Israel Could Benefit By Palestinians' Personality Transplant

The reconciliation between the Iran-backed terror group Hamas and the West Bank-governing Palestinian Authority will not result in an inherent repositioning of either group or the moderation of proposals to wipe Israel off the map and instill a government operated under the auspices of radical Islam. That inherent radicalization of the Palestinians could, though, benefit Israel by further delineating how there few — if any — true partners for peace on the other side of the Green Line.

Since Hamas’ founding in the late 1980s in the midst of the first intifada, the terror group has periodically amended its strategy, but its core principals — and, in fact it’s charter — have not deviated from the beliefs that Israel and the Jews should be ousted from the region at all cost, including through the use of suicide bombers and sacrificing children by positioning them as human shields around terrorist weapons.

Hamas has, though, on occasion signaled what has been called moderation, with the group periodically requesting that rouge terrorists — as opposed the card carrying Hamas terrorists — limit their attacks on Israel, for example. However, the group has not abandoned its core ideals that embrace terror and frequently reverts back to targeting civilians, as exemplified recently by the hundreds of rockets and mortars launched into southern Israel over the last couple months.

As an old professor of mine once said while reflecting on radical Islamists, “Pragmatism is not moderation. If you can’t kill an American, kill an Israeli. That’s pragmatism.”

Hamas knows very well how to be pragmatic, but it is certainly not a moderate organization, nor is it headed toward moderation. Through their new alliance with the Palestinian Authority, Hamas’ values of terror and radicalism will remain ingrained in its governance policies and be reflected in any new government to which they are a part.

The terror group’s new found embrace in the Palestinian Authority, and the implications of infusing more radical elements in the the Palestinian governing entity, will undoubtedly change the peace process landscape, possibly even providing Israel with an avenue to gain credibility in its bargaining positions.

For years, Israel — especially now with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu at the helm — has been characterized as an impediment to peace, as settlement construction in the West Bank and parts of Jerusalem continues virtually unabated. The Palestinians, as a precondition to talks, have demanded a full moratorium on this building, as many of the new homes are on land that would likely be engulfed within a Palestinian state.

Netanyahu, unable to halt settlement construction without risking a dissolution of his government, has only agreed to temporary and partial freezes on building, even with extensive U.S. pressure for a more thorough moratorium. Being portrayed as the antagonist, Israel has been blamed for the peace process impasse, even though the Palestinians continue to launch terror attacks on Israel and refuse to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, which, coupled with the Palestinian insistence of a right of return, will eventually result in a multi-national non-Jewish country.

Yet, with Hamas’ incorporation into the government, the Palestinians are demonstrating that they accept as a major part of the dialogue that Israel should not exist and that terrorism is acceptable. That choice was made by the Palestinians in 2006 when they overwhelmingly voted for Hamas, however other rationales — such as mere dissent to the governing Palestinian Authority — could have led to the terror group’s victory. But, now the Palestinian government has actively chosen to incorporate the terror group. In the upcoming elections as part of the agreement, the Palestinians will once again have a choice on who they want as representatives — but this time, there should be no excuses.

The West Bank, under the leadership of the Palestinian Authority as governed by the Fatah party, is largely improving, as institutions are being built and the economy is recovering. On the other hand, Hamas has demonstrated how it would govern the Palestinians. Gaza, which is run by Hamas, is rife with the suppression of speech, the implementation of radical Islamic law and the embracing of terror. The Palestinians’ choice on how they seek representation and what they determine as their national personality will be readily apparent, and they must take ownership for that choice.

Even if excuses abound as to why one party is selected over another, the fundamental choice is still being made. The selection of Hamas — just like the incorporation of the group into the government today — is a choice of de-legitimizing Israel and embracing terror instead of support for a possible peace accord. Tangential issues or other excuses cannot overshadow the fundamental personality of the Hamas versus Fatah.

That possible choice of terror in a future election, just as it is being made today by the Palestinian Authority leadership, depicts the character that many Palestinians seek in their government — that of terror.

The Western World does not negotiate with terrorists, and Israel should not be forced into a dialogue that counters its values, which are also embraced by the United States and Europe.

The incorporation of Hamas in the government lifts the veil on a major impediment to peace — that the settlements, even though they are unhelpful and should be halted unconditionally, do not represent the only or most significant barrier to an agreement with the Palestinians. Instead, choices by many Palestinians to support radical Islamic terrorists, could present Israel with the evidence that there is no viable partner for peace, as the government on the other side of the armistice line openly incorporates terrorists into its government.

The Fatah leadership has chosen to accept Hamas and demonstrate that it will incorporate radical terrorist views into its governance. The Palestinian people will hopefully soon have a choice to oust that leadership and prove that they actually do want peace. If they choose otherwise, a major impediment to peace that is not of Israel’s doing will be further illuminated.