FP: How do you think this is going to impact support for Hamas among Palestinians?
KE: At a superficial level, they will get a boost in their popularity. Anyone who is seen as inflicting damage on Israel is going to win points among the Palestinian public—especially in contrast to the leadership in the West Bank, where the contrast couldn’t be more stark. Here are the guys—[the Palestinian Authority (PA), which governs parts of the West Bank] Abu Mazen [Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas] and his people—they play by all the rules, they’re against violence, they’re for negotiations, they want to do things the right way. They jumped through all the hoops of the international community about institution building and finances and all of these things. Yes, they’re corrupt, but the corruption comes from the stagnation of Palestinian politics, the fact that there’s no parliament, there’s no oversight, which itself is a condition of the occupation. The U.S. and Israel don’t want elections; they don’t want a genuinely representative government that probably won’t be committed to things like security coordination with Israel.
So they do all the right things. They coordinate our security. And what did they get? Well, it’s a lose-lose, because they’re seen as collaborators by the people. That they’re subcontractors for Israeli security. But what did they get? Are they rewarded for their compliance and jumping through all the right hoops? Have they gotten the state? No, they haven’t.
It doesn’t matter if Palestinians play by the rules because it doesn’t get them anywhere. And so the Hamas option looks much more appealing. Because, even if there’s a cost, well, we’re paying costs anyway. Every day, we’re losing land. Every day, we’re losing people, homes—villages are being evacuated, depopulated in the Jordan Valley—and so we’re losing anyway. At least they’re doing something. So I think that’s the mindset if you’re a Palestinian. The choice between the two, Hamas will pay a price for sure, but maybe they’re calculating that that price will be offset by being seen as the new vanguards of Palestinian liberation and maybe the future of Palestinian leadership.
FP: How would the PA feel about seeing Hamas brought down?
KE: What does it mean to bring it down? You can kill all the leaders, which Israel has done. Remember back in the early 2000s, they killed the no. 1, 2, and 3 in succession, and there will always be someone to replace them. I don’t think you can just erase a political movement or political idea, whatever you may think about it.
This is another reason why I’m frustrated: There are no grown-ups in the diplomatic world who are calling for some reasonable, measured response and not falling into emotional reactions to everything.
FP: How do you think this is going to impact support for Hamas among Palestinians?
KE: At a superficial level, they will get a boost in their popularity. Anyone who is seen as inflicting damage on Israel is going to win points among the Palestinian public—especially in contrast to the leadership in the West Bank, where the contrast couldn’t be more stark. Here are the guys—[the Palestinian Authority (PA), which governs parts of the West Bank] Abu Mazen [Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas] and his people—they play by all the rules, they’re against violence, they’re for negotiations, they want to do things the right way. They jumped through all the hoops of the international community about institution building and finances and all of these things. Yes, they’re corrupt, but the corruption comes from the stagnation of Palestinian politics, the fact that there’s no parliament, there’s no oversight, which itself is a condition of the occupation. The U.S. and Israel don’t want elections; they don’t want a genuinely representative government that probably won’t be committed to things like security coordination with Israel.
So they do all the right things. They coordinate our security. And what did they get? Well, it’s a lose-lose, because they’re seen as collaborators by the people. That they’re subcontractors for Israeli security. But what did they get? Are they rewarded for their compliance and jumping through all the right hoops? Have they gotten the state? No, they haven’t.
It doesn’t matter if Palestinians play by the rules because it doesn’t get them anywhere. And so the Hamas option looks much more appealing. Because, even if there’s a cost, well, we’re paying costs anyway. Every day, we’re losing land. Every day, we’re losing people, homes—villages are being evacuated, depopulated in the Jordan Valley—and so we’re losing anyway. At least they’re doing something. So I think that’s the mindset if you’re a Palestinian. The choice between the two, Hamas will pay a price for sure, but maybe they’re calculating that that price will be offset by being seen as the new vanguards of Palestinian liberation and maybe the future of Palestinian leadership.
FP: How would the PA feel about seeing Hamas brought down?
KE: What does it mean to bring it down? You can kill all the leaders, which Israel has done. Remember back in the early 2000s, they killed the no. 1, 2, and 3 in succession, and there will always be someone to replace them. I don’t think you can just erase a political movement or political idea, whatever you may think about it.
This is another reason why I’m frustrated: There are no grown-ups in the diplomatic world who are calling for some reasonable, measured response and not falling into emotional reactions to everything.