Israel’s assassination of Sheikh Ahmad Yassin,
founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, marked an extraordinarily dangerous
escalation in the conflict between Jews and Arabs in Palestine. There could
hardly be a more dramatic demonstration of the disparity in military power
between the two parties to this conflict. The trouble is that there is no
military solution and there are only losers in this dance of death.
Both the official Israeli justification for the
killing of Yassin and the Hamas response were entirely predictable. Ariel
Sharon described it as part of the war on terror and called Yassin the ‘first
and foremost leader of the Palestinian terrorist murderers’. He compared him to
Osama bin Laden and congratulated the Israeli security forces on their success.
Hamas leaders overflowed with fury, seeing the killing as an attack on Islam.
They vowed to take revenge and escalate the armed struggle until they achieve
independence. Israel,
they said, had opened the gates of hell. Secular Palestinian leaders denounced
the attack as dangerous, crazy and cowardly and suspected that the motive was
to create chaos in Palestinian society and bring about the collapse of the
Palestinian Authority.
One thing was clear: with this single act of
violence, Israel killed any prospect of a revival of the Middle East peace
process. The road map, launched with so much fanfare a year ago, is now dead.
All of Tony Blair’s efforts in prodding and persuading a reluctant George Bush
to adopt this plan for a two-state solution by 2005 appear to have been in
vain. No Arab leader can be expected even to talk about peace with Israel,
given its callous disregard for both Muslim sensitivities and international
legality.
The assassination is likely to strengthen rather than
weaken Hamas. In the wretched Gaza refugee camps, recruitment of suicide
bombers has never been much of a problem. With Yassin turned into a martyr,
more desperate young people will rally behind the Islamic banner. Political
support for Hamas is also likely to grow at the expense of its secular rival,
Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement. Yassin’s spartan lifestyle commanded universal
respect. His honesty and that of his colleagues stood in marked contrast to the
endemic corruption in parts of Fatah.
Yassin’s removal will almost certainly tilt the
internal balance within Hamas in favour of the more radical military wing. The
political wing, headed by the organisation’s new leader, Dr Abdel Aziz
al-Rantisi, was much more pragmatic than is commonly realised in the West. It
observed several ceasefires scuppered by Israel. While approving suicide
bombings as the only weapon available to their movement, its leaders leaned
increasingly towards de facto acceptance of Israel within its 1967 borders.
Israel’s action, however, is bound to reinforce the argument of the hardliners
that the Jewish state only understands force, and can only be dislodged from
the occupied territories by force.
All this could have been predicted, so why did Israel
embark on such a high-risk strategy? To answer this, you have to delve into the
personality and policies of Israel’s Prime Minister, a right-wing extremist who
abhors negotiations and compromise and imposes his will by brute force. He is a
proponent of Greater Israel and the champion of violent solutions. The
Palestinians pose the main challenge to his vision of Greater Israel, so he has
always advocated the use of military force to crush them.
By destroying the Palestine Liberation Organisation,
Sharon hoped to break the backbone of Palestinian nationalism and facilitate
the absorption of the West Bank into Greater Israel. The war was a disaster,
but Sharon doggedly persisted in his objective of denying the Palestinians any
independent political existence in Palestine. Evidence for this is ably
presented by the sociologist Baruch Kimmerling in Politicide: Ariel Sharon’s
War against the Palestinians.
Equally dogged Palestinian resistance since the
outbreak of the al-Aqsa intifada persuaded Sharon that the dream of Greater
Israel had to be modified, if not abandoned. His new strategy rests on two main
planks. One is the building of the wall on the West Bank that would prepare the
way for the de facto annexation of roughly half its territory to Israel. The
other, announced in January, involves unilateral Israeli withdrawal from the
Gaza Strip.
Few Israelis want to hang on to Gaza, where there are
1.2 million Arabs and 7,500 Israeli settlers, who control 25 per cent of the
territory and 40 per cent of the arable land. Sharon knows that the occupation
cannot be sustained in the long term, so he wants to cut his losses to
consolidate occupation of half of the West Bank. This plan amounts to an
attempt to redraw the map of Israel-Palestine unilaterally without negotiating
with the Palestinian Authority, without complying with any external diktats,
and without following any international roadmaps.
Yet although Sharon’s plan is fixated exclusively on
Israeli interests, it has met opposition inside his cabinet from the
pro-settler, ultra-right-wing parties and from the aggressively hawkish
Minister of Defence, Shaul Mofaz. The General Staff is worried that Hamas would
turn Gaza into a launchpad for attacks on Israel, leaving it with a powerful
enemy on its southern border. Therefore it wants to break Hamas before the
withdrawal.
The decision to execute Yassin has to be seen in this
light. Some Ministers and the director of the internal security service opposed
the proposal on the grounds that it was illegal and would only increase the
violence, but the majority voted in favour.
It transpired that the cabinet decided to eliminate
not just Yassin but the entire Hamas leadership in response to the double
suicide bombing in the port of Ashdod. This means that Israel will strike at
Hamas leaders whenever opportunities present themselves, not only in
retaliation. Israeli strikes will be followed, inevitably and inexorably, by
Palestinian retaliation with suicide bombs. This is a recipe for violence and
bloodshed without any hope. Sharon has truly opened the gates of hell.
Avi Shlaim is a British Academy Research Professor at
St Antony’s College, Oxford, and author of The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab
World.
No comments:
Post a Comment