Hamas official says group would lay down its arms if an independent Palestinian state is established
apnews.com
A top Hamas political official told The Associated Press the Islamic militant group is willing to agree to a truce of five years or more with Israel and that it would lay down its weapons and convert into a political party if an independent Palestinian state is established along pre-1967 borders.
That will never happen while Netanyahu and his regime are in power. And the only time steps were taken in that direction, the Israeli Prime Minister got assassinated.
I think Clinton may have been the last individual human that could have prevented catastrophe in Gaza. He should have capitilised on it and essentially refused to take no as an answer from Israel. Instead, he just kind of went "oh well", and here we are.
or while the us is interested in maintaining their geopolitical presence in the region.
honestly i doubt it would be that easy at all.
Lmao, fuck this guy. He doesn't give two fucks about Palestine or its people.
The Hamas leadership are a bunch of wealthy old men who live abroad in comfort.
Sounds familiar
It is. There's remarkable symmetry to this (and most) conflicts, in a way.
The fact that a large number of people in the West are denying this and portraying Hamas as freedom fighters is very worrying.
Well then who is Israel attacking? If Hamas is in Qatar?
You can't be seriously asking this in good faith.
Before people go off about them being evil, how much worse would it be if you tried? If it fails you're just back in the same place. If it works then you have peace.
Alright, while on a moral level this offer would be definitely the right thing to accept (ASSUMING complete good faith), it could be much, MUCH worse. Hamas has shown a willingness and ability to commit to large-scale attacks on Israel - considering the long, long history of antisemitic and genocidal rhetoric Hamas officials have engaged in, "Five years of not disrupting an enemy's plans and organization" is a five-year recipe for an even-better coordinated and funded attack.
Follow the North Ireland model independent verification of compliance (on both sides).
The Hamas guy in the OP is literally talking about how they would lay down arms and become a party. IRA to Sinn Fein.
(Will there be splinter hardliners? Sure! There is a civil war at the end of Independence. But there is a promise of peace after the civil war.)
Yes, like I said, assuming complete good faith. But even then, laying down their arms wouldn't mean that fighters for their cause would no longer exist; it would simply mean that a better-organized Palestinian military would take its place.
My point isn't "Five year truce bad", it's "Five year truce good but there ARE reasons to not accept it even from an abstract standpoint"
A better organized Palestinian military is a natural consequence of independence. And ideally yes, the best trained Hamas fighters will be joining it and be under government control, fighting against the hardliner splinters to enforce the hypothetical Independence Peace agreement, rather than being the hardliner splinters.
The road to peace will be very very messy. It is the bed Israel made and has to sleep on. The time when a relatively clean, peaceful transition to 2SS could have happened was right after Oslo. But here we are and it's either a super messy transition to 2SS that will require nerves of steel to not intervene in the civil war, or a super messy transition transition to a democratic post-apartheid 1SS that will also require nerves of steel and a political and cultural transformation. Or ... the ethnic cleansing, which hardliners in both Israel and Palestine dream of and we all dread.
Peace doesn't sell arms (weapons)
Peace means Israelis can't steal land from people their government murdered.
If you consider that Hamas only exists to fight against Israeli oppression over an ineffective PA, it makes sense that if the oppression ends, Hamas becomes irrelevant.
That's a chicken and egg problem, though, isn't it: Netanyahu's government wants Hamas because the conflict keeps Bibi out of prison, and Hamas wants to remain relevant. All the same, the Israeli and Palestinian people are the ones who suffer due to both regimes being in power, and Hamas doesn't shed its guilt just because Israel doesn't want a reasonable Palestinian government. Neither side wants to blink because they have multi-generational hatred for the other side, and that means popular support for further violence probably isn't going anywhere. You back down! No, you back down!
The result is that neither side is going to take real steps to deescalate, because both sides benefit from the conflict. That the Palestinians are suffering more, by orders of magnitude, doesn't make either side's position any less entrenched: Bibi wants to stay in power (and free), and Hamas wants to remain relevant and in power, and they're more justified now than ever. Both regimes need to be replaced.
