I do not know the source of optimism that pushed the Egyptian Foreign Ministry's officials, topped by Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul-Gheit, to announce that an agreement on a truce in Gaza would be signed on February 5th and that a dialogue for reconciliation between the Palestinian factions would start on February 22nd. Nor do I know on what bases these dates have been fixed. Are they linked to the Egyptian initiative? This initiative provides for a two-week ceasefire during which there shall be negotiations on a truce. This truce shall in turn be followed by the Palestinian national dialogue. Instead, are these dates linked to the contacts made by Cairo with all parties, which has resulted in an agreement on these very dates?
Although I hope this optimism is justified, all evidence indicates that turning the ceasefire into a truce is still a far-fetched possibility. The Israelis are saying that – as affirmed by Peres in Davos two days ago –they do not need any agreement in this regard and that they are the ones who decided to open fire and to stop it and who will resume it if the need arises. This is what actually happened last Tuesday when a bomb exploded near an Israeli patrol. Israel closed the borders, pushed into Khan Younis, launched air raids and warned the Gazans that staying at less than five kilometers away from the border with Israel meant risking being hit by artillery shelling. Israel also warned Hamas leaders, from Ismail Haniya to Mahmoud al-Zahar, not to get out looking at the sun because a raid might make them unable to see it forever.
On the other hand, what comes out of Hamas leaders is like the discordant voices of a chorus in which everyone sings what they know without trying to make it match with what the others are singing. In fact, Salah Bardawil, Khaled Meshaal, Osama Hamdan and Mohammed Nazzal have come out with totally contradictory statements. There is also contradiction between those who live in Damascus hotel and those who hide in the tunnels of Gaza.
What about these conflicting statements? One said Hamas is not involved in any agreement for a truce because it is a resistance movement rather than a state. In another statement for the French Liberation two days ago, Meshaal said Israel has to negotiate with him because he is the only person who can ensure its security. Such words are said only by Heads of States, especially Arab ones, whether they are with or against the truce. Until now, it seems the problem faced by Hamas lies in reaching a truce that is different in form from the one which was offered to it before December 19, 2008. On that occasion, Hamas rejected the truce and gave the Israeli war criminals the opportunity to kill the Palestinians. Hamas agrees to open Gaza's side of the Rafah crossing on the basis of the 2005 agreement, which has become international now after being included in the Security Council Resolution 1860. Hamas also accepts the presence of European observers and monitors of the Palestinian National Authority - provided that they are from Gaza - in addition to observers from Hamas and Turkey to replace Israeli cameras. Another story says that Israel agreed to take away its cameras from the crossing in exchange for a commitment from the Palestinian National Authority not to allowing some 5,000 Palestinians living abroad to return to Gaza. No one knows who will decide what will eventually be accepted and rejected by Hamas with regard to the truce. Likewise, no one knows whether Hamas will participate in the national reconciliation meetings which are supposed to start on February 22 and result in the formation of a national unity government and simultaneous presidential and legislative elections.
In light of the contradictory statements of the discordant chorus, some Hamas' leaders announced that the release of some of the movement's detained members in Ramallah was a condition for dialogue. Other members of Hamas, though, announced that Hamas would attend, but it had reservations on the date. After that, Meshaal dealt a mortal blow to the Palestinian national reconciliation when he announced last Tuesday in Doha that he and a number of other Palestinian factions were negotiating to create a new reference for the Palestinians at home and abroad to replace the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which is now managing the division of the Palestinian home.
Amid this confusion, a group of leading Palestinian figures, including leaders from Fatah, Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, as well as independents, writers, intellectuals and clerics, has launched a Palestinian national unity initiative based on the cessation of all forms of repression, arrests, torture, media campaigns and killings. The initiative is also based on stopping security coordination and bilateral negotiations on the basis of the Annapolis Conference, the Road Map and the Quartet's conditions. The initiative also calls for a national comprehensive dialogue resulting in a Palestinian national government committed to the United Nations' resolutions, preparing for legislative and presidential elections and paving the way for a new government. This government should reform security agencies - so that they are professional and impartial - and seek a new approach to the negotiations in order to ensure the cessation of the settlements, the aggression and the siege! This is the better Jihad that should be backed by all the Palestinians and Arabs if they really want the liberation of Palestine.
