Handling Hamas
By DEBORAH SOLOMON
Q: You were this country's chief peace negotiator in the Middle East for 12 years, until 2001, when the talks broke down and never resumed. Do you think the U.S. is at all responsible for the ascent of Hamas in the Palestinian territories and its landslide election victory last month?
I find it incredibly depressing. We had so many opportunities to stop this.
How? Some people see the Israeli pullout from Gaza last summer as the turning point in all this, because the local economy collapsed and left Palestinians feeling as if no one was in charge.
The expectations were that life would get better. Well, it got worse. It became completely lawless, and the jobs disintegrated as well. You needed someone to spearhead the pledging of assistance and the delivery of assistance. The U.S. could have done that. But we didn't have a point person.
Are you saying that we could have saved Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, from his incompetence in Gaza, which Hamas exploited for political ends?
From the beginning, it was clear that Abbas had a limited time to show that his way, the way of nonviolence, worked. And to do that, he had to show that life got better. What didn't happen is a major effort on the part of the outside, which had to be led by us, to help Abbas make decisions and become responsive to the Palestinian public.
Why do you think President Bush decided to eliminate the position of Mideast peace negotiator, after you had served his father and President Clinton and helped broker so many agreements?
The Bush administration, in the first term, made a basic decision to disengage.They took the words "peace process" out of the lexicon. They literally would not use the words "peace process" for the first few months. In the second term, Condoleezza Rice has been more involved.
When she visited Gaza after the Israeli evacuation, it was announced with great fanfare that she pulled an all-nighter to finesse an agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
She was there two days. She has never had a long trip there. And the pullout took place in August. This understanding took place in November. It was good she did it, but it would have been better if this had been done before. Had it betokened a consistent, visible involvement through the person of an envoy, it might have made some difference.
Do you think the members of Hamas will desist in calling for the destruction of Israel now that they have acquired political clout?
No. I think they will not.
In that case, what is the proper course of action for us?
The international community needs to cut them off unless they transform themselves. There can be no dealing with Hamas and no financial assistance to the Palestinians if they don't give up violence and recognize the right of Israel to exist.
Why would an extremist like Ismail Haniyeh and the other leaders of Hamas care what we think anyhow?
Think about this: The Palestinians get about a billion dollars a year from the outside. This year the U.S. was giving them about $350 million, a certain percentage of which was for the Palestinian Authority, but most of it for nongovernmental organizations.
Can't Palestinians get the same support from their fellow Arab nations?
Well, the Arabs give them very little money. The Saudis, who give them the most, have been giving them about $84 million a year. The Egyptians give them no money. There is a genuine sense of grievance throughout the Arab world on the Palestinian issue. But Arab leaders are more prepared to talk about doing something than to actually do it.
What countries do you think are crucial if we are to form an anti-Hamas front that has any influence?
I think right now the U.S. focus has to be on lining up a common front with the Europeans, the Russians, the Chinese, the Japanese and, if possible, Arab leaders.
Are we actually capable of doing that?
The current administration has not shown great interest in group projects. That's true, but sometimes necessity creates reality. There's an imperative here.
