Hamas in Gaza is putting its personal programme of resistance before national interests, writes Mahmoud Murad* Aside from venting anger, the random firing of rockets does little to promote the cause of freedom. Those who seek to liberate their land must be willing to sit down and talk. Only if talks collapse, armed resistance would be justified. But it is hard to believe in resistance that brings little aside from death and starvation to its own people. It is hard to believe in resistance that engages in violence without inflicting serious damage on the enemy. What is happening in Gaza is not true resistance, but adolescent histrionics involving considerable loss of life and property. You may say that this is a cheap price for freedom. But do you really see freedom coming? Do you see the world or the region becoming more sympathetic to armed Palestinian resistance? In the late 1950s, the Algerian resistance took to the mountains during its fight against the French. It did so to minimise bloodshed among civilians. Whenever resistance fighters waged action in urban areas, they were choosing their targets with utmost care. This was helpful, so was the fact that international and regional sympathies were favourable to Algerian insurgents. Ahmed Ben Bella, leader of the resistance movement, was invited to speak on Cairo's Sawt Al-Arab radio. The resistance aired its coded messages to fighters on Egyptian and Arab broadcast services. Egypt sent weapons to the Algerian resistance by sea and across neighbouring countries. That was a time when the world had many major powers, and some of them were happy to see the Algerians push out the French. Other liberation movements fought similar battles across the world, often with the help of powerful allies. Furthermore, the Algerians were united and fought under one command. In Gaza, it's a different story. The brothers in Hamas have put their personal interests above national ones, carving off a runaway authority, confusing the public and dividing the revolution. Then they started firing homemade rockets at Israel. Each time they knocked down a wall here or injured a little girl there, the Israelis struck back with vengeance, claiming the rationale of self- defence. What's next? We have no problem backing Hamas if only it offers proof that it can protect the Palestinians and have Israel on the run. But this is not happening. So perhaps Hamas should mend fences with the Palestinian Authority. Hamas is entitled to its views, but it is time it expressed these views as a legitimate partner, not a disgruntled outsider. The Palestinians have every right to pursue their goals, whether wholesale, as Hamas wants, or piecemeal, as others have suggested. There was a time when Yasser Arafat was vilified for endorsing the Oslo Accords. Since his death, those who assailed Arafat have failed to offer anything better. A nation split in two doesn't really seem like an improvement on Oslo. President Bush promised to come back to the region in a few months to help with the peace process, but few expect anything good to come out of that. Still, the Palestinians must have a shot at freedom, but only if they come together. Any progress, however incomplete, is better than nothing. Egypt fully supports the Palestinian quest for independence, but it is having trouble supporting their tactics. Some flexibility, and a bit of unity, may help. * The writer is deputy editor-in-chief of Al-Ahram .