It's important to note that for most of its existence, "fighting against Israeli oppression" explicitly meant Israel no longer existing. This is the first time I can remember them even implying that they would accept a two state solution.
they accepted a two-state solution previously, the isreali PM that was negotiating with them at the time was assassinated.
Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by an Israeli law student who didn't believe in the peace talks. Hamas didn't even kill him, Israel did it. No fucking surprise there.
Hamas was also not in power back then, in no position to accept or reject any solution.
You saying Israel killed him is like saying Palestine committed Oct. 7th's terrorist attack.
Israel didn't kill the guy, a lone Israeli student did. This is one of those times when facts and nuance matter.
That was Fatah, not Hamas. Hamas was irrelevant back in the 90s and didn't rise to prominence until the mid-2000s.
That was in the 70's, he was killed by a student, not the government.
And the PA, including Yasser Arafat, have turned it down 4 or 5 times. Yasser Arafat turned it down last time in 2002/2004(?). They have never taken it seriously.
Camp Davis and the Oslo Accords were a way for Israel to change the De Facto annexation of the West Bank into a De Juro annexation. While giving the PA a 'semblence' of a state still under Israeli Military Control. There was no offer of a sovereign state, nor of right of return. Arafat didn't reject a Two-State Solution, he walked away from a verbal 'offer' of taking 90% (later ~80% once written up in Oslo) of the Occupied Palestinian Territories, while ignoring all Palestinian wants such as Right of Return and Sovereignty with an end to Occupation.
Camp David: a tragedy of errors - The Guardian
Deconstructing Camp David - Al Jazeera
What Really Happened Between Barak and Arafat at Camp David? - Haaretz
Oslo accords: 30 years on, the dream of a two-state solution seems further away than ever - The Conversation
If Arafat wasn’t serious about negotiations, why sit down at all and risk his position in the PLO? For decades the ‘Three Nos’ stunted any Arab-Israeli diplomacy, and the maximalists still hold sway today as they did then
Israel refused the right of return for Palestinians as a whole, while for decades doing all within their power to boost Jewish immigration, bankroll Aliyah flights, rubber stamp naturalization, and regular ‘missionary’ trips to visit US and European nations - all only for ethnic Jews, and their spouses.
A two-tiered system based on race is hardly a fair deal, especially in a democratic system where your people are denied fair representation whilst Jew from the world over are invited to jump on a plane and become a full citizen after three months
Every offer has been in bad faith, though, designed to be a non-starter so that Israel could claim they tried.
Better check that history video again. It wasn't Hamas at that table
Before 1948, Palestinian Leadership repeatedly advocated for a Unitary Binational State for decades: Palestinian Arab Congress advocating for Unified State 1928, Arab Higher Committee advocating for Unified State 1937, Arab League advocating for Unified State 1948
After the founding of Israel, the Two-State Solutions were utilized to further annex the Palestinian Occupied Territories and enact military control over Palestinians while denying them human and civil rights. This is apartheid. Despite this, both Fatah and Hamas have accepted a Two-State Solution on the 1967 borders, with the two most important factors being the Right of Return of Palestinian refugees and an end to the permanent occupation.
Oslo Accord Sources: MEE, NYT, Haaretz, AJ
History of peace process - The Intercept
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
One State Solution, Foreign Affairs
They wanted a unified Arab state, and they wanted the non-Arab immigrants out
And failing that, they tried to put a genocide on them
Small details, I know
It's true they wanted it to be an Arab state, since the vast majority were Arab. It's not that they wanted 'non-arab immigrants' out, it's that Zionist Settler Colonialism was quite different from normal immigration. Instead of integration, the early land purchases led to the expulsion of tens of thousands of Palestinians in the early 1900's. Many Palestinians opposed the Zionist Land Purchases and Immigration because of fears they would be forced out of their homes and communities, not because they were Jewish.
The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948
Transfer Committee and the JNF led to Forced Displacement of 100,000 Palestinians throughout the mandate.
