In 2006 letter to Bush, Haniyeh offered compromise with Israel

[delad]

A few months after Hamas' 2006 election victory, leader Ismail Haniyeh tried to start a dialogue with U.S. President George W. Bush.

<snip>

Haniyeh dictated a short message he asked Segal to transmit to President Bush. Haniyeh spoke Arabic and Youssuf translated his words into English. Segal took down the letter in his notebook and Haniyeh and Youssuf both signed it.

Haniyeh wrote in the missive, "We are an elected government which came through a democratic process."

In the second paragraph, Haniyeh laid out the political platform he maintains to this day. "We are so concerned about stability and security in the area that we don't mind having a Palestinian state in the 1967 borders and offering a truce for many years," he wrote.

Haniyeh called on Bush to launch a dialogue with the Hamas government.

"We are not warmongers, we are peace makers and we call on the American government to have direct negotiations with the elected government," he wrote. Haniyeh also urged the American government to act to end the international boycott "because the continuation of this situation will encourage violence and chaos in the whole region."

<snip>

In his own letter, Segal emphasized that a state within the 1967 borders and a truce for many years could be considered Hamas' de facto recognition of Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1037258.html

[ProgressiveMuslim]

1. How in the world can continuation of this conflict possibly be in the US' best interest?

That's the real question: why does the US continually act against its own best interests vis-a-vis this conflict?

[LeftishBrit]

3. How can it be in anyone's best interest?

Why for that matter do Israel AND the Palestinians continually act against their own best interests vis-a-vis this conflict?

But then, so do the participants in most conflicts.

The Israeli right just reinforce Hamas' political strength, and give them continued popularity despite their disastrous peformance as a government; and the Palestinian right could as well be Netanyahu's campaign managers, they've strengthened his position so often.

[oberliner]

4. Got any theories?

Why do you think the US continually acts against its own best interests?

What is your theory on this?

[Vegasaurus]

2. Of course Hamas is made up of warmongers

They believe that killing as many innocent people as possible is preferable to developing their own society.

They put war above peace every time.

And an elected government puts the welfare of its people first.

Hamas has never ever put its people first, so they do not deserve to be in positions of power anyway. The people who suffer under Hamas are the innocent.

[azurnoir]

5. Elected governments put the welfare of their people first?

You mean like the current US government?

[aranthus]

6. A worthless compromise

All Hamas was offering was a "truce" in exchange for Israel withdrawing to the 1967 lines. That's worse than a return to the status quo before 1967, because under the Hamas "compromise" the Palestinians would have a state which could build up an army and then break the truce whenever it suited them. A truce isn't recognition of Israel, and it isn't a peace agreement. In short, Hamas was offering to have Israel give them everything they would need to re-group, re-arm and then attack Israel at a later date, in exchange for Hamas keeping things quiet while they readied for the final battle. Thanks for nothing.

I want there to be peace between a Palestinian state and Israel as much as anyone, but it won't happen as long as Hamas is offering nothing but false compromises, and as long as there are tools willing to fall for it.