|
what the dunedan said above.
and like i keep saying, the israeli siege (that's what it is really) was begun out of a misguided attempt to prevent hamas from governing. the idea was based on nothing, really...it's not as though israel's attempts to pulverize the plo/fatah prevented it from operating. it's internal corruption was another matter---but under sharon, this approach had already been tried. and it failed. so why israel chose to respond this way to the gaza elections can only be chocked up to stupidity. stupidity backed by the bush administration because stupidity looped through the discourse of "terrorism"...
but not only has it reinforced support for hamas---it has also **prevented** the organization from moderating.
the counter-argument to the siege from the start was: if you want hamas to moderate, let them exercise power. the example of lebanon was clear.
bad policy, bad strategy, bad choices.
the israeli massacre in gaza simply made conditions worst. it did not break hamas. it had the opposite effect.
what i personally think has happened since is that the goldstone commission and other pressures---combined with the really unfortunate netanyahu government fell---have combined to make it difficult for israel to abandon the siege without losing face. so they've chosen to maintain it. which is at the root of all this business. not hamas. not really. a bad policy choice by the israelis that they are unlikely to be able to get away from until the right is bounced out of power again.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|