Are you talking about the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians? Because that was planned and carried out. There was nothing remotely equivalent from Palestinians or the Arab Liberation Army.
If you have sympathy for that argument, what's the difference with jewish people who want the same? Both wanted to be the first class citizens in their country.
That's true, but it's not different from renters who are forced out after their landlord sells the property. It's not a 'nice' part of humanity, but it's generally accepted as 'fair'. Of course it's true that most zionist immigrants had no plans to integrate with non-jews. Partly because of their own religious backwardness, partly because they moved there specifically to escape religious oppression.
There certainly was: Nebi Musa riots; 1929 Palestine Riots; etc. certainly showed the intent of many Palestinian Arabs to put an ethnic cleansing on the jews.
You're quite wrong if you don't think the ALA or others didn't go in with the same intent. You should look up their logo or statements from their organizers prior to their attack. The only reason one side won is because the other side lost
They said they would accept 1967 borders in their 2017 charter, so it's been done before. It was also less antisemitic than their previous charter. I think they're trying to be less extreme and more flexible to get more recruitment maybe, but that's just my guess.
4 or 5 other times it was offered and every time it was shot down by the PA because either it wasn't from the river to the sea or all jews have to leave.
It was never about sharing, it was about keeping it all to themselves.
They've publicly held this position for nearly 20 years now. When they publicly adopted it and got elected as the new Palestinian Authority because of it, Israel immediately declared war and prevented them taking power.
Well, they did fuck around and find out. Now they are facing an existential threat of their own and suddenly reasonable?
Funny how that works
Hamas has lied about peace and democracy in the past. They became the state of Palestine by winning an election in which they promised to stop attacks on civilians and be democratic, then refusing to hold an election for 2 decades.
Israel is a genocidal regime and needs to be stopped. But that doesn't make Hamas the good guys. A long-term solution can't include the current governments of either Israel or Palestine.
Hamas won an election in 2007, which no other country accepted the results of. Israel responded with a blockade. Not saying they're the good guys but it's not like it's a level playing field.
What! They "won" an election that nobody outside HAMAS found legitimate??? And then the country they promise to exterminate reacted? No way!?!?!?!?
Don't let facts get in your way:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_election
International observers noted that the elections, for the most part, were conducted fairly and in accordance with international standards.
There were some reports of voter obstruction - caused by Israel.
Yes also don’t forget that Fatah immediately led a coup against them, with public support and arms from Israel and support from US.
Quite a long term they have, 17 years and counting.
I thought we don't accept the results of the election?
Immediately after the election, Fatah, with US and Israeli support dismissed the Hamas government, which Hamas obviously disagreed with.
At this point there's a stalemate where we (the West) and Fatah don't recognize the Hamas government and Hamas can't call an election because they have not officially governed.
Nothing is stopping them from holding another election. There's clearly a desire for one, since Hamas has violently quelled dissent in the past.
The fact of the matter is that Hamas is looking out for Hamas, and that they haven't held elections in 14 years heavily underscores that.
To be absolutely clear, Israel is still the greater evil here. But that doesn't mean that Hamas isn't an authoritarian dictatorship either.
-Article 7 of Hamas’ founding charter
They were founded to kill Jews and push them out of Palestine. They’re not righteous freedom fighters.
-prayer of Sheik Ahmad Bahr
They’re just as genocidal as Israel has been as of late, they just lack the same capability Israel does.
Hamas began twenty years into the occupation during the first Intifada, with the goal of ending the occupation. Collective punishment has been a deliberate Israeli tactic for decades with the Dahiya doctrine. Violence such as suicide bombings and rockets escalated in response to Israeli enforcement of the occupation and apartheid.
Hamas 1988 Charter and Revised 2017 Charter
The 1988 Charter, which is certainly unreasonable in its fundamentalism with Sharia Law and is antisemitic, does not call for the extermination of all Jewish People. Hamas wants an end to Israel as an Apartheid State, not an extermination of all Israelis. Under Ahmed Yassin in the 1990's, truces were offered in exchange for Israeli to withdrawal from Gaza and the West Bank to the 1967 borders. The 2017 Revised charter explicitly accepts a Two-State Solution of the 1967 Borders. Check Article 7 and 13 of the 1988 Charter to see yourself, compare it to Article 20 and 24-26 in the revised charter.
