“What to speak with Hamas about”
By Shlomo Avineri

“Recently, more and more voices have been heard saying that the only way to reach an Israeli-Palestinian accord is by talking to Hamas. These voices are not only in Europe but also in the United States. New York Times columnist Roger Cohen, for example, and Brent Sowcroft, who was national security adviser to the first president Bush, have said that without a dialogue with Hamas there will be no peace between Israel and the Palestinians. And if Israel refuses to do so, the Europeans or the Americans should begin a dialogue with Hamas. …

I believe they are right, but not for the reasons they cite. The question is what to talk to Hamas about. It is clear we have to talk with them - and Israel indeed does speak with them indirectly - about freeing kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit and achieving calm.

I believe we must talk to Hamas about other things too, like about what is written in their founding covenant. Most Israelis, as well as the Europeans and Americans, know that Hamas espouses the destruction of Israel. What most of them do not know is that Hamas’ founding document includes a much more comprehensive attitude, not merely to Israel and Zionism, but to the Jews.

The prologue to the covenant states that Hamas’ aim is a war - not against Israel or Zionism but against the Jewish people at large, since the Jews, and not merely Israel and Zionism, are the enemies of Islam.

And in order to remove any doubt, the entire chapter 22 is devoted to detailing the iniquities of the Jews.

According to Hamas, the Jews are responsible for all the ills of modern society - the French Revolution; the Communist revolution; the establishment of secret associations (Freemasons, Rotary and Lions clubs, B’nai B’rith) designed to help them gain control of the world by secret means. They control the economy, press and television; they are responsible for the outbreak of World War I, which they initiated in order to destroy the Muslim caliphates (the Ottoman empire), to get the Balfour Declaration and set up the League of Nations with the aim of establishing their state. They also initiated World War II in order to make a fortune from selling war materials; they use both capitalism and communism as their agents.

Sound familiar? Yes, some of it is taken directly from “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” and some, particularly the parts dealing with the world wars, is original.

Don’t tell me that these are merely words and Hamas must not be judged only on the basis of its covenant. Would anyone dare say that if a similar movement were to arise in Europe or America and, in addition to statements like these, was busy killing Jews?”

Read the rest for yourself here.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=1076694

I would take him more seriously if his views on Iran, or Hezbollah, or Hamas were backed up with some hard verifiable data. As it is his views are indistinguishable from those who blame Israel for all the problems in the region.

Had he for example been more critical of the threats the Islamic organizations Hezbollah and Hamas posed to Israel, or even criticized their antisemitic ideologies and also criticized Israel for its handling of the war in Gaza, or said that it went too far in Lebanon when dealing with Hezbollah one could take his views more seriously. Add to this his views that Iran is no real threat and that it is Israel’s “influence” in Washington which is keep the US from establishing a rapprochement with that Islamic Republic and you get the kind ideological view packaged by the likes of Galloway and other anti-Israel agitators.

Cohen may be softer spoken but his position in the NY Times gives him more credibility than other anti-Israel agitators. The New York Times in turn seems to be reverting towards its anti-Zionist position it held before and during World War Two, for which it has since apologized since it had such disastrous consequences on the Jews in Europe.