Latest Column:
Stopping the Meltdown
What Beltway Republicans Need To Do
..........

CaliforniaRepublic.org
opinon in
Reagan country
..........

..........

Jon Fleischman’s
FlashReport
The premier source for
California political news

..........

Michael Ramirez
editorial cartoon
@Investor's
Business
Daily
..........

Do your part to do right by our troops.
They did the right thing for you.
Donate Today

..........

..........

..........

tOR Talk Radio
Contributor Sites
Laura Ingraham
Hugh Hewitt
Eric Hogue
Sharon Hughes
Frank Pastore
[Radio Home]

..........

Middle East Maelstrom
Hamas takes over…
[J. F. Kelly, Jr.] 2/2/06

Palestinians have just enjoyed a brief exercise in democracy in the form of free elections. The Bush administration promotes democracy in the Middle East and has been urging free elections so that the people of the region can choose their own leaders. We should be careful what we wish for.

The Palestinians got to choose between, on the one hand, Fatah, the governing party which gave them Yasser Arafat and years of corruption, terror and mismanagement which President Mahmoud Abbas was trying, mostly ineffectively, to remedy and, on the other, Hamas, a terrorist organization which turns children into human bombs to be used to kill innocent people. Some choice. They chose, overwhelmingly, the greater of two evils, demonstrating once again that they may not yet be quite ready to take their place in the community of independent, civilized and peaceful nations.

Hamas is dedicated to eliminating the democratic state of Israel and replacing it with a Muslim theocracy. It is properly regarded as a terrorist organization by the United States and even by the European Union. The Bush administration has declared it will never conduct business or diplomacy with a terrorist organization. This policy puts any government in which Hamas participates at something of a disadvantage since the United States provides over half a billion in desperately needed aid to the Palestinians annually. Israel has said firmly that it will not even recognize Hamas. So the Palestinians, by their vote, have said to the United States, Europe and Israel, in effect, “go to hell and take the roadmap to peace with you”.

Apologists for Palestinian behavior are attempting to put a smiley face on all this by urging a wait and see attitude. The vote, they say, was more a protest against corruption in the ruling party than any endorsement of terrorism. It was more a recognition of the reforms advocated by Hamas and the services provided by that organization and less of an anti-American, anti-Israeli statement. It is a good thing, they say, to draw Hamas into the political process. What Hamas can attain through peaceful elections they no longer have to seek through terror and intimidation. Moreover, they note, Hamas hardy mentioned the destruction of Israel and death to the Jews in its election campaign, so we shouldn’t overreact.

Such wishful thinking could be given some measure of credibility by a simple statement from Hamas leaders that they now renounce their position that Israel must be eliminated and the Jews driven from the Middle East. Those few words would ensure the continued flow of American and European aid. No need to go so far as to embrace Israel as a partner in peace or to profess affection for their Jewish neighbors. Would that really have been too much to ask?

Apparently so, because the election victors ceased discharging their guns into the air on crowded streets just long enough to declare that they had no intention of giving up their weapons or changing their position regarding Israel. So much, then, for Mr. Bush’s roadmap to peace.

This unhappy outcome may only be a sample of what we can expect as we push for free elections elsewhere in the Arab world where people suffer under autocratic rulers supported by the United States with billions in aid. Our aid may have gained the cooperation of pragmatic dictators in the region but you can bet it hasn’t won too many hearts and minds in countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia where organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood are ready to provide an alternative to the entrenched rulers if free elections with opposition parties are ever permitted. Sometimes the devil we know is preferable to the devil we don’t.

The Bush administration is determined to pursue the spread of democracy throughout the Arab and Muslim world, arguing that democracy is always conducive to American interests. Critics have argued that many of the nations there are not ready for American style democracy. Ready or not, as we try to sew the seeds of democracy in these places, we need to be realistic in our expectations and recognize that our values, our culture and indeed our presence are not widely appreciated, even though our aid may be.

It’s hard to argue against the idea that people everywhere should be allowed to elect their own leaders, but in promoting that objective, we need to anticipate some outcomes that will not please us and that may result in anti-America, anti-Israeli, radical Muslim theocracies such as exist in Iran. But just because leaders are freely elected doesn’t mean that we have an obligation to support them financially or even to extend diplomatic recognition when they advocate hatred and support terrorism. We must never negotiate with terrorists, freely elected or not, until they unequivocally renounce terrorism in word and deed. We must be absolutely resolute in that regard. -one-

copyright 2006 J. F. Kelly, Jr.

§