The slogan From the River to the Sea is about Palestinian liberation that started in the 60s by the PLO for a democratic secular state, not Genocide. The Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad in 1966 maybe, but he's not Palestinian.
History of Hamas supported by Netanyahu since 2012
No I don't support Hamas as a ruling party, I want Palestinians to be able to have free fair elections.
Thanks for the links, I’ll give this a read later today.
I think that person you're replying to's point is they won't be able to recruit at the same right without the huge group of angry, oppressed people that Israel keeps producing. They'll wither away out off non-relevance.
Gotta love the wording in this article "Hamas, which is committed to the destruction of Israel..."
It's because the "state" of Israel is inseparable from a military blockade that imposes a starvation regime and illegally settles lands in the West Bank in direct defiance of the UN. It's like saying I'm committed to the destruction of the US because I'm committed to ending criminal wars of aggression, unconstitutional mass surveillance, and a prison system with 2 million residents.
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
Made up tripe should be treated as such, and people who believe in any kind of religious doctrine are delusion and deranged. We shouldn’t trust religious people with positions of authority or power, look at where this has gotten humanity.
Fully agree.
And to be crystal clear - that applies across all religions. It’s all bullshit and none of it should influence people in positions of power in any government.
I think Israeli leadership has already made the decision that all of that region is their land and they're not sharing it with anybody, or if they do, it'll be smaller reservations, similar to American Indian reservations in the US. They just want the Palestinians to eventually fade away. Violent groups like Hamas just help them more than anything because it gets Israelis riled up and gives their military an excuse to go in and carve out even more territory, so I'm sure they don't even care about this, they're like, "Why would we want you to lay down your arms?"
Left unchecked, this is only going to be the beginning.
Jordan condemns far-right Israeli minister over "Greater Israel" map
https://currentaffairs.adda247.com/greater-israel-map/
And they pretend to be outraged when they hear "from the river to the sea."
That map is disgusting.
The genocide of Native Americans happened when the world was less civilized, people as a whole were less aware and more disconnected. Allowing genocide in any era is unacceptable, it shouldn’t happen now.
“Best we can do is value menu holocaust.”
Even that they are failing hard at. Despite all the unimaginable cruelty and choicest Western weaponry, all they have succeeded in is causing utter destruction and wholesale slaughter; they have neither decisively defeated Hamas or broken the resolve of a people they have blockaded more or less since 1967. What a bunch of losers.
I would personally reject this deal.
The Palestinian people do not deserve to live under the rule of Hamas. In 19 years of living under Hamas, after all the money given to them by the US, France, the UK, Qatar, Iran, and even Israel, the only thing they built for the Palestinian people has been tunnels to commit terrorism from.
Instead, they deserve to live under the genocidal tyranny of Israel. Clearly that's the much better choice.
After Ireland gained independence they fought a civil war. Same in countless outer places. The Greeks fought one while fighting for independence. I fully expect the Palestinians to do the same.
The thing is: the Israelis don't get to decide any of this. That what independence from Israel means.
They also do not deserve to live under an Israeli genocide.
I mean yeah, but why can't we have a two state solution that gets rid of Hamas as a governing authority and also stops genocide?
The Israeli imposed closure on Gaza began in 1991, temporarily, becoming permanent in 1993. The barrier began around Gaza around 1972. After the 'disengagement' in 2007, this turned into a full blockade; where Israel has had control over the airspace, borders, and sea. Under the guise of 'dual-use' Israel has restricted food, allocating a minimum supply leading to over half of Gaza being food insecure; construction materials, medical supplies, and other basic necessities have also been restricted. This has been a deliberate tactic of De-development.
