1.5.2011
via Yisrael Hayom (translated by GI Staff)

 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a mistake by rushing to respond in a brief speech to the nation regarding the agreement between Fatah and Hamas to establish a temporary technocratic government. If his intention was to quickly influence world opinion, he could not, because most of the countries involved would like to see a single Palestinian address. If, however, it turns out that the new Palestinian cooperation leads to violence, Netanyahu can not argue that he gave it a fair opportunity, given his claim that reconcilitation is dangerous. Everyone will say that he did not allow it to succeed in the first place.

 

Is this a positive development for us? It might be, but it is not guaranteed. The source of all sins is the surrender of then- Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to the desire of then-U.S. President George Bush to allow Hamas, which supports terrorism, to participate in the Palestinian Legislative Council elections, in contrast to what was set out in the Oslo agreement.

 

Once Hamas became a legitimate player and won the elections, it posed a serious problem for Israel with no ideal solutions. But under the current circumstances, it is better for us that Hamas recognize the Palestinian Authority and give Mahmoud Abbas the opportunity to hold political negotiations with Israel and eventually bring a solution to a referendum. If Hamas does not gain a foothold in the security forces in the West Bank, if it continues to control only the Gaza Strip, and if there is not violence against Israel--this would be a positive development. After all, Israel has no right to say to President Abbas that he does not represent all Palestinians--since the Gaza Strip was taken from him--and keep him from establishing a partnership with Gazans in order to represent the Palestinian people.

 

Hamas remains the same Hamas. It does not recognize Israel nor conduct negotiations with her. We are not asked to, and we do not need to negotiate with Hamas, and we can recognize it only if it recognizes the terms set by the Quartet --recognition of Israel, cessation of violence, and recognition of previous international agreements. (If there are political negotiations they will be conducted with the PLO, with whom we have prior agreements and which Mahmoud Abbas heads. With a technocratic government we are supposed to talk to address cross-border issues that exist between neighbors--agriculture, problems of water environment, and endless questions and other issues that we can not help but talk about.)

 

We must embrace the new agreement. We do not know enough to support it, but equally we do not know enough to oppose it. Hamas is weakening, and public opinion surveys show Mahmoud Abbas becoming the most popular leader on the Palestinian street. By creating a single Palestinian address, the Cairo Agreement can be an opportunity both for Palestinians and for us.