The European Union gets criticised for a lot of things but is an MEP right to blame the organisation for the situation in Gaza?
The Cypriot MEP , a leading member of the Green group says the EU should "shoulder the blame" for ignoring Hamas and not getting talks going. He points out that the EU is a member of the quartet and the largest financial donor to the area: is he right that "ostracising" Hamas is the root of the problem?
Jump to more content from this blog
I’m Mark Mardell, the 91Èȱ¬'s North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My previous blog, as the 91Èȱ¬â€™s man in Europe, taught me one thing at least: your comments are key. I read them all, so please have your say.
For the latest updates across 91Èȱ¬ blogs,
visit the Blogs homepage.
|
Nick Robinson: |
 |
|
Douglas Fraser: |
 |
|
Brian Taylor: |
 |
 |
|
Richard Black: |
 |
|
Jonathan Amos: |
 |
You can stay up to date with Mark Mardell's America via these feeds.
Mark Mardell's America Feed(RSS)
Mark Mardell's America Feed(ATOM)
If you aren't sure what RSS is you'll find useful.
91Èȱ¬ © 2014 The 91Èȱ¬ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment
Well first the Palestinians are told to embrace democracy and vote for a new government, and then when they vote for Hamas their will is completely ignored and sanctioned.
Without going as far as to blame Europe for the current Palestinian civil war; _something_ is definitely wrong in Europe's approach of the issue.
I think we should not have broken off talks with a democratically elected government. It's against everything we claim we stand for. Just because we might not agree with who the people of Gaza elected, doesn't mean we should not talk to them and treat them as we would any other elected government.
I don't think the EU is to blame though. Hamas might have been elected, but that doesn't mean they aren't terrorists. But the EU's attitude was definitely wrong.
If we'd refused to even talk to sinn fein we'd still have IRA bombs going off everywhere.
You can't tell someone how you'd like them to behave without talking to them and showing them that your way is better. Turning our back on our own core principle of democracy showed Hamas just how important we considered those principles.
You made some mistakes in your text.
Kyriacos Triantaphyllides is not a MEP of a Green party but of AKEL, which is the Communist (moderate) party of Cyprus. Thus he can not be a leading member of the Green Group.
And mr Triantaphyllides is wrong.
Given the EU's "you can vote for anyone you like as long as it's Fatah" policy, and the disastrous effect it has had on living conditions in Gaza, it's hardly surprising if people lose faith in democracy and take up weapons.
Actually, he is a member of the United European Left group.
Hamas were democratically elected, that does not mean that the EU is bound to deal with them. The responsibility of government determines that Hamas has a duty to manage relations with other countries, including Israel.
A policy comitted to the destruction of a neighbour is hardly the platform to promote the 2 state solution and a deal with Israel. Israeli policy towards the Palestinians has certainly been counterproductive.
In the short term Hamas will probably bring order to Gaza which brings it into sharp relief against the corruption and factionalism of Fatah. It wont be long before Hamas begins to assert its new authority in the islamisation of palestinian society. Iran and Syria must be rubbing their hands with glee
The biggest losers are the palestinian people
Many apologies, you are right he's a member of the European united left/Nordic green group :
There are said to be shortages of all sorts of things in Gaza. But Regretably there is no shortage there of guns, ammunition, & violence. While that continues the only solution is what in social work terms is called "Tough Love". If they want something good (eg foreign assistance), they had better stop doing things that are bad: ie (1) vicious factional fighting, & (2) refusing to make lasting peace with Israel.
When they SINCERELY begin to do these 2 things, they can receive a sensible amount of help (but no more than that). But not until they make a convinvcing pledge to follow the path of peace. It's called "Tough Love", & it works!
Watchet
The basis of negotiation is that you acknowledge the existence of the person or state you are negotiating with. Hamas does not recognise Israel. Would you negotiate with me if I didn't recognise your right to exist? The EU has, for once, acted properly.
The idea that the EU should deal with Hamas because it was democratically elected is absurd. Hamas is a terrorist group that calls for the destruction of Israel. It spouts hatred and violence.
These events are proof of Democracy's ultimate fault, the belief that the majority is always right.
Just because the majority of Palestinians want the destruction of Israel, doesn't make them right and it certainly doesn't give Hamas legitimacy. All legitimacy is lost the moment you promote violence and hate to advance your own cause, no matter how many people agree with you.
Thomas Patricio
Toronto Canada
No, it's not right to blame the EU. The list of people/organisations/governments that could be blamed is exceedingly long and gets longer as we go further back into the past.
More recently, though, Hamas is to blame. They are too radical to be effective in a real, working government. The people who voted for Hamas wanted some real change and thought that Hamas represented that. They don't; they just represent Palestinians shooting other Palestinians and Israelis.
Ofcourse to blame EU and USA. For many years , while the Palestinians were under the israeli attacks in Gaza strip , when the Palestinians ask for any fair decision or any multicultural force, USA always vetoed. Dont forget the fact that the boycott was not only against hamas goverment, it was against the unity goverment too which was not for Hamas only, which Hamas gave up with the most powerfull ministries even the financial one. This makes every thing worser , it was like we have no choice. Guess many are not following the news , Hamas already asked for long ceasefire and accepted to live with a neighboor country called israel , BUT no one care about that. Keep talking about sending weapons to Abbas army which is like giving weapons to Fatah was a dirty play of USA , which cause more troubles here. It divided us more than before, and it scared Hamas members. Dont expect after years of occupation , after years of boycott, after years of unfair treatment and unjustice , that Gaza will be a stable land. As a Palestinian , I dont care about the name of my leader , as long as there will be justice and safe here.
By the way , not all the Israeli party's accept the Palestinians rights or their existence and some of those are in the Israeli goverment!! Anyone mention them ever? welcome to the world of the double standards!!
