Hamas does not work for a two-state solution

The terrorist attack on 7th October presents Israel with a situation with only poor solutions. While bombing Gaza to smithereens is unlikely to bring peace to the country, the fundamental problem is that neither Hamas nor Netanyahu's government wants a two-state solution.

 

So far, my conclusion is that Israel chose the worst solution after the terrorist attack last October. At the same time, I think Hamas wanted a massive attack on Gaza, with thousands of civilians killed and massive material destruction. The terrorists who took part in the carefully planned attack expected that their grotesque violence would soon fade into the background and that the world's attention and disgust would be directed at the Israeli retaliation in Gaza.

 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his advisers could have chosen to send special forces in search of the culprits, as the country did after the attack on the Israeli contingent to the Munich Olympics in 1972. Perhaps the Israeli authorities realized that it is not possible to neutralize Hamas once and for all that way. But they are not likely to succeed the way they operate now either. When they bomb an entire residential complex to destroy an apartment used by Hamas, the survivors will take over for the slain Hamas fighters.

 

Hamas aligns itself with the civilian population of Gaza and has built miles of tunnels under cities and civilian infrastructure with cement that could have been used to provide people with better living conditions. Such a movement is very difficult to eradicate. The only possibility would have to be if the Palestinians themselves rebelled against an increasingly unpopular ruler. Hamas has not delivered on the promises of Change and Reform which Hamas called itself at the election in 2006, and which brought them to power with 44.45 percent of the vote and 74 seats in the 132-delegate national assembly. The Israeli blockade is not popular in the Gaza Strip, but it is Hamas that makes daily life miserable for people there, one of my students at the NLA University College told me. She was from Gaza. Now people there have other things to think about. The Israelis are probably not too concerned with Netanyahu's ongoing legal problems, which deal with indictments for corruption and fraud.

 

However, what has created this situation is extreme ideology on both sides. Hamas's charter calls for the establishment of an Islamic state in Palestine and the dissolution of the state of Israel. A partner in Netanyahu's government, the Religious Zionist Party, wants to incorporate the occupied West Bank into Israel itself. They call the area Judea and Samaria. These areas are vital parts of Eretz Israel, which the Orthodox Zionists dream of; namely, the creation of Israel as it was at its greatest in Old testament times. The leader of the Shas party, Aryeh Deri was until January deputy prime minister and interior minister. He played a key role in rallying ultra-conservative support for Likud and thus made it possible for Netanyahu to form yet another government. Deri was forced out of the government due to corruption.

 

Now we have seen what two parties characterized by extreme ideology can create. It does not give much hope for the future. The only thing one can hope for now is that more moderate forces take the reins on both sides. Western politicians point to the establishment of a Palestinian state next to Israel. It is clearly the best solution. The problem is that neither Hamas nor Netanyahu's government wants a two-state solution.

 

A Pew Research survey in April this year shows growing skepticism among Israeli voters concerning the creation of a Palestinian state on the West Bank. Only 35 percent of voters believe in peaceful coexistence here. This is a decrease of 15 percentage points since 2013. Arabs living in Israel do not believe in a two-state solution either. Their support for the idea has fallen by 33 percentage points over the past 10 years.

 

Voters who do not support Netanyahu's coalition government are the most optimistic about the two-state solution with 54 percent supporting it. 73 percent of voters on the left are positive to a Palestinian state, compared to 53 percent in the center and 14 percent on the right.

 

Another problem is that the last elections have made it almost impossible to form a functioning government. In the period 2018 to 2020, there were five elections to the national assembly Knesset, because no parties were able to form a stable coalition. 40 parties were registered to take part in these elections, but only 10 parties met the threshold of 3.25 per cent. It was in this situation that Benjamin Netanyahu, with the help of Aryeh Deri, managed to build a coalition with the support of 64 members in the 120-seat Knesset.

 

There is broad agreement both in Israel and in the West that Hamas cannot be part of what comes after the fighting in Gaza has stopped. A step in the right direction would be if the left in Israel manages to establish a wider cooperation with Israeli Arabs living in Israel today. The next election will be held in October 2026. But for more people to believe in a two-state solution, there must be a way to neutralize Hamas, so that they no longer pose a threat to Israel's citizens. And so far, no one has come up with a solution to this problem.

This article was orginally published in the local Norwegian newspaper Fædrelandsvennen on December 6th.

Kåre Melhus

Kåre is a retired Norwegian journalist and journalism educator. After serving as a journalist and a newsroom manager for the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) for many years, he served as an associate professor at the NLA University College in Kristiansand, Norway, where he taught journalism both at the BA and MA level for 18 years. During that time Kåre was also part of a team which established MA degree programs in journalism in Ethiopia, Kosovo and Uganda. He holds a MA degree in journalism from University of Missouri, and a BA in sociology from Trinity College, Illinois.

Previous
Previous

Realpolitik vs. Human Dignity

Next
Next

How ‘Power Play’ can inspire innovation in moderate political parties