Gaza Policy Forum summary: Experts agree that Israel’s dual-use policy causes acute distress
The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of De-Development - Third Edition by Sara M. Roy
It said a free Palestinian State not Hamas rules
Probably, but they don't deserve to live under Israel either, and one of those is much more effective at killing them all.
Two state solution has to be the way to go, after that the people can have a Palestinian Spring if they want and overthrow Hamas, but whoever comes after is likely not going to be much better. They never are.
Yes, a two state solution is the only viable option. The problem is that Palestine never agrees to any of them. They won't this time either. As far as Hamas is concerned they'll only accept it if Tel Aviv is part of the independent Palestine. They regard the whole area as Palestine.
The guy in the op is literally talking about the 1967 green line.
An independent Palestinian state would give the Palestinian people a chance to throw off the yoke of Hamas.
Depends. Does conversion to a political party imply free elections and opposition parties to exist?
No, obviously Hamas would not take a deal that is conditional upon [the UN?] removing them from power and holding elections.
Not obviously. Hence my request for clarification.
Which terror groups that took full power restored the right to vote after having already stripped their people of that right?
A terror group with full power is no longer a terror group.
So.. You concede that there are no terror orgs who have expanded the rights of the people they control?
The basis of your statement is nonsensical.
Terror organisations don't control the rights of people. (If they did, then terrorism would not be needed)
Ahh yes. Reject the deal, continue the starvation and murder of thousands and thousands of Palestinians by Israel. Because what would be more liberating than being murdered?
I see statements like "Free Gaza from Hamas" to justify the continued genocide. It is no suprise, given that the Nazis wrote "Arbeit macht frei". "Work makes free",
Twisting genocide into claiming it to be a liberation of the people they are genociding. Now i am not sure, if you belong to these bad faith people, but if you wonder, why you are getting backlash, it is because your statement seems to be advocating for that.
Why do you automatically assume somebody who is anti-Hamas is pro-war?
Probably so you have an excuse to call people Nazis.
I won't be engaging with that nonsense. You can message again with an intent of more respectful dialog or you can be blocked.
If you are not arguing in bad faith, then you should acknowledge the consequences and the context of "not taking a deal from Hamas". And these consequences are continued death and destruction. You didn't address that context. Which is why i provided the context of these kind of statements by people using these stances in bad faith.
I agree…but one thing at a time. When Palestine is free, then they can get rid of Hamas. But right now, they’re on the same team against Israel…against literal genocide. A violently oppressive fundamentalist government is obviously something to shed when you have a state to expel them from. But they’re living under the worst case scenario right now. Hamas is their only defense at the moment against genocidal colonialist state. Fighting a battle on two fronts is a recipe for complete destruction.
You mean to fight the occupation?
Haha. Some fight. Millions of people living and dying in poverty and malnourishment so they could do a mass shooting of 1,300 people. They really showed em!
They have zero chance of fighting Israel and the only proper course for Hamas is an unconditional surrender and whatever peace terms Israel will grant them. They should be lucky to get the rights due prisoners of war. Usually you have to put yourself in a uniform to get those rights.
Hamas went all in hoping that once all of the other Muslim nations saw their merry slaughter of Jews, they would happily and immediately join in and attack Israel from all sides to complete the attempted genocide. They forgot about or chose to ignore a few things:
Israel has nukes and would use them if they felt fundamentally threatened, Israel has conventionally defeated every army that has ever attacked them (if sometimes by the skin of their teeth), has made reluctant, but reliable allies out of some of their former enemies and crippled others. Hamas didn't consider that Biden would protect Israel and fully commit to it, they kept the preparations for their attack so secret that only Tehran and Moscow knew about them, but crucially not Hezbollah (which ended up being muzzled by the American carrier groups anyway) and they gave nobody the necessary heads up for the months of buildup required for a full on war, because that would have given the whole thing away. While Hamas skillfully (with Russian and Iranian help) overcame the border defenses, they wasted the element of surprise on random carnage instead of overrunning the same airfields that have since been launching thousands of sorties that are, day by day, obliterating their organization.
