'Weak' position for Abbas in Middle East peace talks
Success looks tricky at the Middle East peace talks because of the unprecedented weakness of the negotiating position of Palestinian Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, writes Lindsey Hilsum.
Four Israeli settlers were killed, but the Hamas attack on the eve of Middle East talks in Washington was really aimed at wounding the Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas.
Mr Abbas has been persuaded by the Americans that he must negotiate, yet he does so from a position of unprecedented weakness. Many Palestinians question his legitimacy – his term was up more than a year ago, yet no fresh elections have been held. Hamas, not Fatah, holds sway in Gaza and by launching this attack, their armed wing has called into question his control of the West Bank.
Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman, said: “Mahmoud Abbas does not have the right to speak for the Palestinians, nor to represent them and therefore, any results will not be binding on the Palestinian people,” adding that the government in the West Bank was “nothing but a tool to protect the security of the occupation and settlers.”
So even if the peace talks are successful, it’s hard to see how Mr Abbas could carry through.
“If he reaches a deal, many will ask in whose name he was bartering away Palestinian rights. If negotiations fail, most will accuse him of once more being duped,” write Hussein Agha and Robert Malley in the Washington Post.
On the other hand, whatever happens, the Israeli prime minister can spin it to his advantage.
“If Netanyahu comes back with an accord, he will be hailed as a historic leader,” say Agha and Malley. “His constituency will largely fall in line; the left will have no choice but to salute. If the talks collapse, his followers will thank him for standing firm, while his critics are likely in due course to blame the Palestinians.”
There is no internal political pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu to make peace – in fact, it is the right-wing, who don’t want a deal under any circumstances, who will decide whether the governing coalition stands or falls. According to the analysis website Stratfor the attacks will “excuse Israel from having to make meaningful concessions. The cost on Tuesday was four Israeli lives, but on the strategic level, Hamas gave Israel exactly what it was seeking in the lead-up to Thursday’s peace talks: the status quo.”
Hamas rejects the talks partly because its leadership refuses to accept the existence of Israel, and partly because it is not included.
The Israelis repeat the mantra that they don’t “talk to terrorists” and the Americans and Europeans agree – even though peace deals in Northern Ireland, South Africa and elsewhere have perforce included those once defined as “terrorists”. Western governments have even decided that, if peace is to come to Afghanistan, they have to talk to the Taliban. They know Fatah cannot deliver without the acquiesence and involvement of Hamas. And – as Israelis often say – you make peace with your enemies, not your friends.
