December 23, 2007

About that Cease-fire

It has been widely reported lately that Hamas is seeking a cease-fire. A current Telegraph article, with the headline "Hamas seeks truce with Israel in Gaza" suggests that we shouldn't get carried away, but seems to think the "overtures" were real:

Hamas officials have denied any overtures, following media reports in which a senior advisor to Hamas's Gaza leader, Ismail Haniya, said a truce was possible . . .

But the suggestion of a cease-fire can be interpreted as Hamas's acknowledgement of the severe strain its Gaza government has fallen under since its violent wresting of control of the territory six months ago.

In this sort of situation it is always interesting to see what Hamas has to say out of the side of its mouth that faces Iran:

IRIB: "Hamas rejects any cease-fire with Israel"

Speaker of the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, Sami abu Zahri rejected reports that the movement is drafting terms for temporary ceasae-fire with the Zionist regime.

"The Zionist regime is continuing its crimes, so resistance will be our option," Zahri added.

"Ball is still in the Zionists' court. If they bring an end to their brutal crimes, we will discuss about the issue," he said.

There is a hint of a possible cease-fire there also, but the message can certainly be given a quite different stress.

Arab Herald tries to make it sound balanced:

Israel and Hamas refuse to talk peace:

Hamas also says it will not hold any cease-fire talks unless Israel stops its military operations, which have killed at least 20 militants over the past week.

Israel refuses to stop because armed Hamas groups continue to fire rockets and mortars into Israeli territory.

But, of course, the "military operations" are designed to stop the rockets. So why doesn't Hamas just stop the rocket fire? Because the current military operations are merely a temporary problem. Israel mostly tolerates the rockets as a permanent fixture of its relationship with the Palestinians.

Crossposted on Judeopundit

Tags: Iran, Israel, Hamas, Gaza, Palestinians
Posted by Judeopundit at December 23, 2007 2:55 PM | TrackBack
Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us
  • digg
  • Furl
  • Spurl
  • YahooMyWeb
  • co.mments
  • Ma.gnolia
  • De.lirio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlinkList
  • NewsVine
  • scuttle
  • Fark
  • Shadows
Add this blog to my Technorati Favorites!
Soccer Dad's Most Recent Entries
Out of sitemeter
Hamas's novelty wears off
Council speak 09/14/08
Still not barking
The Media and The Hubris of Hope?
Osama didn't bark. why not?
Palin's coming out party
I go flying so high
A piece of peace
Seven year ago plus
Comments

More importantly, the very concept of a "cease fire" has a very particular meaning for radical Islamists such as Hamas. If anything, they want a "hudna." To the civilized west, a "cease-fire" is the prelude to more substantial negotiations leading to a lasting peace. To Islamists, a "hudna" is a truce they seek when they perceive themselves to be weak, in order to relieve themselves of the solemn religious obligation to wage jihad, only until such time as their strength is again adequate to their bloodthirsty designs. The only acceptable terms that can be offered Hamas are the terms that General U.S. Grant offered General Simon B. Buckner at Fort Donelson, the same terms that were offered by President Harry S Truman to the Germans and Japanese: unconditional surrender. Anything less than that will merely prolong the agony of terroristic warfare.

Posted by: Punditarian at December 24, 2007 4:48 PM