Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumAs Israelis and Palestinians Talk, the Rise of a Political Islam Alters the Equation
Source: The New York Times
JERUSALEM Israeli and Palestinian officials met in Amman, Jordan, on Tuesday, their first encounter in more than a year, and while little emerged, the meeting said a great deal about the crossroads facing the Palestinians and the entire Middle East as political Islam emerges as a potentially transformative force in the region.
While officials of the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority and the Israelis were meeting under the auspices of King Abdullah II of Jordan, who enjoys Western backing, the Hamas prime minister of Gaza, Ismail Haniya, was in Turkey dismissing the session and expressing his movements solidarity with what he called the Islamic spring.
Mr. Haniyas point was that the upheaval in the Middle East had led to the emergence of political Islam. That, in turn, could create difficult choices for the Palestinians, as well as for the Jordanians and the Israelis, that could unite or divide them.
All three parties are very much concerned with the rise of Islamism, and that is part of what this meeting was about, said Zakaria al-Qaq, a political scientist at Al Quds University in East Jerusalem.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/world/middleeast/rise-of-political-islam-alters-israeli-and-palestinian-talks.html
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
An interesting look at the talks from a regional perspective.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Islam has always been political, like all organized religions, and what is ending in Egypt is the suppression of political islam. I don't think anyone knows what that will lead to, over time, but it can't be good for the status quo, and you know that it is seen by them as the end of oppression. I think it is going to be very interesting to see what happens when the military "turns over power" to the new civilian government, the critical question being how political pluralism is handled.
But I don't think the "three parties" have much to say about it at this point.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)CAIRO With the Muslim Brotherhood pulling within reach of an outright majority in Egypts new Parliament, the Obama administration has begun to reverse decades of mistrust and hostility as it seeks to forge closer ties with an organization once viewed as irreconcilably opposed to United States interests.
The administrations overtures including high-level meetings in recent weeks constitute a historic shift in a foreign policy held by successive American administrations that steadfastly supported the autocratic government of President Hosni Mubarak in part out of concern for the Brotherhoods Islamist ideology and historic ties to militants.
The shift is, on one level, an acknowledgment of the new political reality here, and indeed around the region, as Islamist groups come to power. Having won nearly half the seats contested in the first two rounds of the countrys legislative elections, the Brotherhood on Tuesday entered the third and final round with a chance to extend its lead to a clear majority as the vote moved into districts long considered strongholds.
The reversal also reflects the administrations growing acceptance of the Brotherhoods repeated assurances that its lawmakers want to build a modern democracy that will respect individual freedoms, free markets and international commitments, including Egypts treaty with Israel.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/world/middleeast/us-reverses-policy-in-reaching-out-to-muslim-brotherhood.html
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)not. The whole idea of having a dialogue with Islamists is almost impossible for a Republican administration, and there is a significant amount of criticism of Obama from the right. What the Islamists are and what they want will be clearer in the future, but I think that democratic aspirations trump religion for people in the Middle East. I still wonder what Haniyeh is doing in Turkey, he's seen as a hero by the Turks, and he's one of the moderate voices of Hamas. The timing makes me wonder if not Turkey is trying to become, in part, a sponsor of Hamas.
Btw, I found this piece that shows how things could be if there is a Republican President in the WH. The site israelhayom.com is very RW, it's got Daniel Pipes on the Opinion page for example. The article shows why I'm afraid of what Republicans can do to the Middle East.
National Security Council: Obama naive on Muslim Brotherhood
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com
National Security Council holds discussion entitled "The Challenge of the Rise of the Muslim Brotherhood and its Offshoots," during which it concluded that Israel should focus its efforts on the Obama administration.
U.S. President Barack Obama is "naive" and needs to face up to the threat presented by the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood across the Middle East, Israel's National Security Council concluded during a strategic discussion several days ago.
Read more: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=2481
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Instability, uncertainty, doubt, anxiety, fear, hate, ...
I quite agree that Presidents matter. The current mess originated in the interaction of Sharon and Bush the Lesser ten years ago. Obama has done little to change it, I suppose because Bibi is - if anything - to the right of Sharon, and much weaker politically, hostage to the religious right. He's got Lieberman constantly yapping away with his brain disengaged on his right. If you remember how things were when Clinton's term ended, it's hard to view what has happened since as progress towards peace.
