0
   

Fatah: Hamas Wins Palestinian Elections

 
 
oralloy
 
Reply Thu 26 Jan, 2006 03:17 am
Officials in the ruling Fatah Party said Thursday that Hamas captured a majority of seats in Palestinian legislative elections, shortly after the militant group claimed victory.

The Fatah officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said they expected Hamas to win about 70 seats, which would give the Islamists a majority in the 132-seat parliament. They spoke on condition of anonymity because counting in some districts was continuing.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/palestinians_election_25&printer=1


EDIT: Updated Link
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,017 • Replies: 25
No top replies

 
Moishe3rd
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jan, 2006 07:55 pm
Re: Fatah: Hamas Wins Palestinian Elections
oralloy wrote:
Officials in the ruling Fatah Party said Thursday that Hamas captured a majority of seats in Palestinian legislative elections, shortly after the militant group claimed victory.

The Fatah officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said they expected Hamas to win about 70 seats, which would give the Islamists a majority in the 132-seat parliament. They spoke on condition of anonymity because counting in some districts was continuing.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/palestinians_election_25&printer=1


EDIT: Updated Link


Praise Allah! Very Happy
This is Good. Very good. I am most happy that the Arabs called Palestinians were able to democratically elect the people that they believe in...
Wonderful!
All countries should have such an opportunity.
I sincerely hope they are able to develop a civilized; productive country where all of its citizens can live with hope and peace.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Thu 26 Jan, 2006 07:57 pm
In other news, thirty of the newly elected Hamas officials blew themselves up to celebrate their good fortune.
0 Replies
 
Ceili
 
  2  
Reply Thu 26 Jan, 2006 09:03 pm
Oy Vey!

I hope they will make an attempt at diplomacy and not further thier blood lust.
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jan, 2006 09:08 pm
Mark
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jan, 2006 09:10 pm
When the electorate takes it into its head to throw the rascels out, it almost always ends up with another pack of rascels.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 08:33 am
What does this election do to the peace process? Is there a chance that it will survive or is it dead.
Will as some hope Hamas, now being in the seat of power modify it's stand. Or will it as they say a leopard never changes it's spots continue to be a terrorist organization with all that that entails? Continuing it's war of terror.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 09:02 am
 


JERUSALEM Though the leaders of the military wing of Hamas, responsible for suicide bombings and other attacks against Israelis, stay underground and out of sight, the group's local political figures will be prominent in the new Palestinian Parliament, while its overall leadership is in Syria. Prominent figures among Hamas include: 
Khaled Mashaal, recognized as the leader of Hamas, based in Damascus. Mashaal makes the decisions about Hamas policy in consultation with West Bank and Gaza leaders and others in Damascus. Mashaal maintains an uncompromising line against Israel. He survived an Israeli assassination attempt in Jordan in 1997. 
Mahmoud Zahar, the local political leader of Hamas, is one of the founders of the group. He was the personal physician for Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the spiritual force behind Hamas, who was killed in an Israeli airstrike in Gaza in 2004. Zahar backs a stern, harsh line policy toward Israel, promoting the Hamas ideology that rejects the existence of a Jewish state in an Islamic Middle East. 
Ismail Haniyeh, the top candidate on the Hamas list, is known as a relative moderate in the militant group. Haniyeh is one of the most public of the Hamas figures, remaining available to comment on events when most of the other leaders drop out of sight for fear of Israeli attacks. 
Hassan Yousef, the top Hamas figure in the West Bank, was released from an Israeli prison in 2004. He is the most moderate of the Hamas leaders, refusing to rule out talks with Israel under strict conditions. 
Zahar, Haniyeh and Yousef were elected to the new Parliament. 
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 09:28 am
The rise of Hamas: A blessing in disguise?


