National Reconciliation, the Only Solution

After many years of differences between Hamas and Fatah over the establishment of a government of reconciliation and reaching a political solution to end the domestic crisis, they have finally reached an agreement. Following the previous agreements reached in Doha, Mecca and Cairo that were never implemented, how were the grounds prepared for the implementation of an agreement this time?

The 2006 election was the basis of differences between Hamas and Fatah. In that election, Hamas gained 72 seats and Fatah gained 47 seats. It was very surprising for Fatah to be defeated by Hamas. This issue disrupted the relations between these two groups. At that time, while Abu Mazen had appointed Ismail Haniyeh to form a cabinet, he ignored this issue and introduced another person as prime minister. This person never went to parliament to gain a vote of confidence. Even the issue of the coup in Gaza was proposed to uproot Hamas. In the end, the Gaza Strip was controlled by Hamas and the West Bank was controlled by Fatah. The approach of these two groups is different from each other. Hamas seeks resistance but Fatah’s approach is political. These differences never allowed them to reach reconciliation. But, at the present time, they both have the need to make efforts in this regard. Hamas, which had bet on the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, realized its miscalculations with the elimination of this group in Egypt and was seriously surrounded in Gaza. Fatah has invested in making peace with the Zionist regime but, 21 years after the signing of the Oslo agreement, has not yet been able to achieve this objective. Therefore, both sides were faced with problems and were under pressure from the people to reach national reconciliation. Both sides felt that they would be able to gain achievements through this agreement and expand their social base.

After reaching the agreement, Mahmood Abbas reiterated that he would officially recognize Israel but at the same time he accepts the quadri-lateral peace agreement. In addition, he claims that he is also committed to the people’s resistance. The question is how could Fatah create a balance between the different demands of Israel and Hamas?

When Mahmood Abbas talks about resistance, he means unarmed resistance. It is true that the approaches of Hamas and Fatah are different. But a complex agreement has been made which allows such an issue to happen. The government is technocratic; neither from Fatah nor from Hamas. But they both have to reach an agreement over certain people. Therefore, the position of the government is different from that of Hamas. On one hand, Hamas still reiterates its positions based on non-recognition of Israel and not accepting the four-point conditions. Hamas has defined its approach outside of its power. Mahmood Abbas insists on his positions as well. But the power is basically two-folded. Mahmood Abbas, who is the Secretary General of Fatah, will be the head of the executive body and Aziz Dowek from Hamas is the head of the Palestinian legislative council. This would mean the supervision of Hamas over the technocratic government which would create a balance in the structure of the system. In the future, Hamas, Jihad and other resistance groups must enter the Palestinian Liberation Organization, thus, a balance would be created there as well. That is why despite its commitments to its positions, Hamas can be placed in this structure and Mahmood Abbas will also make efforts to maintain stability.

John Kerry has stated that he will support the government of national reconciliation. This is while members of Hamas will be present in this government and, based on an item adopted by the US Congress, Hamas is a terrorist group and financial sanctions have been imposed on it. How would the US support this reconciliation then?

First of all, Hamas holds more than 60% of the parliament’s seats which shows its popular legitimacy. A terrorist group is a group which has no relation with society and acts against it, but Hamas is inside the society. Therefore, this claim has no legal basis and is only made for political purposes. There is no minister from Hamas inside the transition government and that is why the US can easily interact with it. Israel has asked all countries to have no interaction with this government because it is approved by Hamas. But the western countries and the US do not necessarily act upon Israel’s recommendations and have stated that they will have interaction with the technocratic government. This shows that Israel’s tumultuous statements have not been effective and using this issue as an excuse to ignore many issues has not been fruitful. Israel attempts to hide itself behind the government of Hamas and Fatah and continue its settlement policies. This is while the countries of the world have come to know this occupying regime and know that what this regime states is aimed at justifying its aggressive behavior.

What effects will the establishment of the government of national reconciliation have on the peace process?

These talks are based on international conditions, meaning the recognition of Israel, accepting agreements and putting aside violence. Hamas has rejected these pre-conditions but Fatah has accepted them and entered into dialogue. The government will continue these talks based on Fatah’s positions. Therefore, Hamas is not bound to continue talks and that is why Hamas does not take any positions in this regard at the present time, although it does not accept the basis of these talks.

The Zionist regime has stated that the peace talks will advance only if reconciliation with Hamas ends. If this does not happen, then how would these talks proceed?

This is one of the excuses made by Israel. Nevertheless, Mahmood Abbas has accepted the three pre-conditions and entered into negotiation. Therefore, reconciling with Hamas is not related to these talks and Israel makes these statements to justify its aggressive behavior. Reconciliation is made about the territory and this is while Israel changes its nature with its settlements. It is Israel that is responsible for the failure of these talks.

Ismail Haniyeh has also stated that he has willingly delivered the government to the agreed government. Will Hamas ask for its share in the final government?

Based on the agreement that was made, an election will be held six months after the formation of the cabinet. This government is the transitional government which would hold the elections; both presidential and parliamentary. Mahmood Abbas and the Palestinian parliament’s terms ended almost five years ago. Neither of these bodies has been legitimately elected. But under the conditions in Palestine where the enemy does not allow an election to be held, the terms of the parliament and Mahmood Abbas have been extended. Therefore, holding elections would not mean that one side has surrendered, but rather that an agreement has been reached to hold elections after six months and for the people’s votes to be considered. Thus, six months is not a long period of time and Hamas must render the power to the central government. On the other side, the government must attract all of Haniyeh’s cabinet members. In other words, many Hamas forces who worked in the Haniyeh administration must now be attracted by the transitional government and be present next to Fatah which is part of the government.

Wouldn’t the presence of Hamas forces create challenges for the government?

Yes it would create challenges for the government particularly with regard to the police forces. Since Dayton was appointed by the US to establish a coordination headquarters between Israel and the Palestinians, the exchange of information is made between Israel and the forces of Mahmood Abbas. What will happen now that the Hamas forces are among the police forces and attracted by the structure and are not willing to cooperate with Israel? This is an important question to which there is no response, and both sides refrain from answering such challenging questions.