Issues for a Just Peace in Conflict of Israel and Palestine - Research Paper Example

?Briefing Paper for the Government of Australia Hamas briefing: Issues for a just peace in israel-palestine Hamas: Overview Hamas or ?arakat al-Muqawamat al-Islamiyyah was founded in the year 1987 as a Palestinian Islamist political party. It has a political wing and a military wing and is classified as a terrorist organization by several nations including the US, EU Canada and Japan (Frey, 2004). Hamas was founded with the mission of freeing the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem from Israeli occupation and for establishing an Islamic Palestinian state. Hamas now controls the Gaza Strip, and it has been involved in various political as well as military activities during the past decades. However, in the year 2009, the political wing of Hamas was largely projected as the harbinger of peace for the region, and had agreed to engage in the conflict resolution process in case the borders of 1967 are respected by Israel. In addition to its political and military actvities, Hamas has also been involved with developing clinics, hospitals, mosques and schools for the conflict ravaged Palestinians (BBC, 2009). Additionally, the Palastinians have been increasingly drawn towards the hardline military response that Hamas has espoused and carried out, especially after the failure of the Oslo accord. As a result, Hamas won the 2006 Palastinian Authority legislative authority elections with a large majority (Schanzer and Pipes, 2008). Hamas contends that Israel should give up all the Palestinian territory that it occupied in 1967 including East Jerusalem, West Bank and the Gaza strip. Also, it wants that Palestinian refugees who were driven out of what is now Israel, should be allowed to return and resettle in their original homes. However, in 2007, Israel again entered and occupied large portions of Ghaza Strip, promting the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1860 that asked for immediate withdrawal of Isreal from the occupied territory (BBC News, 2009). Australia has supported the UN resolution 1860 for Israeli departure from Gaza Strip and restoration of peace. It contends that Israel should declare a ceasefire and this should also be honored by Hamas. Australia also thinks that both Israel and Palestine have to agree to a sustainable ceasefire and also agree to coexist within their individual geographic boundaries. Australia, till now has been giving its support to the peace process that was initiated by the UN security council as well as the talks in Egypt that involved France and Egypt as mediators (Schanzer and Pipes, 2008). Costs and Benefits It is essential to involve the extremists and hardliners in the peace processes, as their absence not only indicates that the peace initiative is doubted by a section of the people involved in teh conflic, but it also indicates that the extremists groups may sabotage the peace process with their activities. For example, the Hamas has resorted to distruption of the Oslo peace talks by perpetrating intermittenrt violence and causing disruption of the process. There is precedent that extremists groups in other conflict ravaged regions like Ireland and South Africa, where the extremists groups have been involved in the mainstream peace talks and have ultimately resulted in a more sustainable and acceptable resolution of the issues (Deflem, 2004). One of the disadvantages of engaging the terrorist groups into the peace talks is that the terrorist groups get legitamicy and this can be construed to mean that their past activities have been condoned. This may be observed as unethical as the organizations are linked with terror activities in their own region or even worldwide (Alesina and Perotti, 2004). This is the reason why some scholars have suggested ignoring the terrorits groups completely and avoiding to deal with groups that deal with violence (Frey, 1988). It is therefore essential to weigh the costs and benefits of engaging with Hamas by the Australian government – both in terms of the economic, international relations or ethical issues. Benefits of Engagement with Hamas On the political front, engaging with Hamas makes sense for the Auatralian government. For decades, the US, EU, Russia and the UN have been trying to get the two sides to resolve their issues in an amicable manner (Enders and Sandler, 2006). However, not only violence from both sides undermined the peace initiatives, they also show highlighted the fact that there is perhaps no scope for peace in the current future of the region. Australia has not been as yet directly involved in the peace process, and the time is ripe that it can make its presence felt internationally by engaging with Hamas. Australia has the senstivity and objectivity needed and it does not invoke the intense negative sentiments that the Arab have towards most of the Westen countries (Reich, 2004). This places Australia in a unique position to negotiate in an amicable and neutral manner withe Hamas and help in developing a realistic roaodmap for the peace process in the region. Australia is also vying for a permanent seat in the UN security council and it is expected that a more active engagement with security issues in the International arena would further its claim in the UN (Speers, 2010). Inspite of the fact that Australia continues to support Israel’s claim to exist as a country in the Middle East, Australia believes that a peaceful plan of coexistence with Palestine is possible (Firth, 2005). Australia is therefore in a position to portray its support for the peaceful resolution of the issue and hence garner support from the Arab community and further its claimn to the UN security council. The peace process in the Middle East is crucial for the stability of the region and also for international security. It has been seen that terrrorism perpetrated in different parts of the world is inadvertantly linked with the conflict in the Middle East and the alleged atrocities of Israel against the Palestinians (Heymann, 2002). By helping in the Israel-Palestine peace process, Australia gets a chance to contribute to the world security on a larger scale. On the ethical front, Australia has always condemned violence and terrorism. In the case of Israel-Palestine conflict, Australia is only too aware of the fact that violence and terrorism are being undertaken by both the sides in a viscious circle. Australia has officially made its opipnion felt to the Israel diplomats about the perpetration of violence from both the sides. Australia opines that whatever the original cause or the intemediary triggers are for the conflict, violence is not the path of resolution. Additionally, there is concrete evidence on the part of Hamas not engaging in any terrorist related acivities since the last five years (Cronin, 2009). In fact, Hamas has shown its stance towards Islamic extrimism by evicting the Al Quida from its grounds and sending the signal across the world that Hamas is not going to promote or condone terrorism in the name of Islam (). Further, a recent report by the BBC showcased the fact that Hamas is eventually moving towards an acceptance of a two nation theory – that israel and Palestine can coexist as peaceful neighbors. This premise is based on the findings that in madrassas and mosques across the Hamas controlled Gaza Strip the Imams are narrating tails about how jews and muslims once co-existed (BBC, 2009). The fact that Hamas is not engaging in voluntary violence and that it has shifted its hardline stance toward Israel, makes it an appropriate party to be reckoned with in the peace talks. Drawbacks of Engaging with Hamas Some of the drawbacks of engaging with Hamas may include alienating the US and Israel that consider the Hamas a terrorist organization and inadvertantly giving the exterimist groups a moral boost by condoning the involvement of Hamas into past violence related activities. The concerns of Israel and the US can however be addressed appropriately by Australia by displaying a continuous support for Israel’s right to exist. There is already ample precedent of Australia voting against UN resolutions that it felt were unjust for Israel. For example, in 2010, Australia and just 5 other nations in the UN voted for Israel’s right to exist (Downer, 2005). Additionally, Australia has already made it clear to Hamas and to the Middle East that it wants the peace process to move towards a resolution that culminates into an acceptance of two nations coexisting together. Other plausible drawback of engaging with Hamas could be that it may send out the wrong signals to the fundamentalists and extremists governments and groups in the Middle East (Lutz and Lutz, 2008). Hamas is still largely regarded as completely committed to the objective of wiping Israel out of existence (Howard, Sawyer, and Bajema, 2008), and any support for Hamas from Australia can be misconstrued as a step against Israel. On the home front there are mixed reactions about the government’s intention to work with Hamas. People in Australia largely view Hamas as a violent group and espouse support for Israel. Any move by the government that places them as an ally with Hamas in the eyes of the local public could be detrimental for internal politics. However, by maintaining a clear stance and support for Israel and urging for stability of the region, Australian government can make a case for its engagement with Hamas for a democratic and peaceful resolution of the proces (Wilkinson, 2000) How can Australia engage with Hamas There are several routes that Australia can take in oder to engage with Hamas. Traditionally, International issues are taken up in the United Nations, and as an active member of the UN, Australia can play a more promiment role in furthering the resolution process. Hamas enjoys widespread support in Palestine and is seen as a liberator and caretaker of the people of the region. Though Hamas has not been initially involved in the peace talks between Israel and Palestinian