by Clifford D. May
-- when it comes to Islamists, too many journalists are losing what George Orwell called the "constant struggle" to see "what is in front of one's nose."
"Hamas 
Drops Call for Israel's Destruction," The Wall Street Journal had in a 
headline last week. The New York Times told its readers: "Hamas 
Moderates Talk on Israel," while the British Guardian concluded that 
Hamas had produced a document likely to "ease peace process."
All this is big news -- or would be if it were true. But it's not. Not even close. 
What it is instead is 
more evidence that, when it comes to Islamists, too many journalists are
 losing what George Orwell called the "constant struggle" to see "what 
is in front of one's nose."
To understand what is 
really going on, let us start with a few pertinent facts. Hamas, the 
Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, is recognized as a 
terrorist organization by the U.S., Britain and the European Union. 
Following Israel's disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005, civil war 
broke out between Hamas and its main rival, Fatah, headed by Palestinian
 Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Within two years, Hamas had 
prevailed. It has ruled Gaza ever since, devoting its energies to 
launching rockets, digging terrorist tunnels and provoking three wars 
with Israel.
In its 1988 founding 
charter, Hamas makes clear that its goal is to wipe Israel off the map. 
It rejects a "two-state solution" because, as it interprets Islamic 
scripture, any land conquered by Muslims at any time in history is as an
 endowment from Allah to the Muslims. No one has the authority to 
surrender such territory to non-Muslims.
Last week, at a press 
conference in Doha, Qatar, Hamas unveiled what it called a "Document of 
General Principles and Policies." Hamas implicitly renounced its ties to
 the Muslim Brotherhood, the organization that launched the modern 
Islamist movement 89 years ago. However, it mentioned no ideological 
disagreements with the Brotherhood.
So why the ostensible 
break? Hamas leaders would like increased international acceptance and, 
in particular, to be viewed more kindly by Egyptian President Abdel 
Fattah el-Sisi. Indeed, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates
 all regard the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.
In the document, Hamas 
says it is willing to accept a provisional Palestinian state within the 
1967 lines. It does not say it is unwilling to accept Israel beyond 
those lines.
As for those lines, 
take a moment to recall how they came into being. Sixty-nine years ago, 
Israel declared its independence within part of Mandate Palestine, 
territory the British had taken from the Turks after World War I. The 
largest chunk of that territory had already become what is now known as 
Jordan. The U.N. proposed dividing the remainder into two states, one 
Jewish and one Arab. The Israelis said they could live with that. The 
Arabs said they would not.
The armies of Egypt, 
Syria, Lebanon and Jordan invaded and attempted to destroy the fledgling
 Jewish state. In 1949, the conflict came to a halt. The armistice lines
 held until 1967, when a second attempt was made to push the Jews into 
the sea. That effort also failed and the Israelis ended up taking Gaza 
from Egypt and Judea and Samaria from Jordan. Ever since, Israel has 
attempted -- and failed -- to trade land for peace. 
The new Hamas document 
continues to rule out peaceful coexistence with the "enemy," also called
 the "Zionist project." It envisions "the full and complete liberation 
of Palestine, from the river to the sea," in other words every inch of 
Israel. (Though the notion that Gazans are "liberated" is simply 
absurd.) Nor does Hamas disavow terrorism, which it euphemizes as 
"resistance," noting that it considers "all means and methods" -- 
suicide bombings, knifing children -- permissible and indeed "guaranteed
 by divine laws, customs and international laws."
Over the weekend, Hamas
 made news a second time when it named Ismail Haniyeh to its senior 
leadership position. If he follows the example of his predecessor, 
Khaled Mashaal, he will now move from Gaza to Qatar where he will rule 
from the relative safety of an elegant Doha hotel suite.
Inside Gaza, the most 
powerful figure will be Yahya Sinwar, leader of Hamas' military wing, 
often described by journalists as a hard-liner. Do those journalists 
really expect us to believe that there are jihadist terrorist moderates?
You may be wondering: 
What is Qatar's angle? An oil- and gas-rich mini-state on the 
northeastern coast of the Arabian Peninsula, Qatar is ruled by a 
36-year-old emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al Thani. He is extraordinarily
 adept at playing both ends against the middle: He provides Hamas not 
just with a capital-in-exile but also with much of its funding. He 
supports other Muslim Brotherhood organizations throughout the region. 
Financiers of al-Qaida, the Taliban and other terrorist groups operate 
openly in Qatar.
At the same time, the emir transmits Qatari perspectives -- a less polite term would be Islamist propaganda -- around the world through Al Jazeera, the state-funded international television network.
At the same time, the emir transmits Qatari perspectives -- a less polite term would be Islamist propaganda -- around the world through Al Jazeera, the state-funded international television network.
But Qatar has another 
face. It hosts the largest American military base in the Middle East. It
 contributes millions of dollars to several Washington think tanks. And 
it lavishly subsidizes satellite campuses for American universities, 
among them Georgetown, Cornell, Carnegie Mellon, Northwestern, Texas 
A&M and Virginia Commonwealth.
The campuses are 
located in "Education City" where the main mosque regularly features 
Islamist clerics, including Mudassir Ahmed, who from the pulpit last 
year said: "Kill the infidels. ... Count them in number and do not spare
 one." Another preacher called for Allah to "render victorious our 
brothers the mujahideen ... in every place" and to "guide their 
shooting."
What do the 
administrators of the American colleges say about this? Not a word. When
 it comes to Islamists, too many academics long ago gave up the struggle
 to see what is in front of their noses.
Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a columnist for the Washington Times.
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=18995
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
 
No comments:
Post a Comment