A top Hamas political official told The Associated Press the Islamic militant group is willing to agree to a truce of five years or more with Israel and that it would lay down its weapons and convert into a political party if an independent Palestinian state is established along pre-1967 borders.
If you consider that Hamas only exists to fight against Israeli oppression over an ineffective PA, it makes sense that if the oppression ends, Hamas becomes irrelevant.
That’s a chicken and egg problem, though, isn’t it: Netanyahu’s government wants Hamas because the conflict keeps Bibi out of prison, and Hamas wants to remain relevant. All the same, the Israeli and Palestinian people are the ones who suffer due to both regimes being in power, and Hamas doesn’t shed its guilt just because Israel doesn’t want a reasonable Palestinian government. Neither side wants to blink because they have multi-generational hatred for the other side, and that means popular support for further violence probably isn’t going anywhere. You back down! No, you back down!
The result is that neither side is going to take real steps to deescalate, because both sides benefit from the conflict. That the Palestinians are suffering more, by orders of magnitude, doesn’t make either side’s position any less entrenched: Bibi wants to stay in power (and free), and Hamas wants to remain relevant and in power, and they’re more justified now than ever. Both regimes need to be replaced.
It’s important to note that for most of its existence, “fighting against Israeli oppression” explicitly meant Israel no longer existing. This is the first time I can remember them even implying that they would accept a two state solution.
they accepted a two-state solution previously, the isreali PM that was negotiating with them at the time was assassinated.
Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by an Israeli law student who didn’t believe in the peace talks. Hamas didn’t even kill him, Israel did it. No fucking surprise there.
Hamas was also not in power back then, in no position to accept or reject any solution.
You saying Israel killed him is like saying Palestine committed Oct. 7th’s terrorist attack.
Israel didn’t kill the guy, a lone Israeli student did. This is one of those times when facts and nuance matter.
That was Fatah, not Hamas. Hamas was irrelevant back in the 90s and didn’t rise to prominence until the mid-2000s.
Better check that history video again. It wasn’t Hamas at that table
That was in the 70’s, he was killed by a student, not the government.
And the PA, including Yasser Arafat, have turned it down 4 or 5 times. Yasser Arafat turned it down last time in 2002/2004(?). They have never taken it seriously.
Camp Davis and the Oslo Accords were a way for Israel to change the De Facto annexation of the West Bank into a De Juro annexation. While giving the PA a ‘semblence’ of a state still under Israeli Military Control. There was no offer of a sovereign state, nor of right of return. Arafat didn’t reject a Two-State Solution, he walked away from a verbal ‘offer’ of taking 90% (later ~80% once written up in Oslo) of the Occupied Palestinian Territories, while ignoring all Palestinian wants such as Right of Return and Sovereignty with an end to Occupation.
Camp David: a tragedy of errors - The Guardian
Deconstructing Camp David - Al Jazeera
What Really Happened Between Barak and Arafat at Camp David? - Haaretz
Oslo accords: 30 years on, the dream of a two-state solution seems further away than ever - The Conversation
If Arafat wasn’t serious about negotiations, why sit down at all and risk his position in the PLO? For decades the ‘Three Nos’ stunted any Arab-Israeli diplomacy, and the maximalists still hold sway today as they did then
Israel refused the right of return for Palestinians as a whole, while for decades doing all within their power to boost Jewish immigration, bankroll Aliyah flights, rubber stamp naturalization, and regular ‘missionary’ trips to visit US and European nations - all only for ethnic Jews, and their spouses.
A two-tiered system based on race is hardly a fair deal, especially in a democratic system where your people are denied fair representation whilst Jew from the world over are invited to jump on a plane and become a full citizen after three months
Every offer has been in bad faith, though, designed to be a non-starter so that Israel could claim they tried.