Palestinian
Gaza strip
L.S.,
Remind me, again, why the official line is in favour of a two state (or, at the moment, three state) solution? Bearing in mind that there are already about a million muslims that are Israeli citizens, and bearing in mind that no way no how would a Palestinian state be in any way viable, wouldn't it make more sense to opt for a one state solution? (NB, clearly this is a long term issue, because at the moment the whole situation is too violent to be worrying about such things.)
Could the EU have used its economic muscle to greater effect in pushing for a solution to the Israel/Palestine problem? Probably. Was it caught between a rock and a hard place with regards to dealing with Hamas? Definitely!
The (ex) Palestinian Prime Minister gave an interview in Gaza (Sat 16/06/07 edition), explaining Hamas don't want a two-state Palestine - but recognition of and support for a legitimate, democratically elected government: ie, for him, that won by Hamas.
That's been the problem all along - non-recognition of the Palestinian government - any government - by the US in particular but also of a lukewarm EU. The US and the EU share the blame for decades of weak middle-eastern policies. Now they (and Israel) have helped the radical Islamists once more.
When Austria admitted a far right politician into her Government, she was rightly banned from the EU until the ennemy of democracy was ousted. The EU rightly applied the same standards to Hamas: the EU does not talk to terrorists with blood on their hands and totalitarian parties who use democratic ways to promote their undemocratic ideas and policies based on the destruction of their neighbour and the rule of sharia from sea to sea. Full stop.
I think the MEP is correct. Why did the EU push for a democratically elected Palestinian government and then cancel their support when they did not like the result? The polls had always suggested the Palestinian peoples discontent with the corruption of the existing administration and that Hamas would win, so why push for an election in the first place? Why did they feel canceling aid was even necessary when the president was still a member of Fatah? Why even take sides in this internal dispute? The EU does have a lot to answer for as punishing the Gazans in particular has only increased their misery. They have kicked a group of people who have been in the dirt for a very long time.
You can't blame the EU, it hasn't got a legal entity status... you should blame Germany, the UK, France, etc. What goes by the name of the "EU" shouldn't become the scapegoat for member countries (with an "independent" foreign policy) to hide their failures in the Middle East.
Fatah are terrorists. The Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade belong to Fatah. They have sent suicide bombers into Israel. Fatah is so corrupt and riddled with nepotism that the voters opted for Hamas as an honest alternative in Government. In spite of this the West chooses to ignore them because Hamas refuses to recognise Israel and chooses a single state solution rather than an artificial and unworkable two state plan. They are agressively isolated and suffer embargoes. Is this really fair or just ? Viewed from Palestinian eyes it clearly is not. Instead the E.U. willfully continues to pour its largesse into the black hole the is fatah. Do YOU really want your tax money buying luxury villas and bombs for this organisation ??
I have to correct Joanv, the Palestinian people were asked to conduct an election,this they did and a party called hamas won that election. It didn't suit a lot of countries,so like Cuba it gets isolated,
The word " terrorist " is banded about quite willy-nilly but consider this, if a group of people broke into your property and murderd some of your family what would you call them. That is what happened in Iraq and Afgahnistan.
Tony Blair may become the George Bush representative to solve the Gaza/West Bank and Israel issues. Not smart if he accepts this. The real country negotiating there is Egypt, and perhaps Jordan. The Israel/Palestine issue is right at their door step, they understand the issues, both the realities and historical reading in between the line problems. Also Blair with his Western Christian Religion plus representing Bush, who has failed missarably in Iraq, would be a square block in a round hole. This already was demonstrated by Wolfinsonn, the former head of the World Bank (and not to be confused with Wolfowitch, the present WB failure), who resigned from the Middle East negotiating tables this past spring. As he said, enough is enough. He has given up his US passport and returned to his native Australia for retirement.
HAMAS were indeed democratically elected, but then again so was Hitler, a politician whose views HAMAS share. Being democratically elected is a requirement but it is not sufficient by itself; as a minimum HAMAS has to accept Israel's right to exist otherwise what is there to negotiate? HAMAS' view is that the Jews should be driven into the sea - are the Israeli's supposed to negotiate over which beach?
the situation in gaza is bad hamas is a terrorist group who clearly cannot be dealt with except by armed methods inculding the reoccupation of gaza perhaps but hopefully economic sanctions might work.the aim must be a gaza with a west bank under moderates in control final aim israel and a palestine living in peace we must allow iran and their allies any hope of victory
If I understand the situation correctly -the really big problem is that Hamas opposes the existance of Israel.
However, although this is a "political" matter -the current global political structure seems to effectively make discussion of this issue virtually taboo. So presumably, violence is the only way to keep the issue alive -which then means that those responsible can be (selectively) accused of terrorism.
I may be a little stupid -but I personally cannot see any fundamental (logical) difference (not based on political favouritism) between the position of Hamas with regard to Israel -and the position of the US with regard to its own (somewhat larger) "axis of evil". Perhaps even the Israel's policy on the ground could be seen as effectively mirroring that of Hamas with regard to Israel.
So western dubble standards seem to lie at the base of the problem -which therefore can never be solved -which is presumably profitable for some of those in power in various places.
Perhaps the best way to deal with Hamas is to seriously debate other alternatives to the "two state" solution in the ME. The current western position seems to defacto reward Israel's illegal settlement and occupation -while supporting an apparently corrupt (but complient) Fatah that muscled in on the scene locally, after being in exile for years.....
Perhaps in the long term, honesty does pay and the current western hypocricy is killing people all around the globe. One may suspect that the "international community" (through the UN, WTO, World Bank, IMF, etc.) supports (with armed force if required) corrupt but complient governments in many countries around the world.