authority, it has been one of the most powerful players in the affairs of the region. Hamas is a politicallt recognized organization in the Palestine Authority as it came to power after the elections of 2006. As mentioned earlier, it enjoys the support of the locals as well as has influence over other mainstream terrotist organizations (). Australia’s concerns over Hamas being a terrorist organization have been largely appeased by the lack of Hamas involvement in direct violence against Israel in the past several years. Australia contends that Hamas should recognize Israel’s right to existence, and this too seems to be slowly accepted by Hamas as the ultimate solution. In the given political situation, it is possible for Auatralia to play a more active role involving Hamas, which is now considered as the most poweful of the Palestinian parties. Australia is already involved along with the US, UK and EU in providing financial aid to rebuild Gaza after the recent israeli foray into the terrotery (Smith, 2009). Australia can enter into unilateral talks with Hamas or it may take help with another neutral country like Norway to enter into talks with Hamas. There have been several cases where third party including cooperations of neutral nations has led to a peaceful peace process (Ross and Gurr, 1989). The unilateral talks need to move from the point where Hamas, implicitly or explicitly recognizes Israel and also shuns violence. Israel opposes Hamas’ involvement in any peace talks and hence it is expected that there can be no one on one negotiations between Israel and Hamans. However, it is here that Australia can play a unique role by helping the build communication between the two sides. Peaceful withdrawl of Israel occupied terrortories in return to the acceptance of two nation theory, can then be dicussed taking Israel into confidence. Reference Alesina, A. and Perotti, R. (2004). The European Union: A Politically Incorrect View. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(4), pp. 27-48 BBC News. (2009).Who Are Hamas? BBC News Online [Online] 4 Januauary. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1654510.stm [Accessed 5 April 2011]. Cronin, A, K. (2009). How Terrorism Ends: Understanding the Decline and Demise of Terrorist Campaigns. NJ: Princeton University Press Deflem, M. (2004). Social control and the policing of terrorism: foundations for a sociology of counterterrorism. The American Sociologist, 35(2), pp.75-92 Downer, A (2005). Speech of Foreign Minister of Australia to the Annual General Meeting of the United Israel Appeal of New South Wales Sydney, 30 November 2005. Available at: http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/speeches/2005/051130_united_israel_appeal.html [Accessed 5 April 2011]. Firth, S. (2005). Australia in International Politics: An Introduction to Australian Foreign Policy. London: Allen & Unwin Academic Frey, B.S. (1988). Fighting Political Terrorism by Refusing Recognition. Journal of Public Policy, 7, pp.179-188 Enders, W. and Sandler, T. (2006). The Political Economy of Terrorism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Frey, B. S. (2004). Dealing with terrorism: stick or carrot? NY: Edward Elgar Publishing Heymann, P. B. (2002). Dealing with Terrorism, International Security, 26 (3), pp. 24-38 Howard, R., Sawyer, R. and Bajema, N. (2008). Terrorism and Counterterrorism: Understanding the New Security Environment, Readings and Interpretations. NY: McGraw-Hill. Lutz, J. M. and Lutz, B. J. (2008). Global Terrorism. London: Routledge  Reich, C. (2004). Australia and Israel: An Ambiguous Relationship, Melbourne: Melbourne University Publishing Ross, J. I. and Gurr, T, R. (1989). Why Terrorism Subsides: A Comparative Study of Canada and The United States. Comparative Politics, 21(4), pp. 405-426. Rubenstein, C. and Fleischer, T. (2007). A Distant Affinity: The History of Australian-Israeli Relations. Jewish Political Studies Review, 193, pp. 4 Schanzer J. and Pipes, D. (2008). Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle For Palestine. NY: Palgrave Macmillan Stephen, (2010). Expulsion of Israeli diplomat, UN resolutions on Israel and Palestine. Interview by David Speers. [TV] Sky News. 5 May 2010. Transcript Available at: http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/transcripts/2010/100525_sky_news.html [Accessed 5 April 2011]. Smith, S. (2009). Gaza; Visit to Australia by Netherlands Foreign Minister; Afghanistan; Israel. Press Conference, Perth. [Transcript] Foreign Ministers Office, Australia. Available at: http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/transcripts/2009/090118_pc_perth.html [Accessed 5 April 2011]. Smith, S. (2009). Donations to Gaza, Afghanistan. Interviewed on ABC News [Radio], ABC News Radio, 3 March 2009. Transcript available at: http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/transcripts/2009/090303_afternoons.html [Accessed 5 April 2011]. Wilkinson, P. (2000). Terrorism Versus Democracy: The Liberal State Response. London: Frank Cass Read More