Before 1948, Palestinian Leadership repeatedly advocated for a Unitary Binational State for decades: Palestinian Arab Congress advocating for Unified State 1928, Arab Higher Committee advocating for Unified State 1937, Arab League advocating for Unified State 1948
After the founding of Israel, the Two-State Solutions were utilized to further annex the Palestinian Occupied Territories and enact military control over Palestinians while denying them human and civil rights. This is apartheid. Despite this, both Fatah and Hamas have accepted a Two-State Solution on the 1967 borders, with the two most important factors being the Right of Return of Palestinian refugees and an end to the permanent occupation.
Oslo Accord Sources: MEE, NYT, Haaretz, AJ
History of peace process - The Intercept
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
One State Solution, Foreign Affairs
They wanted a unified Arab state, and they wanted the non-Arab immigrants out
And failing that, they tried to put a genocide on them
Small details, I know
It’s true they wanted it to be an Arab state, since the vast majority were Arab. It’s not that they wanted ‘non-arab immigrants’ out, it’s that Zionist Settler Colonialism was quite different from normal immigration. Instead of integration, the early land purchases led to the expulsion of tens of thousands of Palestinians in the early 1900’s. Many Palestinians opposed the Zionist Land Purchases and Immigration because of fears they would be forced out of their homes and communities, not because they were Jewish.
The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948
Transfer Committee and the JNF led to Forced Displacement of 100,000 Palestinians throughout the mandate.
Are you talking about the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians? Because that was planned and carried out. There was nothing remotely equivalent from Palestinians or the Arab Liberation Army.
If you have sympathy for that argument, what’s the difference with jewish people who want the same? Both wanted to be the first class citizens in their country.
That’s true, but it’s not different from renters who are forced out after their landlord sells the property. It’s not a ‘nice’ part of humanity, but it’s generally accepted as ‘fair’. Of course it’s true that most zionist immigrants had no plans to integrate with non-jews. Partly because of their own religious backwardness, partly because they moved there specifically to escape religious oppression.
There certainly was: Nebi Musa riots; 1929 Palestine Riots; etc. certainly showed the intent of many Palestinian Arabs to put an ethnic cleansing on the jews.
You’re quite wrong if you don’t think the ALA or others didn’t go in with the same intent. You should look up their logo or statements from their organizers prior to their attack. The only reason one side won is because the other side lost
They said they would accept 1967 borders in their 2017 charter, so it’s been done before. It was also less antisemitic than their previous charter. I think they’re trying to be less extreme and more flexible to get more recruitment maybe, but that’s just my guess.
4 or 5 other times it was offered and every time it was shot down by the PA because either it wasn’t from the river to the sea or all jews have to leave.
It was never about sharing, it was about keeping it all to themselves.
They’ve publicly held this position for nearly 20 years now. When they publicly adopted it and got elected as the new Palestinian Authority because of it, Israel immediately declared war and prevented them taking power.
Well, they did fuck around and find out. Now they are facing an existential threat of their own and suddenly reasonable?
Funny how that works
Hamas has lied about peace and democracy in the past. They became the state of Palestine by winning an election in which they promised to stop attacks on civilians and be democratic, then refusing to hold an election for 2 decades.
Israel is a genocidal regime and needs to be stopped. But that doesn’t make Hamas the good guys. A long-term solution can’t include the current governments of either Israel or Palestine.
Hamas won an election in 2007, which no other country accepted the results of. Israel responded with a blockade. Not saying they’re the good guys but it’s not like it’s a level playing field.
What! They “won” an election that nobody outside HAMAS found legitimate??? And then the country they promise to exterminate reacted? No way!?!?!?!?
Don’t let facts get in your way:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_election
International observers noted that the elections, for the most part, were conducted fairly and in accordance with international standards.
There were some reports of voter obstruction - caused by Israel.
Yes also don’t forget that Fatah immediately led a coup against them, with public support and arms from Israel and support from US.
Quite a long term they have, 17 years and counting.
I thought we don’t accept the results of the election?
Immediately after the election, Fatah, with US and Israeli support dismissed the Hamas government, which Hamas obviously disagreed with.