Uri Dromi International Herald Tribune

FRIDAY, JANUARY 27, 2006



JERUSALEM Presumably the Palestinian elections are good news to those who believe that the only way to bring peace to the Middle East is by democratizing it. The United States, waving the flag of the "Broader Middle East," has been arduously trying to promote democracy in the region.  
In its haste to see Arabs going to the ballots, however, the Bush administration has been turning a blind eye to the most obvious flaw in these elections, namely the participation of Hamas, an organization that has vowed to destroy Israel by terror.  
So now the elections are over, and Hamas has emerged with a stunning victory. What will America do next? Insist that Hamas stays out of future Palestinian governments unless it revokes its charter and disarms? Hamas spokesmen have already dismissed that possibility. In that case, will the United States sever relations with the Palestinian Authority, as the U.S. Senate has warned? That would be perceived by the Palestinians - and, indeed, by many others in the Middle East - as another example of how America is coercing the Arabs to succumb to its will. First America allows Hamas to run for elections, and when it wins, America says "Oops, sorry, I didn't mean you." Sounds pretty much like the business with Iraq: First you act, then you think. 
Israel, in the meantime, has carefully prepared itself for any contingency. The acting prime minister, Ehud Olmert, who will probably lead Israel after the next elections, said in his first public speech on Tuesday that Israel prefers a negotiated settlement, but it has more cards up its sleeve - referring, probably, to more unilateral actions.  
Olmert stated, however, that the only viable avenue for negotiations was the stalled road map, and insisted that the prerequisites for jump-starting the peace process according to the road map - disarming all terror groups, Hamas included, and enforcing one law in the Palestinian Authority - be fully implemented. With Hamas vindicated by the elections as the authentic representative of at least half of the Palestinians, that might turn out to be impossible.  
A mess, then? Maybe, but the participation of Hamas in the elections might prove to be a blessing in disguise. It will force the Palestinians to make a serious choice once and for all: Either they conform with democratic norms, by which societies engage peacefully in the political game, both internally and externally, or they prefer the old, Lebanese type of politics, composed of parties that run for Parliament but also deal with terror and keep armed militias on the side, just in case.  
In the first case, the Palestinians will gain the sympathy and the assistance of all, mainly of Israel. But if they choose the second option, the world may wash its hands of them and declare them a failed state. 
Come to think of it, I am glad that Hamas won the elections. Things might now become much clearer. There will be no whitewashing, no Arafat-style double-talk, or endless Abbas impotence. It's better to deal with a pure enemy: Fight him ruthlessly while he is your enemy, and sit down and talk to him when he is genuinely willing to cut a deal. History has seen such things happen. 
(Uri Dromi is the director of international outreach at the Israel Democracy Institute, Jerusalem.) 
0 Replies
 
flyboy804
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 09:59 am
My greatest source of optimism is remembering my fears in the early 60's. I ruefully thought that Israel would not last 20 years surrounded and vastly outnumbered by so many who did not want Israel to exist. Fortunately I was wrong.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 10:26 am
I think this is likely a positive, though maybe not for the reason spelled out in the articles above.

Fatah has erupted in front of Mahmoud Abbas' house. Their leadership, besides Abbas, says they will now let Hamas sink or swim. This is a brilliant idea. The shine will dull from Hamas, and they will lose the power they have hung on to all this time.

They have been so powerful because int he eyes of the average Palestinian, they have helped with certain charities that were easy for Hamas to fund.

While choosing their charities, Hamas has also been able to bitterly criticise the ruling parties' inability to take care of the really important issues--jobs, infrastructure.... Now, Hamas will be held responsible for all of it. They have grossly miscalculated. They thought they just recieved power. They'll soon look on the day they won the election, as they day their power began to erode.

Additionally, now we aren't dealing with a terrorist organization. We're dealing with a state. If they had any sense, they wouldn't have revealed themselves as an entity that can be punished like a state. They should have kept hiding under their terrorist camouflage.

They're screwed.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 10:38 am
I have no sympathy with the Israeli position. If they had not reneged on Madrid Oslo Taba talks, i.e negotiated in good faith with Arafat and Fatah, they wouldn't have undermined them and ended up with Hamas.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 11:31 am
Reconsider!!!













<haven't tried that angle, yet>
0 Replies
 
Moishe3rd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 12:03 pm
au1929 wrote:
The rise of Hamas: A blessing in disguise?