Haniyeh is looking for new sources of funding and a new place to live, I think. He is basically the Hamas Minister of Propaganda. I am curious to see what the Turks do about him, but I don't realy think it means much. I think Hamas has big problems, but I would not want to guess what's going to happen.
I don't usually spend much time on "advocacy sites", though I used to, they become predictable.
aranthus
(3,385 posts)Hamas' inclinations are religious, not democratic. They don't have a respect for individual liberty or the rights of minorities. They want Israel dead. It isn't certain that they are going to turn Palestine into a mini-Iran, but that is obviously the way to bet.
shira
(30,109 posts)Little Tich
(6,171 posts)And yes, I've seen the PMW clip of Haniyeh embracing armed struggle to liberate Palestine. But compared to Mahmoud al-Zahar and Khaled Meshaal, he's not impossible to work with.
I think it's wrong to characterize all of the leaders (and members) of Hamas as vicious killers, just waiting for the right moment to strike. These guys differ in political views, and Hamas is the sum of all that. Hamas has changed since the early days of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, and will continue to do so. They will never become nice, but they can be convinced, hopefully, to be less extreme.
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2012, 01:05 PM - Edit history (1)
Tunisians greet Hamas leader with chants of Kill the Jews!http://cifwatch.com/2012/01/06/guardian-moderate-islamism-update-tunisians-greet-hamas-leader-with-chants-of-kill-the-jews/
Violet_Crumble
(35,954 posts)To act like all members of Hamas all think the same way and that there aren't more moderate voices within the group is making a mistake. Over the years I've seen statements come out from Hamas, and in some cases only a few hours later, someone else from Hamas would make another statement contradicting the earlier one. I put that down to the differing opinions within the organisation in a lot of cases...
Hamas have no choice but to soften or vanish into nothingness. Haniyeh has said in the past that Hamas would accept a deal with Israel based on the 1967 borders, which is definitely a softening of their hardline stance towarrds Israel...
aranthus
(3,385 posts)"A critical question is what kind of political Islam is emerging. There are indications in Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco, as well as within Hamas itself, that it is more pragmatic than when it was merely a force of opposition."
It speaks to the naivite and and willful disregard of reality to which much of the left succumbs. Is political Islam pragmatic? Yes it is. Is this a substantive change? Not at all. Political Islam has always been pragmatic. That's one reason that more sober observers recognized that it was almost certain to win out of the Arab Spring (as many on the Left refused to recognize). When it paid to be more strident (as it does when you're in the opposition), they were strident. Now that it will pay them to say the right things to the right people, they will do that. Pragmatic only means that they will do what works to obtain their goals. It doesn't mean that those goals are good, decent, or moderate. Yet the Times appears to use "pragmatic" as a synonym for "moderate," even though that is plainly not the case. I would rather that they were incompetent blind ideologues. They would have less chance of winning.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)On one hand there are moderates like the Turkish Justice and Development Party, which is firmly entrenched in the secular system, and on the other hand there are Islamists like the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) in Algeria which want an Islamic state ruled by Sharia law.
While the goals of some parties and groups are similar to what you describe, it's certainly not the goals of the majority. The Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt for example, wants to have a civil state, and in Tunisia the Ennahda Movement says that Sharia law should not be implemented. It's really diffficult to envisage the rise of theocracies like that of Iran. The next few years will show how much religion there will be in the new Middle East, but I think that the popular desire for democracy will prevail.
aranthus
(3,385 posts)There's Turkey somewhere in the middle, and then there are the extremists. If you think that the MB is moderate, then I think you are either going to be surprised by them or you have a strange definition of moderate. Granted I think that we should give them the chance to prove themselves (mostly because we have no other choice), but I wouldn't hold my breathe on it. There's more to a viable society than mere Democracy. Liberty and respect for individual rights are needed as well. Certainly Islam is compatible with those things, but it remains to be seen if the strain of Islam now gaining sway in the Arab world is going to honor those values.