Hamas May Accept Statehood in West Bank

In an incredible change of direction, a Hamas spokesman says that the terrorist organization will accept a 2 state solution: Israel and Palestine...

Hamas May Accept Statehood in West Bank
By MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH, Associated Press Writer

RAMALLAH, West Bank - "In an apparent change in long-standing policy, a top Hamas leader said Friday the militant group would accept the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip (news - web sites) as well as a long-term truce with Israel.

Hamas' statement came as Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak described Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as the Palestinians' best chance for peace.

Mubarak's comments could mean warming relations between Israel and an important Mideast peace mediator at a crucial time. It was a marked departure from past comments from Mubarak and other Egyptian officials blaming Sharon for the escalation of violence in the territories.

"I think if they (Palestinians) can't achieve progress in the time of the current (Israeli) prime minister, it will be very difficult to make any progress in peace," Mubarak told reporters.

Hamas has long sought to destroy Israel and replace it with an Islamic Palestinian state, rejecting peace accords and carrying out suicide bombings and other attacks that have killed hundreds of people and badly damaged peace efforts.

"Hamas has announced that it accepts a Palestinian independent state within the 1967 borders with a long-term truce," Sheik Hassan Yousef, the top Hamas leader in the West Bank, told The Associated Press, referring to lands Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast war..."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20041203/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians

and much stronger war against Israel - most likely with Syria helping out.

that has resolved nothing and oppressed the Palistinians??

Its always been up to Israel whether or not peace was attainable!!

Israel has been ready for peace and has offered more than its fair share. Israel took that land as protection when it was being attacked and strangled in 67 and the 'Palestinians' weren't even accepted by their former host Arab countries because they're troublemakers. It's easy to blame the more powerful group, but that power has been used judiciously if you look at other similar situations historically.

100% pure bullshit.
please try again.

but the accord during the Clinton era offered nothing to the Palistinians short of a land surrounded by Israel, no borders, no water rights, no air rights.. In other words, no deal..

Not to mention, Israeli's would still be in the west Bank and Gaza under that deal..

Sorry to say, but it wasn't really a good deal at all..

This is the most hopeful thing I've seen in the last four years.

If they say it to Western media - that's one thing. Let's see if they say it to their own people.

Why would they start now?

They have a charity branch, a political branch, and of course they have that branch that goes around blowing up in crowded areas. I'll let you people decide if you want to call that the freedom fighter branch or the terrorist branch.

hehe

:shrug:

peace please let it be .

The Israeli forces launch a major strike. Doesn't make sense? I agree. Apparently, the hawks within the Israeli gov't have never wanted to make peace with Hamas.

Don't get me wrong: Hamas is a sick, bloodthirsty gang of terrorists, who prey upon even the Palestianians. But Israel has this morbid desire to keep Hamas around.

When the intifada began, Israeli leadership was surprised when Islamic groups began to surge in membership and strength. Hamas immediately grew in numbers and violence. The group had always embraced the doctrine of armed struggle, but the doctrine had not been practiced and Islamic groups had not been subjected to suppression the way groups like Fatah had been, according to U.S. government officials.

But with the triumph of the Khomeini revolution in Iran, with the birth of Iranian-backed Hezbollah terrorism in Lebanon, Hamas began to gain in strength in Gaza and then in the West Bank, relying on terror to resist the Israeli occupation.

Israel was certainly funding the group at that time. One U.S. intelligence source who asked not to be named said that not only was Hamas being funded as a "counterweight" to the PLO, Israeli aid had another purpose: "To help identify and channel towards Israeli agents Hamas members who were dangerous terrorists."

In addition, by infiltrating Hamas, Israeli informers could only listen to debates on policy and identify Hamas members who "were dangerous hard-liners," the official said.

In the end, as Hamas set up a very comprehensive counterintelligence system, many collaborators with Israel were weeded out and shot. Violent acts of terrorism became the central tenet, and Hamas, unlike the PLO, was unwilling to compromise in any way with Israel, refusing to acquiesce in its very existence.

But even then, some in Israel saw some benefits to be had in trying to continue to give Hamas support: "The thinking on the part of some of the right-wing Israeli establishment was that Hamas and the others, if they gained control, would refuse to have any part of the peace process and would torpedo any agreements put in place," said a U.S. government official who asked not to be named.

"Israel would still be the only democracy in the region for the United States to deal with," he said.

All of which disgusts some former U.S. intelligence officials.

"The thing wrong with so many Israeli operations is that they try to be too sexy," said former CIA official Vincent Cannestraro.

According to former State Department counter-terrorism official Larry Johnson, "the Israelis are their own worst enemies when it comes to fighting terrorism."

"The Israelis are like a guy who sets fire to his hair and then tries to put it out by hitting it with a hammer."

"They do more to incite and sustain terrorism than curb it," he said.
http://upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=18062002-051845-8272r

NT!

Or just fluff?

It's all about the wall. Hamas has seen their biggest bargaining chip, suicide bombings, reduced by some 90 percent or so by the erection of the wall. This tells them three things: one, wait too long and be closed in. Once that wall goes up, it's hard to bring down. Right now it skirts outside of the green line to cover settlements, especially around the West Bank. Two, with their bargaining chip reduced, they had two opposing options, neither of which they were too crazy about. First, they could wage peace and get what they can while they can still get something at all or up the ante and go for WMDs such as chemical or biological weapons to get their bargaining power back up. Third, Sharon is pulling out of Gaza and possibly parts of the West Bank and getting clobbered for it politically. The next leader may be WORSE than Sharon if he can't pull a coalition together.

I think it's real.

Hamas' political wing may be trying to skinny in on the next PM position. That's a completely different possibility than the one I sketched out above. Still subject to same dynamics, though.