Uri Dromi International Herald Tribune

FRIDAY, JANUARY 27, 2006



JERUSALEM Presumably the Palestinian elections are good news to those who believe that the only way to bring peace to the Middle East is by democratizing it. The United States, waving the flag of the "Broader Middle East," has been arduously trying to promote democracy in the region.  
In its haste to see Arabs going to the ballots, however, the Bush administration has been turning a blind eye to the most obvious flaw in these elections, namely the participation of Hamas, an organization that has vowed to destroy Israel by terror.  
So now the elections are over, and Hamas has emerged with a stunning victory. What will America do next? Insist that Hamas stays out of future Palestinian governments unless it revokes its charter and disarms? Hamas spokesmen have already dismissed that possibility. In that case, will the United States sever relations with the Palestinian Authority, as the U.S. Senate has warned? That would be perceived by the Palestinians - and, indeed, by many others in the Middle East - as another example of how America is coercing the Arabs to succumb to its will. First America allows Hamas to run for elections, and when it wins, America says "Oops, sorry, I didn't mean you." Sounds pretty much like the business with Iraq: First you act, then you think. 
Israel, in the meantime, has carefully prepared itself for any contingency. The acting prime minister, Ehud Olmert, who will probably lead Israel after the next elections, said in his first public speech on Tuesday that Israel prefers a negotiated settlement, but it has more cards up its sleeve - referring, probably, to more unilateral actions.  
Olmert stated, however, that the only viable avenue for negotiations was the stalled road map, and insisted that the prerequisites for jump-starting the peace process according to the road map - disarming all terror groups, Hamas included, and enforcing one law in the Palestinian Authority - be fully implemented. With Hamas vindicated by the elections as the authentic representative of at least half of the Palestinians, that might turn out to be impossible.  
A mess, then? Maybe, but the participation of Hamas in the elections might prove to be a blessing in disguise. It will force the Palestinians to make a serious choice once and for all: Either they conform with democratic norms, by which societies engage peacefully in the political game, both internally and externally, or they prefer the old, Lebanese type of politics, composed of parties that run for Parliament but also deal with terror and keep armed militias on the side, just in case.  
In the first case, the Palestinians will gain the sympathy and the assistance of all, mainly of Israel. But if they choose the second option, the world may wash its hands of them and declare them a failed state. 
Come to think of it, I am glad that Hamas won the elections. Things might now become much clearer. There will be no whitewashing, no Arafat-style double-talk, or endless Abbas impotence. It's better to deal with a pure enemy: Fight him ruthlessly while he is your enemy, and sit down and talk to him when he is genuinely willing to cut a deal. History has seen such things happen. 
(Uri Dromi is the director of international outreach at the Israel Democracy Institute, Jerusalem.) 

This is exactly correct.
There never was any "peace process" with Arafat the Rotting or Machmood Abooboo Alsoknownas Abooboo Machmoood.
Clarity is wonderful.
"Civil" clan/faction warfare will reign in Gazastan until a strong Hamas leader eliminates the opposition.
The survivors will be incorporated into Hamas.
Israel will deal with the last man standing, no matter who it is.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 01:17 pm
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
>I have no sympathy with the Israeli position. If they had not reneged on Madrid Oslo Taba talks, i.e negotiated in good faith with Arafat and Fatah, they wouldn't have undermined them and ended up with Hamas.


I don't think Israel is in a bad position where they would need sympathy.

However, I don't think it is fair to say Israel didn't negotiate in good faith.

And I don't see how they could renege on anything, since an agreement was never reached for them to renege on.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 01:35 pm
oralloy wrote:
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
>I have no sympathy with the Israeli position. If they had not reneged on Madrid Oslo Taba talks, i.e negotiated in good faith with Arafat and Fatah, they wouldn't have undermined them and ended up with Hamas.


I don't think Israel is in a bad position where they would need sympathy.

However, I don't think it is fair to say Israel didn't negotiate in good faith.

And I don't see how they could renege on anything, since an agreement was never reached for them to renege on.


From Robert Fisk's book The Great War for Civilisation p516

...indeed a detailed investigation in 2000 of Israeli withdrawals under the Articles of Agreement would prove that not a single one of thes accords had been honoured by the Israelis since the 1991 conference. (1)

Footnote (1)

The Oslo II (Taba) agreement, concluded ty Rabin in September 1995 - two months before he was assassinated - promised three Israeli withdrawals: from Zones A, B and C. These were to be completed by October 1997. Final status agreements covering Jerusalem, refugees, water and settlements were to have been completed by October 1999, by which time the occupation was supposed to have ended. In january 1997, however, a handful of Jewish settlers were granted 20 per cent of Hebron, despite Israel's obligation under Oslo to leave all West Bank towns. By October 1998, a year late, Israel had not carried out the Taba accords. Israeli Prime MInister Benjamin Netanyahu negotiated a new agreement at Wy River, dividing the second redeployment promised at Taba into two phases - but he only honoured the first of them. Netanyahu had promised to reduce the percentage of West Bank land under exclusively Israeli occupation from 72 per cent to 59 per cent, transferring 41 percent of the West Bank to Zones A and B. But at Sharm el Sheikh in 1999, Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak reneged on the agreement Netanyahu made at Wye River, fragmenting Netanyahu's two phases into three, the first of which would transfer 7 percent from Zone C to Zone B. All implementation of the agreement stopped there.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 02:40 pm
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
>The Oslo II (Taba) agreement,


Ah. You meant the Oslo agreement. I thought you were talking about a final status agreement.

