THE call by the EU’s Finnish presidency for member countries to welcome the creation of a new Palestinian national unity government is encouraging. It could conceivably bring Hamas and the Palestinians in from the cold. Washington and Tel Aviv might see otherwise, insisting the aid freeze to the Palestinians should remain in place. But bearing in mind that the current embargo was imposed by the Israelis, the US and the EU, this means that one of the parties is breaking ranks.
Finland is not the only European nation wanting an end to the embargo. A Palestinian government of national unity, said Philippe Douste-Blazy, the French foreign minister, should lead to a re-examination of the policies of the international community toward the Palestinian government in terms of aid and contacts. Italian Foreign Minister Massimo D’Alema has gone further, dropping the “ifs” and “howevers,” saying his colleagues have already agreed to back the new government.
This perceptible European shift toward the Palestinians is the cause of what looks like a growing rift between the US and the European Union. Washington’s insistence that the formation of a Palestinian national unity government has not changed anything is in direct opposition to the new European view that it has. Although it is still too early to judge — the national unity government has not even been put together yet and naturally has not had a chance to spell out its program in detail — the Europeans are willing to give Hamas the benefit of the doubt. There are indications that Hamas has agreed to accept the 2002 Arab peace plan which could potentially be seen as indirectly recognizing Israel. The EU may also argue that the 18-point national political agenda known as the “Prisoners’ Document” is to be based largely on a Palestinian state that would live alongside Israel, and that certainly implies acceptance of Israel’s right to exist. Whether the stance of the new national unity government leads to an end to the Palestinian economic embargo and diplomatic re-engagement ultimately depends, not on the EU but on how its agenda is received in Israel and the United States. So far, the US shares Israeli objections to having Hamas represented in the government.
Washington also sees fit to blame Hamas for the plight it has put the Palestinians in, a spokesman blatantly putting the onus on Hamas “because of its failure to make the tough decisions to provide for the Palestinian people and to be able to govern effectively.” How can Hamas “provide for its people” when the US has imposed a boycott that has pushed two out of three Palestinian families below the poverty line? How can Hamas “govern effectively” when dozens of Palestinian officials, including five Cabinet ministers, are being held in Israeli jails?
And why, above all, should Hamas take the blame for being voted into power in the very atmosphere of democracy the United States espouses? Is it the fault of Palestinians that they carried out what the West cherishes? Several EU members, at least, think not.
