Did Hamas Recognize Israel?

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/
opinion/14944297.htm

Published 7/1/06
For a brief moment this week, two days after Palestinians kidnapped 19-year-old Israeli corporal Gilad Shalit, and just a few hours before Israel launched a major incursion for his release, an item of seemingly promising news flashed across computer screens throughout the world. The radical Islamic group Hamas, the headlines proclaimed, had at last decided to grant ''implicit'' recognition of Israel's right to exist. Hamas, which runs the Palestinian Authority government, had always proclaimed its goal of destroying Israel. Had the extremist group suddenly changed? The headlines wishfully indicated that is exactly what had happened. That interpretation, however, was more than premature: It was patently incorrect.

With developments in the Middle East as distressing as ever, a world hungry for good news latched on to the announcement that Hamas and Fatah, the bitter rivals of Palestinian politics, had agreed to the so-called Prisoners Document, marking a possible new beginning for peace. Commentators called it a major breakthrough, and many, including Palestinian leaders, suggested that international sanctions against the Hamas-led PA could soon end. Perhaps the sides would now tiptoe to the peace table.

Even now, with Israeli tanks in Gaza, one still hears both Western and Arab commentators perpetuating the growing myth that Hamas has recognized Israel.

The document, written by Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, offers a stunning display of vagueness on what some perceive as concessions, combined with absolute specificity on points that Israel has consistently rejected over years of negotiations. Nowhere does it announce recognition of Israel's right to exist. The closest it comes is saying the Palestinians seek to achieve freedom, ''including the right to establish their independent state with al-Quds al-Shareef (Jerusalem) as its capital on all territories occupied in 1967.'' That suggests the possibility of two states. But it is not a real departure for Hamas.

Hamas -- whose charter acknowledges Israel by saying, ''Israel will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it'' -- had already offered a long-term truce if Israel would withdraw to 1967 lines. Its wishes to destroy Israel after the truce were never hidden.

PA President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah had threatened to call a referendum on the document, unless Hamas agreed to it, while Fatah and Hamas gunmen were shooting at each other and Palestinians teetered on the verge of civil war.

This week, the impending Israeli incursion, and the real threat that Hamas would lose power, persuaded its leaders to sign. But Hamas spokesmen promptly and unequivocally declared that they were absolutely not conceding Israel's right to exist.

The document steps back from negotiating positions that brought Israelis and Palestinians closer in pre-Hamas days. It demands Israel's return to pre-1967 lines, whose strategic vulnerability both sides knew demanded redrawing. And Israel, of course, would never completely withdraw from Jerusalem. Both sides also know that Israel will not fully agree to the so-called right of return to Israel proper by all Palestinian refugees, which the document demands. That would mark the end of Israel as a Jewish state, amounting to demographic suicide. Israelis see this as another ploy to annihilate it. Compromise positions on the issue had emerged at Camp David.

With Hamas -- considered a terrorist group by the European Union, the United States and Israel, among others -- in control of the legislature, foreign donors stopped the gushing flow of cash to the PA. They demanded three conditions before aid would resume. Hamas would have to recognize Israel's right to exist; accept previously signed agreements with Israel and renounce violence. The agreement does little to address these fundamental issues.

Far from renouncing violence, it enshrines the Palestinians' right to continue resistance ''in various means,'' presumably including suicide bombings against civilians. Just days ago, a top European Union official visiting the region described the document as a ''step forward.'' But, she added, it is not enough to satisfy the conditions for renewed aid.

So, as much as we would all like to see a glimmer of hope for peace, this document is not the place to find it. Even if Shalit is released and Israeli tanks roll out of Gaza; even in the unlikely scenario that the situation returns to where it stood before this awful new chapter, the two sides would still have no basis for new negotiations. This document fails on basic points. It does not end the violence. And, most importantly, it does not tell us that Hamas has decided to give up its intention to destroy Israel. Without that precondition, there's hardly a point to peace talks.