It is true that Likud wasn't acting in good faith there.

However, Israel's Labor governments were acting in good faith, particularly the Barak government.

It wouldn't be fair to say that Barak wasn't acting in good faith.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 03:34 pm
When I would ask have the Palestinians ever acted in good faith? I suppose that Arafat was a trustworthy member of society?
0 Replies
 
Galilite
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jan, 2006 07:12 pm
Lash wrote:
I think this is likely a positive, though maybe not for the reason spelled out in the articles above.
...

While choosing their charities, Hamas has also been able to bitterly criticise the ruling parties' inability to take care of the really important issues--jobs, infrastructure.... Now, Hamas will be held responsible for all of it. They have grossly miscalculated. They thought they just recieved power. They'll soon look on the day they won the election, as they day their power began to erode.

Additionally, now we aren't dealing with a terrorist organization. We're dealing with a state. If they had any sense, they wouldn't have revealed themselves as an entity that can be punished like a state. They should have kept hiding under their terrorist camouflage.

They're screwed.
Very, very likely so.

Looks like it will happen rather quickly:
[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/international/middleeast/27cnd-mideast.html?_r=1&oref=login]NY Times[/url] wrote:
JERUSALEM, Jan. 27 — The overwhelming victory of Hamas in Wednesday's Palestinian legislative elections has made only more pressing the financial crisis of the Palestinian Authority, which has a deficit of $69 million for January, with little prospect for finding the money from Western countries shaken by the rise of an armed terrorist group to power, Palestinian officials and Western diplomats said today.

Of the many questions that the Hamas victory presents, the need for money to pay basic bills and salaries to Palestinians is the most pressing. It will be an urgent question when the members of the quartet — the United States, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations — meet Monday in London to discuss the Palestinian vote.

In Davos, Switzerland, the quartet's envoy to the Middle East, James D. Wolfensohn, said today: "The crunch time is next week. The Palestinians are basically bankrupt." Mr. Wolfensohn said there was not enough money to pay the salaries of 135,000 Palestinian civil servants, including some 58,000 members of the security forces. "If you do not have the money to pay 135,000 Palestinians," he said, "you're going to have chaos."

Because Hamas has not yet formed a government, Mr. Abbas has asked for American help to try to convince the Persian Gulf countries to provide more aid now, and to ensure that Israel delivers the $40 million to $50 million owed to the Palestinian Authority from tax and customs receipts, which Israel collects on behalf of the Palestinians.

Israel has made it clear that it will not deal with a Palestinian Authority run by Hamas, with acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's government issuing a statement on Thursday saying that Israel will not negotiate with a Palestinian government including any members "of an armed terrorist organization that calls for the destruction of the state of Israel."
...
It has also called into serious doubt the likelihood that the United States and the European Union will continue to aid a Hamas-led or -dominated Palestinian Authority. Certainly, direct payments would be banned by American law, and many European countries have said they will not continue to aid the Palestinian Authority until Hamas agrees to recognize Israel and disavow violence — which Hamas has said it will never do.


I say, in a matter of a few days Hamas will suddenly recognize Israel. Or, it could get to this:
[url=http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-01-27T120818Z_01_L27747876_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-GUNBATTLE.xml]Reuters[/url] wrote:
GAZA (Reuters) - Hamas and Fatah gunmen exchanged fire in the Gaza Strip on Friday, the first such gun battle since the Islamic militant group crushed the long-dominant Palestinian faction in a parliamentary election, witnesses said.

Three people were wounded in the clash near the city of Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip, because the witnesses said Hamas gunmen were angered with a sermon given by a Fatah-appointed preacher at Friday prayers.

After the results of Wednesday's vote were announced, Hamas called for immediate talks among factions to discuss formation of a new government. But leaders of Abbas's long-dominant Fatah party said they wanted no part in such a coalition.

Hamas's triumph in winning 76 seats in the 132-member Palestinian parliament against 43 for Fatah was widely seen as a political earthquake in the Middle East, triggered in part by voter disenchantment with corruption.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Jan, 2006 08:20 am
At least one bit of good is resulting from the Hamas victory. The Palestinians are shooting at each other rather than the Israelis. May they have success in that activity. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Fatah: Hamas Wins Palestinian Elections
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 02/26/2021 at 10:44:38