As Jimmy Carter toured the Middle East, pundits highlighted the controversy surrounding his meetings with Hamas leaders, Rasha Saad writes In the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat, Abdul- Rahman Al-Rashed wrote that former US president Jimmy Carter visited the Middle East despite [the protests of] President Bush, whose State Department criticised Carter's trip because he was to meet with Hamas leaders, including Khaled Meshaal. Al-Rashed believes the Americans are going too far in blaming Carter and in boycotting the Hamas leader. "In reality, Meshaal has little to be blamed for because most of Hamas's decisions are now made abroad, I mean outside the Palestinian arena, i.e. Iran." Meshaal, Al-Rashed argues, knows the nature of the regional conflict more than the rest of the Hamas leaders, as he lived in Kuwait for 23 years and left it only in the wake of Saddam's invasion of the country. "So what would Carter say that could add to Meshaal's ideas or change his mind? And if he changed his mind, what could he do, now that Palestinian decision-making has been hijacked? This meeting is between two men: a brave Carter who is a retired president with no power, and a brave Meshaal, who is not the master of his decisions." Al-Rashed describes Carter as the best US leader who sought to be fairer in handling the Arab-Israeli conflict as much as the political circumstances permitted. "I think that were it not for Carter, the Egyptian-Israeli Camp David talks might not have ended up with the agreement that gave the Egyptians all that they had asked for," Al-Rashed wrote. As to why Carter is now coming to the Middle East, the only explanation, according to Al-Rashed, is that he wants the people to recall his moderate stand, whatever anger it provoked at the time. Also in Asharq Al-Awsat Tariq Al-Homayed described Carter's meeting with Meshaal as "anything but an [internal] American skirmish; the outcome of which will be fruitless for the region and the Palestinian cause." According to Al-Homayed the meeting can only exacerbate the crisis in the region. "There is nothing to indicate that Hamas, under Meshaal's leadership, will commit to a resolution that unites all Palestinian efforts." Meshaal's real problem, Al-Homayed contends, lies in the fact that he aspires more towards a truce with Israel than he does towards the vision of a Palestinian state and that he does not strive to put an end to the crisis endured by the people of Gaza in as much as he attempts to exert pressure on Egypt with the intention of serving goals that are far removed from the Palestinian cause. "Meshaal leads a safe life in Damascus and is more preoccupied with preserving Hamas's alliance with Iran and Syria than with unifying Palestinian ranks. His position is the same as that of the rest of the Hamas leadership, which has disappeared fearing that Israel will target it, leaving the residents of Gaza to confront the Israeli aggression." In "The old man's visit" Mohamed Salah wrote in the London-based daily Al-Hayat that what exceeds Carter's visit to the region in importance is that his meeting with the leaders of Hamas took place in the Egyptian capital. According to Salah, this may reduce tension between Cairo and Hamas, especially as it has recently culminated following hints, statements and threats made by figures associated with or actual members of Hamas to breach the border with Egypt for a second time if Israel continues its siege of Gaza. "If Carter's meeting with Hamas leaders is to be of any use, the greater benefit was the return of friendly ties between Hamas and Cairo and the return of Hamas leaders to consider the reaction of their behaviour, especially at a time when Hamas has no shortage of enemies." Salah argues that ultimately, the paradoxes of the Palestinian cause are far too great to be resolved by the capabilities of any former or current American president, for the former has no mechanisms or means of proposing solutions and exerting pressure on the parties of the conflict to implement solution; and the current president has neither the desire for or a real interest in a solution. "Meanwhile, Arabs remain divided and powerless to resolve their problems among each other and continue to seek the approval of a current American president or the efforts of a former American president, only to receive nothing," laments Salah. Raghida Dergham in Al-Hayat believes that there is a common factor between Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's message from Qatar, addressing the Democracy Forum in Doha, and the meetings that Carter held with Hamas leaders in Ramallah, Cairo and Damascus. It is that they have a role in supporting radicalism in the region as both try to undermine the Palestinian Authority, as well as the option of negotiating an end to the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories and to reach a peace agreement. Dergham wrote that Livni's claims of partnership with moderate Arab states are almost hypocritical, since the policies and practices that she adopts are intended to repeatedly strip the moderates of the means needed to face the axis of radicalism and to mobilise the public in their support. "Carter, like Livni, is encouraging the axis of radicalism and practically providing it with ammunition, whether deliberately or not." Dergham also argues that neither Carter nor others in the US, particularly in the Jewish community who endorse the "fashion" of embracing Hamas, have the right to mislead the Palestinians with illusions. According to Dergham, the reality of Hamas is that while it rejects the option of negotiation, it in fact does not have the option of resistance. Hence, it claims to combine both options and refuses to meet the demands of the Middle East Quartet to respect previous agreements between the PA and Israel. Dergham added that on the other hand. when Livni "prances around in Doha", talking about the axis of moderation as if she belonged to it, she is in fact prancing around as she climbs the axis of Arab moderation. If she truly believed in moderation, she would have used the Doha Forum to announce additional practical measures to strengthen the ranks of the moderates, especially the PA, instead of delivering a lecture which forced moderates to leave the hall. "Had Livni been serious about choosing moderation, she would have discussed Israel's commitment to the foundations of the peace process, and she would have addressed the Arab world from the Doha Forum to welcome the Arab peace initiative, which includes complete normalisation with Israel in return for its withdrawal to pre-1967 borders and for establishing a Palestinian state," Dergham concluded.
