantime, Hamas must concern itself with challenges other than money. Israel has renewed its assaults on the Palestinians, killing at least 14 in a 24-hour stretch in Gaza. And Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert now says he will not try to negotiate a peace deal with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas because, as Olmert put it, Abbas has lost out since Hamas’ rise to power. This is the first time that Olmert has stated clearly that he will not negotiate with Abbas as long as Hamas does not do what the US and EU are telling it to do.
As doors quickly slam shut, Haniyeh remains defiant, calling the cut in international aid blackmail. The choice of description is apt. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Hamas had refused to accept “principles of nonviolence, recognition of Israel and respect for previous agreements between the parties.” Thus the group “must take responsibility for the consequences of its policies.” What Rice might well have said —and what is far simpler as well as the truth — is that the Palestinians must pay a huge collective price for voting Hamas into power in a democratic election.
One consequence of the mounting pressure on the Palestinians will be to push them back into armed resistance. The fact is that Hamas has been more or less maintaining a truce with Israel for well over a year.
Hamas finds itself in a very unenviable, awkward and dangerous situation. Having gained a renowned reputation for its invaluable social services provided to the Palestinians — which helped it get elected — it now must allay the fears of those who support it and their unease that its policies will have the opposite effect, of bringing only poverty and maybe even starvation.