And so on and so forth. The entire idea was foolish from the start and had no chance of success. Not that Moscow and Tehran expected any. They just used Hamas as pawns, hoping to weaken the US with this conflict. It's the standard zero sum game that autocrats love to play so much.
The Palestinian cause was already dying and it was only time before they were erased or expunged. What hamas did was revive that cause, even if you don't agree with them killing civilians (which i dont either). Most Palestinians were already living in terrible conditions and not because of hamas but because of the israel blockade of gaza. Which rendered it essentially to concentration camp.
The 1300 figure wasnt all by hamas. And from what we know so far about 300 were soliders, 300 were killed by israel themselves in the crossfire, and 300 were indeed civilians.
So far hamas has done pretty good for it self and has made some losses for israel. At the very least you can see its not a victory for israel.
Bud anyone that died in the chaos on October 7 was killed by Hamas. That's how criminal culpability works.
The blockade too was caused by Hamas and its ideological allies and predecessors. Every fucked up thing about Gaza in 2024 is traceable to poor decisions by their own leadership. They turned every public institution into instrumentalities of international terrorism. Hamas is the enemy. It's sad they have used psychotic interpretations of Islam to convince apparently significant portions of the Gazans public that Martyrdom™ is a civic duty, like where a legitimate state might have jury service or voting, but an evil, fanatical thing, not civic at all.
By your logic, Israel's government is just as culpable: https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
What a disgusting lack of knowledge of the areas history, wow
This is the reality no one wants to accept. Either surrender unconditionally, or be ethnically cleansed because it's clear the rest of the world's governments don't care.
With them on top of that new state? There will never be peace as long as Netanyahu and Hamas are in power. They all need to go
Unfortunately, in a recent poll 80% of israeli said that israel should take into consideration the suffering of civilians. Only less than 2% said they believed the IDF is using too much fire power. I think there is a deeper issue with people's sentiments.
Source
The charter of Likud says
so let's see if Israel chooses security or expansion this time. Every other time they have chosen expansion and a Greater Israel, but hopefully they choose peace this time.
Can indepent mean independent from Hamas (which was basically crafted by Israel)?
According to the definitions of the words yes it can
I don't think they would, but I certainly support testing this claim.
dude LET'S GO
Pre 1967 borders.
Youd have better odds of me shitting out a herd of albino rabid kittens than Israel ever agreeing to those terms.
sounds good
Great news, too bad israel has zero interest in a Palestinian state nor peace. Israel wants to ethnically cleanse all Palestinians and expand their Lebensraum That much has been fully proven over the last six months.
With Biden sending 26 Billion dollars to reimburse all the costs of this Genocide, without strings attached, it's clear that the path forward for israel is to now fully commit to their Gaza Holocaust.
Update: it was rejected.
Again.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Al-Hayya, a high-ranking Hamas official who has represented the Palestinian militants in negotiations for a cease-fire and hostage exchange, struck a sometimes defiant and other times conciliatory tone.
Speaking to the AP in Istanbul, Al-Hayya said Hamas wants to join the Palestine Liberation Organization, headed by the rival Fatah faction, to form a unified government for Gaza and the West Bank.
The Palestinian Authority hopes to establish an independent state in the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza — areas captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war.
Al-Hayya denied a permanent move of the group’s main political office is in the works and said Hamas wants to see Qatar continue in its capacity as mediator in the talks.
Al-Hayya also implicitly threatened that Hamas would attack Israeli or other forces who might be stationed around a floating pier the U.S. is scrambling to build along Gaza’s coastline to deliver aid by sea.
He denied that Hamas militants had targeted civilians during the attacks — despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary — and said the operation succeeded in its goal of bringing the Palestinian issue back to the world’s attention.
The original article contains 1,167 words, the summary contains 190 words. Saved 84%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
They've been saying that for decades but nobody else is interested.
Returning to the 1967 borders is a nonstarter. Israel has stolen a LOT of land since then so it would mean evicting entire Israeli settlements. Not that I disagree with doing that, but Israel would never agree to it. It would be like the US giving good land back to the native Americans; it's simply never going to happen.