"The two-state solution has finally worked"

[BestCenter]

Source: Jerusalem Post

Analysis: Hamas's Gaza and Fatah's West Bank
<...>

Tuesday night, PA Chairman and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas convened his top aides in the West Bank to assess the situation in the wake of what he has called the "military coup" staged by Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

One of the options facing Abbas is to break up the coalition partnership with Hamas and to officially declare war on the Islamic movement.

Whatever decision Abbas and his Fatah lieutenants take, it will be hard to change the new reality that has been created on the ground, especially in the Gaza Strip. As of today, the Palestinians can boast that they have two entities - one in the Gaza Strip run by Muslim fundamentalists and another one in the West Bank under the control of secular Fatah leaders.

"The two-state solution has finally worked," a Palestinian journalist in the Gaza Strip commented sarcastically. "Today, all our enemies have good reason to celebrate."

Read more: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1181570259399&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[Freddie Stubbs]

1. Kind of like what happed to Pakistan

Bangladesh was part of Pakistan until ir broke away in the 1970's.

[pampango]

2. Pardon my ignorance but is the Hamas-Fatah conflict essentially

a Shiite-Sunni issue or a religious-secular divide or is there more to it than that?

[Kagemusha]

3. Closer to religious-secular divide.

There's more to it than that, but that's close enough that it constitutes the easiest difference to cite.

[BestCenter]

4. Yeah.

Also, recently, Fatah has been seen as an Israeli-American stooge, and they really are being armed by us to fight Hamas, but it's still ironic considering they are the party of Arafat and Black September. I don't think the Shia-Sunni divide crops up much in Israel-Palestine.

[razzleberry]

5. less to it than that

more of a war between street gangs,
with tribalism thrown in.

for a gang to win, it has to evict the
current occupant.

Naturally, the people involved will claim some
philisophical difference.

Jets, Sharks,
Bloods, Cryps
Spurs, Cavs

can't be both

[Kagemusha]

6. And, as BestCenter alludes to, that one is Bush's stooge and the other is not.

Either way, not your most noble conflict.

[youngdem]

7. Militant Extremists vs. Secular Moderates

[happyslug]

8. No, more working class vs upper Middle Class

Hamas, while religious, has its greatest strength among the working class of Gaza AND the West bank. Fatah strength was among the upper middle (i.e Professional) class. Gaza was so poor (Comparible to Haiti) that in effective you had NO upper Middle class, so Hamas has little or any real opposition in Gaza (And thus why they won). Gaza is a rich farming area, but with a high population density that it was always poor with just enough food to feed itself and then export food and laborers to the rest of Palestine prior to 1948, occupied by ignored by Egypt from 1948 till 1967 and occupied and ignored by Israeli after 1967. Into this vacuum Hamas grew into existence as the only group that proposed ANYTHING to held the people of Gaza (Re-enforced since Arafat agreed to work with Israel, with what hold Fatah had on Gaza disappearing with Arafat's death).

On the other hand, the West Bank had been the wealthier part of Palestine BEFORE 1947, and then maintained by Jordan up to 1967 (and the King Of Jordan kept paying the Mayors and other officials in the West Bank even during the Israeli occupation). During the first Infatdae, it was Arafat's Fatah that keep getting food and supplies to the people of the west bank. This caused the professionals and the rest of the Upper Middle Class to switch allegiance to Fatah during the 1980s and 1990s. THe problem was Fatah while capable of taking care of the Needs of the Upper Middled Class to be in Control of the West Bank, provided almost NOTHING to the poor and working class (Who were hurt the most by the embargo's of Israel against West Banks laborers from traveling to Israel for work). Once Israel cut off work permits to the working class of the West Bank, the only organization that offered to help this group was Hamas, and thus Hamas was the power house even in the last ten years even in the West Bank. The only check on Hamas was Arafat, whom all classes of Palestinians respected. Once he died, Fatah lost what hold they had on the lower classes even on the West Bank (and thus why Hamas won the last election even in the West Bank).

I hate sounding like a Communist, but the differences between Hamas and Fatah in regards to Religion is minor. The real difference is Hamas wants Israel to give its supporters LAND in Israel, land most possessed prior to 1947. Fatah is willing to accept the situation as it is for its power base in based on the existing power structure in the West Bank (i.e. give them a share of Jerusalem and they will accept being a source of labor for Israel for Fatah will NOT be the Laborers, the supporters of Hamas will be, the Supporters of Fatah will be happy being the people who SUPPLY the Laborers and control and live off those laborers).

In many ways we are seeing a Communist revolt in Gaza and the West Bank, the working class saying they want to control HOW they supply their labor instead of someone else. The Working Class want people they TRUST to run the Government and at present that is NOT Fatah. This probably should have occurred in the 1990s but even among the Working Class Arafat had a lot of respect. Abbas and the rest of the present leadership of Fatah does NOT and thus the vote for Hamas and now this take over by Hamas after Abbas tried to remove them from power.

[Igel]

9. But I don't think I'd project so much to say class divisions are the cause.

There's some of it in there, but it's not the Western version.

One could easily say it's
religious vs secular
extremist vs moderate (or 'less extremist')
uneducated vs educated (at least in outlook)
strong honor system vs weakened honor system
xenophobic vs less xenophobic

as much as

poor versus well off.

The features are so strongly correlated that I don't think we can say which is primary, although the verbiage from the two camps say its religious vs secular and strong honor vs weak honor (or xenophobic vs less xenophobic ... the two traits are probably reducible to one if I worked hard at it).

[FarCenter]

12. Hamas was also supported by Israel as a counter to the PLO

In the late '70s and early '80s, Israel encouraged and indirectly supported Hamas, which at that time was more of a religious charitable organzation.

The theme at the time was that conservative religious organizations should be supported in the Middle East and Central Asia as a counter to secular socialist movements such as the PLO. The view during the Carter/Reagan administrations was that conservative Islamists and conservative Christians were natural allies against Godless Communism.

This was theologically naive.

Conservative Israelis may also have supported Hamas with the thought that it would impede the peace process an allow Israel to keep the occupied territories indefinitely.

[rodeodance]

10. Another interesting take on Gaza...

Another interesting take on Gaza...

http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000596.htm

[moondust]

11. Ironic.

In the past Iran and other Islamic fundies have declared their desire to push Israel into the sea. Geographically speaking, won't Gaza/Hamas be the first to get their feet wet?