At this point there’s a stalemate where we (the West) and Fatah don’t recognize the Hamas government and Hamas can’t call an election because they have not officially governed.
Nothing is stopping them from holding another election. There’s clearly a desire for one, since Hamas has violently quelled dissent in the past.
The fact of the matter is that Hamas is looking out for Hamas, and that they haven’t held elections in 14 years heavily underscores that.
To be absolutely clear, Israel is still the greater evil here. But that doesn’t mean that Hamas isn’t an authoritarian dictatorship either.
-Article 7 of Hamas’ founding charter
They were founded to kill Jews and push them out of Palestine. They’re not righteous freedom fighters.
-prayer of Sheik Ahmad Bahr
They’re just as genocidal as Israel has been as of late, they just lack the same capability Israel does.
Hamas began twenty years into the occupation during the first Intifada, with the goal of ending the occupation. Collective punishment has been a deliberate Israeli tactic for decades with the Dahiya doctrine. Violence such as suicide bombings and rockets escalated in response to Israeli enforcement of the occupation and apartheid.
Hamas 1988 Charter and Revised 2017 Charter
The 1988 Charter, which is certainly unreasonable in its fundamentalism with Sharia Law and is antisemitic, does not call for the extermination of all Jewish People. Hamas wants an end to Israel as an Apartheid State, not an extermination of all Israelis. Under Ahmed Yassin in the 1990’s, truces were offered in exchange for Israeli to withdrawal from Gaza and the West Bank to the 1967 borders. The 2017 Revised charter explicitly accepts a Two-State Solution of the 1967 Borders. Check Article 7 and 13 of the 1988 Charter to see yourself, compare it to Article 20 and 24-26 in the revised charter.
The slogan From the River to the Sea is about Palestinian liberation that started in the 60s by the PLO for a democratic secular state, not Genocide. The Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad in 1966 maybe, but he’s not Palestinian.
History of Hamas supported by Netanyahu since 2012
No I don’t support Hamas as a ruling party, I want Palestinians to be able to have free fair elections.
Thanks for the links, I’ll give this a read later today.
I think that person you’re replying to’s point is they won’t be able to recruit at the same right without the huge group of angry, oppressed people that Israel keeps producing. They’ll wither away out off non-relevance.
Hamas exists because it and Islamic Jihad are the militant wings of The Muslim Brotherhood, a group founded in WWII as unit of the Waffen-SS Afrikakorp.
Their goal was and always has been the death of every single Jew on the planet.
Holy misinformation batman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood
They were opposed to colonialism, both in the form of British occupation and the threat of Zionism - the direct result of which we’re seeing today.
They did side with the axis powers in WW2, but we’ve seen that elsewhere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_National_Army - the logic being that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Also,
At this point we can’t say the same about Israel given it is entirely founded on ethnic nationalism.
Exactly. I can’t understand why** people clutch their pearls at brown people siding with the Axis while accepting as an unfortunate side story the same thing from, say, Finland and nationalists in the Baltics or Ukraine.
Fuck Nazis but let’s be consistent in our standards about it.
**I mean, I can understand what racism is.
HAMAS exists to exterminate Isreal and its inhabitants. Their offer is ‘free Palestine, let us be the dominant political party, and let us form and official national army, then we chill for 5 years! Don’t worry what we might do after that!’
Hamas isn’t going to just die out if they win. Isreal would be suicidal if they agreed to the ‘deal’.
Hamas ran in the 2006 election under a completely different name, in an effort to demonstrate that they can in fact separate themselves from their militant faction.
Remember, Israel also had its origins in armed struggle (against the British).
Edit: although this is probably Israeli projection, given that the armed factions did become the Israeli military. And we all know what they’re up to.
Oke, and Israel exists to exterminate Palestinians and other arabs in their holy quest for greater Israel. Why is Israel continuing to settle the West Bank if Hamas is the big bad?