Mideast peace process after Yassin's killing<\/p>\n
Muhamad Ali, Lecturer, State Islamic University (UIN),
\nSharif Hidayatullah, Jakarta<\/p>\n
The recent assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin -- the founder
\nand spiritual leader of Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement,
\nHarakat al-Muqawwama al-Islamiyya) -- by Israelis in Gaza,
\ncertainly deepens the divide and worsens tension among those
\ninvolved in the Middle East peace effort. Among the Palestinian
\nand Arab world, revenge has been vowed and anti-Israeli sentiment
\nhas become the common language in offices and on the streets.<\/p>\n
For Ariel Sharon and his supporters, the murder was a blow to,
\nwhat they perceive as, antiterrorism efforts, comparable to the
\nAmerican pursuit of al-Qaeda. Israel's objective was to root out
\nthe radical elements. For Palestinians and all those who seek
\npeace in the Middle East, by this, Israelis are the peace
\nbreakers.<\/p>\n
World leaders in the European Union and the Arab and Muslim
\nworld were shocked by the news and condemned this brutal and
\nillegal move. All agree that the assassination was against
\ninternational law. Even U.S. officials, under the pressure of
\nsuch widespread condemnation, criticized Israel, stating that the
\nassassination was \"deeply troubling\". The U.S said that the
\naction would do little for progress toward peace in the region.<\/p>\n
The killing had particular impact for U.S. officials as they
\nhad welcomed Israel's plans for \"disengagement\" from Gaza and
\nparts of the West Bank. U.S. officials said that the killing was
\na mistake that would make Arab cooperation in the withdrawal more
\ndifficult, particularly regarding Jordan and Egypt.<\/p>\n
Since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, the peace
\nprocess in the Middle East has undergone ups and downs. Talks,
\ncease-fires, and attacks are endless phenomena. Little progress
\nhas been made. One of the major obstacles for making progress has
\nbeen rejections from both parties, the Israelis and the
\nPalestinians. Likud Party has shown the most radical attitude
\namong the Israelis and tends to avoid compromise.<\/p>\n
Hamas, on the other hand, promoted the rejection of the very
\nexistence of the State of Israel and tended to avoid the need to
\nhold international conversations. In 1988, Hamas asserted that
\n\"the Muslim Palestinian people reject the surrender solution and
\ninternational conferences, for these will not restore our
\npeople's rights in their homeland... Liberation will not be
\ncompleted without sacrifice, blood, and jihad.\"<\/p>\n
For Hamas, Palestine is a homeland that should not be shared
\nwith the Israeli Jews. Hamas views the Israelis and their main
\nsupporters and allies as \"enemies\". Yet, over the course of time,
\nHamas has not become a monolithic movement and its ideology is
\nnot entirely static. Two wings may be discerned: The religious
\nand the military, although both are connected in many respects.
\nSheikh Yassin has been well known for his spiritual and religious
\nteachings, rather than for his military leadership and
\ninvolvement.<\/p>\n
Yassin's \"anti-colonial\" ideology was born out of the Israeli
\noccupation. His family was among those who became refugees in
\n1948, and he grew up in the occupied territory. Rejectionist
\nideology resulted from alienation from his land and property. \"If
\nthere was a choice between death and the loss of one's homeland,
\none would choose death,\" said Sheikh Bitawi, another leader of
\nHamas.<\/p>\n
At the same time, the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood --
\nfounded in 1928 -- greatly influenced the Islamic nature of
\nHamas, but the occupation was the primary background of its rise
\nin 1988, and its development. The uprising by stones intifada was
\namong the main products of Hamas and has appealed to many
\nPalestinians and the international world. It has become an icon
\nof resistance against colonialism.<\/p>\n
Given the characteristics of Hamas, any peace talks would not
\nbring about progress without the involvement of parties in
\nPalestine, including Hamas. It would be a huge mistake to
\nundermine the role of Hamas in peace talks, even though its
\nleaders tend to reject such conversations.<\/p>\n
It is also a grave mistake to aim to crush Hamas. Hamas -- as
\nan icon of resistance -- has been omnipresent in Palestine and in
\nthe Arab and Muslim world, despite disagreements in ideology and
\nstrategy.<\/p>\n
For a peace talk to make a difference, the task would not be
\nmerely to moderate radical Palestinian attitudes, but also to
\nmoderate the radical, militant elements of the Israeli government
\nand Jewish people, as rejectionism is not exclusively observed in
\nPalestinians. Therefore, U.S. and international pressure should
\nbe directed toward both Palestinians and Israelis -- to restrain
\nfrom destructive moves and to compromise their total rejection of
\nothers.<\/p>\n
The role of Sheikh Yassin was so crucial that his absence will
\nhave a great impact on the future of Hamas. Many believe that
\nthere is no leader comparable to Yassin. However, younger
\ngenerations have become members or supporters of Hamas and it
\nseems likely that this generation will take over the leadership.<\/p>\n
As a result of Israeli militant attitudes, the radicalization
\nof the Palestinian youth will be the main phenomenon in the
\nfuture. More and more attacks against Israelis are likely. And
\nthe Israeli soldiers will be required to be both defensive and
\noffensive. Conflicts will be more severe and the number of
\nvictims will increase.<\/p>\n
However, despite the assassination, all parties should remain
\noptimistic about the future. There are some strategies that could
\nprovide reason for hope. First, the participation of all parties
\nin the Middle East peace process is vital. No party should go its
\nown way.<\/p>\n
Peace in the Middle East will not be realized unless all
\nparties are treated justly. The only hope for the future is the
\ncoexistence of the two peoples based on equality and self-
\ndetermination.<\/p>\n
Second, international intervention through detailed peace
\nstrategies is desperately needed to prevent the increasing
\nepisodes of violence, and to move toward reconciliation. The
\nUnited Nations should impress upon the Israelis that the killing
\nwas destructive and counterproductive to the peace process. The
\nU.S. and international community should be more direct in
\ncondemning the Israeli government whenever injustice occurs, not
\njust in acts carried out by Palestinian suicide bombers.<\/p>\n
Third, a military strategy should not be an option at all.
\nKillings, attacks, terror, and other kinds of violence committed
\nby either side should come to an end. Dialog, compromise, and
\nreconciliation are the keys for the Middle East to make progress
\ntoward long-term coexistence and peace.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/mideast-peace-process-after-yassins-killing-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}