Only a foolhardy observer would predict that peace is about to break out in the Middle East because of the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas — snatched from the jaws of a large-scale Israeli incursion into the Gaza Strip after weeks of intensive, rollercoaster, Egyptian mediation.
Continuing Israeli attacks in Gaza and Palestinian rocket fire across the border into Israel are reminders that this is a conflict that will not be easily ended. And there is clearly room for substantial disagreement over key questions: Will the Cairo deal include the release of Gilad Shalit, the Israeli corporal captured two years ago? Will the Rafah border crossing open at once and who will control it? What if weapons smuggling continues through the maze of tunnels under the border? And what is the link between the situation in Gaza and the West Bank, where the Israelis insist on the right to maintain security?
Still, six months of tahdiya (the Arabic word means “quiet” rather than “ceasefire”) would be a welcome change for ordinary people on both sides. Palestinians have suffered hundreds of dead and injured in recent Israeli raids.
Politically, the agreement boosts the credentials of Hamas, isolated since it took control of Gaza from the Palestinian Authority in a preemptive coup almost a year ago. The Islamists are looking like a partner for the first time.
Pragmatism has won the day for now, though some Israelis will see uncomfortable parallels with the success of Hezbollah in Lebanon, establishing itself as the legitimate armed resistance and the keeper or breaker of ceasefires, according to mutually agreed “rules of the game.”
Haim Ramon, an Israeli deputy prime minister, bemoaned “another victory for radical Islam” and a “chance to represent Gaza as Hamastan state.”
Another key outcome of the tahdiya should be to promote the urgent need for Palestinian national reconciliation, apparently now accepted by Fatah leader and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas changed tack late last month and is backed by an influential Arab coalition of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, which recognize that the Annapolis peace talks with Israel have gotten nowhere slowly.
Only this week Israel announced the construction of yet more housing in East Jerusalem, which it insists is outside the scope of any concessions in the West Bank — even as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was paying yet another fruitless visit.
Abbas has virtually nothing to show for going along with the US-Israeli policy, backed by the Quartet and its envoy, former British prime minister Tony Blair, of “showcasing” the West Bank to prove to Gazans that they are backing the wrong horse in supporting Hamas.
Aides admit privately that he is in a “desperate” position. Now the likelihood must be of a return to the format of the Saudi-backed Mecca agreement of last year, under which Hamas mandated the Palestine Liberation Organization to negotiate with Israel, accepted (however grudgingly) existing peace agreements and respected a ceasefire. The burning issue of recognition of Israel (and the Hamas charter) will again be left sensibly to one side.
Abbas’ demand that Hamas restore the pre-takeover status quo in Gaza will not be easily met. But if the ceasefire holds, Hamas will be in a strong position to contest new presidential and parliamentary elections. Palestinian unity will put the Palestinians on a far more equal footing with the Israelis. It will also help those, especially in Europe, who are advocating an end to the boycott of the Islamists, which is at the heart of Western policy.
So small beginnings in Gaza could yield big dividends more widely — even if experience teaches that it would be foolhardy to hold your breath.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS