Hamas: We won't rule out any bid for cease-fire

[bemildred]

A Hamas spokesman praised on Friday a decision by European Union lawmakers in Strasbourg, France on Thursday calling on Israel to end the blockade and open Gaza's border crossings.

"We in Hamas are highly appreciative of the initiative and the call made by the EU parliament to end the siege imposed on Gaza," said Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri. "We consider this an important development in the European attitude."

Zuhri also said that Hamas will not rule out any initiative to put an end to its armed conflict with Israel, Army Radio reported. The European Parliament, which has no executive powers, said in an adopted resolution that "the policy of isolation of the Gaza strip has failed at both the political and humanitarian level."

"The civilian population should be exempt from any military action and any collective punishment," it added.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/957091.html

[Fredda Weinberg]

1. From the same article

The lawmakers also urged the Gaza Strip's rulers Hamas to prevent the firing of rockets into Israel.

[Vegasaurus]

4. The rockets have to stop

Hamas has the power to do so. They got rid of Fatah, there is no way they couldn't stop the rockets, if they actually wanted to.

Saying they will offer some ceasefire means nothing, if Hamas can't control the militant groups, including their own military wing. So they offer a ceasefire? Big shit. It means nothing without some follow through, and the last "ceasefire" didn't have any rocket cessation (oh, just the "Hamas" rockets, not those from the IJ or any of the myriad other groups).

[pegleg]

22. That's the key - and it should be

That's always been the problem.

[Violet_Crumble]

2. That's a good sign...

I really hope both Hamas and the Israeli govt do take up any intitiatives that will lead to a ceasefire...

[ProgressiveMuslim]

3. From the anecdotal evidence I've seen, any Hamas offer is always brushed aside as a ploy.

It's fascinating how frequently "ceasefire" and "hudna" are derided by Israel's supporters.

I'm sure these offers will all be nonstarters as well.

A cease-fire could actually lead to real negotiations, with all parties at the table, and that could lead to an actual deal that would require Israel to withdrawl.

Worry not, lovers of occupation. The likelihood is slim.

[hack89]

5. But doesn't Hamas need to show they can actually enforce a ceasefire?

Why can't they simply say that no rockets will fall on Israel for 2 weeks as a sign of both commitment and capability to enforce a ceasefire? If successful, it would take away any moral argument that Israel has.

[Orange 5]

6. The same story all over again

Always israel breaks the cease of fire
either by arresting or killing

[hack89]

7. But if Israel breaks the ceasefire

then the moral equation changes to the favor of Hamas - it now becomes easier to mobilize world opinion in favor of Gaza. Right now it is hard for anyone to justify continuous rocket attacks against Israel.

Hamas does not have the same moral equivalence as the government of Israel in the eyes of most of the world - only they can change their image.

[azurnoir]

10. Denial denial denial

even if Israel did break a cease fire they would never ever admit it and in fact there would very like be teams experts explaining how it was not Israels fault, even caught on video there would be those to say how you can not believe your lying eyes.

[hack89]

11. Ok - the status quo it is then

Gaza is suffering, not Israel. If Hamas feels no obligation to make a bold step for peace, then so be. What's more death and suffering as long as they still have their pride?

[azurnoir]

13. That is not even remotely what I wrote

but at least you admit Gaza is suffering and that it costs Israel or its leaders nothing to continue with that, which is why Israel will never accept a cease fire, no matter what Hamas does.
There is also how long with no rockets a day, week, month, years? It is easy to if, when you know if is open ended enough to be meaningless.

[hack89]

14. Yes they are suffering

Are you justifying continued rocket attacks because stopping would be meaningless? What meaning do you place on continued rocket attacks?

[azurnoir]

17. No I do not support continued rocket attacks

but I do not believe stopping them will change anything either, I guess I'm growing nihilist

[Orange 5]

19. ..

either live free or die hard ;)

[hack89]

20. Who do you think will be doing most of dying?

You have a very callous attitude. Sometimes weak governments need to swallow their pride for the benefit of their people.

[Orange 5]

24. The wheel doesnt need to be reinvented

stop looking at ceasing fire in this narrow view
I am talking about a struggle that is 60 yrs old
do u really think cease of fire and stop firing rockets will end it
look at the big picture
n give the ownership back again to the landlords

[hack89]

25. It won't happen by magic

your way simply condemns thousands to misery - the Israelis can live with this status quo for a long time. The Palestinians can't.

[Orange 5]

18. darkness

interesting
I sense alot of hatered in there

[azurnoir]

30. Hate of what or maybe is it whom?

please be plain.

[LeftishBrit]

23. Excellent points!

[pelsar]

8. i got an idea...

given that there is not much to negotiate.....once the kassams stop, the borders can be opened to bring in stuff etc. as it was when israel left. But i understand that Hamas needs some "honor" here and have to get something from israel.

so i propose that israel invade n. gaza...and then hamas can negotiate an israeli withdrawl, opening up of the borders and they will stop the kassams......sort of what it was intended to be about 2 years ago.

[azurnoir]

9. Then why did it not happen then?

if this was even a remote possibility it would have; or are you proposing Israel comeing in and killing a few hundred Palestinians of course with 30% few civilian casualties and then Hamas makes nice, because Israel maybe did not break out the cluster bombs and kill a few thousand.

[pelsar]

21. cant remember?

then why did it not happen then?

the day after israel left gaza....30 kassams....and a continuous flow ever since......

i propose that one puts the blame squarely where it belongs...on the govt of gaza that is responsible for shooting random missiles at the israeli population across the border for no other the reason then to terrorize them.

[azurnoir]

32. Of course I remember

you made my point for me Israel lost 5 IDF and 2 civilians the Palestinians lost 277 "militants" and 117 civilians, but the Pali's should be grateful it wasn't thousands right?

So of those 30 rockets how many Israeli casualties came of them?

But not to worry Israels supporters in America are willing to fund the death of of any Palestinian who will get in the way of continued expansion.

[pelsar]

33. great point...

its ok for the Palestinians to try to kill/terrorize as many israelis as possible....as long as they dont succeed and more Palestinians are killed it means they are "in the right".

great philosophy...but i'm not worried about the world wide support...it appears most people put the emphasis on the intentions rather than the defense....

[azurnoir]

34. Really what "most: people"

If you are saying most of the world approves of Israel killing hundreds of Palestinians for the actions of a few then you may be mistaken, but if your honest then it is more like that a certain faction in America approves and until American campaign funding and political lobby laws change neither will America's support then you would be right.

And yes the EU considers Hamas a terrorist organisation but that unlike some in Israels government is not inclusive of each and every Palestinian in Gaza. The EU does not consider Hezbollah a terrorist organisation however.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

12. Yr solution is great if the goal is a return to the status quo of 2 years ago. nt

[hack89]

15. What status quo do you prefer?

the one before the first intifada?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

16. I condemn the status quo of today, 2 years ago or 20 years ago.

I reject any situation in which Palestinians are denied the same human rights you take for granted.

I do support 2 independent, economically viable stateswith full human rights for all.

But I realize that option is fading fast.

[oberliner]

26. Are there any states in the Middle East that you feel meet those criteria?

Just curious - are there any states in the Middle East that you feel are "economically viable states with full human rights for all"?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

27. What's your point, Arabs don't deserve what you have?

There probably is not an Arab alive in the ME who doesn't live under a despot -- either US backed despot like Hosni Mubarak, or a despot reacting to previous US manipulation, like Iran. Even those who live under so-called democracies are second-class citizens.

Palestinians have been clear about their goals for themselves as part of their national liberation struggle. 3 cheers for them for refusing to settle.

That question really irritates me and I do hope you explain its relevance.

[oberliner]

29. Absolutely, they do

In fact, I would support any attempt by any Arabs who do not feel that they are living under a regime that accords them basic human rights to attempt to liberate themselves from said regime by peaceful means.

I also share your disgust that the US backs so many corrupt dictators across the region (Egypt, Saudia Arabia, etc).

The question was meant to draw attention to the fact that most people throughout the Middle East are living without their basic human rights being respected. Would that more attention was given to the horrors of living under some of those despotic regimes.

Let us hope that when a newly created independent Palestinian state is finally declared that its respect for human rights will lead to positive changes in the less-open political systems that are prevalent across the Middle East.

[LeftishBrit]

28. So do I.

I also reject any situation in which Palestinians are denied the same human rights you take for granted.

I also support 2 independent, economically viable states with full human rights for all.

'But I realize that option is fading fast.'

I don't think it is fading fast; but I think it's urgent. I think it is a DIFFICULT option - but all other options are, in the long term, not difficult but impossible. So a two-state solution has to be negotiated and established and the sooner the better.

[oberliner]

31. I don't actually see where Hamas is proposing a cease-fire

This article does not indicate that Hamas is proposing a cease fire, merely that they won't rule that possibility out.

More telling is a recent article in the same newspaper indicating that Hamas is still aggressively attempting to smuggle weapons into Gaza.

[Vegasaurus]

35. That's why Hamas's rhetoric

means nothing. Their actions speak louder than words, and it is clear that their intentions about taking over all of "greater Palestine", by whatever violent means necessary, has never wavered.

Hudna, coming from Hamas, means more time to regroup and get bigger weapons.

[Violet_Crumble]

36. As yr totally opposed to any ceasefire, what's yr solution?

More and more and more violence involving more dead Palestinians and Israelis? Because the only way the violence can stop is if both sides get together and negotiate a ceasefire...