The string of crises it faces in West Asia could coalesce as one threat to the US
The catalyst for the third crisis is the victory of Hamas in the Palestinian parliamentary elections. But it’s being stoked by a combination of wishful thinking and a stubborn refusal by the Bush administration to acknowledge the limits of its power. Today, the three crises are on the verge of fusing into a challenge to US dominance that it has no hope of overcoming. Unfortunately, no one in Washington is sufficiently far-sighted or dispassionate to realise this.
Incredible as it may seem, the Hamas victory caught both Jerusalem and Washington by surprise. Both governments had believed that with Yasser Arafat gone and a moderate Mahmoud Abbas in his place, the stage was set for the success of Ariel Sharon’s version of the roadmap to peace. Both capitals had also convinced themselves that Hamas’ victory in the municipal elections last year only reflected local concerns, a canny choice of candidates, an acknowledgement of Hamas’ social service and a protest against the increasingly corrupt administration of thePLO. Neither of them was willing to concede that Palestinian nationalism might have something to do with it—that people who were fed up of being bombed, strafed, impoverished, starved, denied freedom of movement, and their homes bulldozed over and over again, would vent their anger by bringing to power the only group that had had the courage to stand up to their oppressors.
This wishful thinking is proving a hardy survivor. Both Jerusalem and Washington have convinced themselves that the very same policies that made the Palestinians vote for Hamas will now make them vote against it. As a result, instead of coming to terms with Hamas’ victory, they have launched a worldwide campaign to isolate it diplomatically and starve Palestinians into voting Hamas out. Israel has already cut off the release of tax revenues to it, and US President George Bush has warned that his country will work towards a worldwide funding freeze if Hamas does not forswear violence and forthwith recognise Israel’s right to exist.
The ink, figuratively, is not even dry upon this proclamation, but it is already apparent that isolating Hamas will not be as easy as Israel and the US would like to think. Russia has already invited the leaders of Hamas for talks. But what is far more ominous, Ayatollah Khameini has announced that Iran will not allow isolation of Palestine. Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood has rapidly followed suit. Few seem as yet to have recognised the full implications of this support. Not only does it promise to bridge the 1,200-year-old gulf between Arabs and Persians but also that between Sunnis and Shias—for the Brotherhood is the parent of Sunni jehad in Egypt.
In this media-driven age, a confrontationist path once taken by a country cannot get it off without losing face. Condoleezza Rice has warned all states, including Iran, to think twice before trying to thwart Washington. "The strategic stakes are rising," she has warned. "I would hope that any state that is considering funding a Hamas-led government would think about the implications of that for the Middle East.... Assistance that might help a government that is dedicated to the destruction of Israel, that’s just not going to happen." The threat to the rest of the world could not be more explicit. This is the authentic growl of Empire.
The threat will almost certainly backfire. Iran is unlikely to back down, so the US will be forced inexorably towards using force against it. This will make Tehran unleash Shia martyrs’ brigades on Iraq to join those of the Sunnis. In Egypt, any attempt by the Hosni Mubarak government, under US pressure, to block a fund-raising effort by the Muslim Brotherhood will further erode his support base. The supply of arms to Palestine through the Sinai desert will increase. All that the US will succeed in doing is to speed up the fusion of the three crises into one and turn the entire Middle East—from Herat to Beirut—into a breeding ground for an Islamic jehad against the West.
The history of a hundred insurgencies, including those that have been successfully tackled in India in recent decades, suggests that the responsibilities of power will force Hamas to moderate its stand. Its leaders have accepted that its charter, which calls for the liberation of all the lands occupied since 1948, is not sacrosanct. Its prime minister-designate, Ismael Haniyeh, has said that "everything is on the table" and has talked of a long-term truce with Israel. But demanding that it surrender everything it has stood for at the point of a gun is a sure way to make sure that it will do the opposite. To quote Alastair Crooke, a British expert on the Middle East, "Hamas enjoys greater legitimacy than any other government in the Muslim world. But the West seems determined to paint itself into a corner."
India, despite having been a staunch ally of the Palestinians for decades, is maintaining a pusillanimous silence on Hamas’ victory. That’s unwise because New Delhi, as a friend of the US, Israel and Palestine, is in a unique position to intervene and head off the confrontation.