Bush Says U.S. Policy on Hamas Unchanged

The full text of Bush's press conference with the portions relevant to Hamas / Palestinian elections is here.

Condi's statement to Davos - the first statement made by the US - is also available in the same convenient, cut up format here:

But of course.

In the press conference, Bush said words to the effect he would not cooperate with the Hamas because its charter called for the destruction of Israel. The thing is, Fatah's charter called for the destruction of Israel as well. Expect the allure of "dialogue" to become to strong to resist, if not for this administration, then for the next one.

All the doublespeak in that conference-- it was hard to watch.

My best guess would be that the Bush admin doesn't want to be seen as jumping the gun. If they come out strongly and cut off aid now, they may be seen on the "Arab Street" (not that we should care) as influencing the formation of the government. It would probably also be to their advantage to wait to play the aid card until the new government is formally established-- much less opportunity for deception on the part of the PA while things settle down.

But you'd think they could be forthright about that much, and come out and say action will be taken when the goverment is formed. Right now, it comes across as the aforementioned doublespeak, as well as flip-flopping, waffling, you name it.

Nothing about cutting off the Jizyah -- not even a hint?

I wish I were a fly on the wall at the next meeting between Javier Solana and his counter-part, the Hamas Foreign Minister.

SOLANA: Look, we all have the same long-term objective in mind but you must exercise some patience. Plausible deniability is the key. Just consider how much global support we were able to garner for the Palestinians with Fatah in power. Think about the donor conferences, the UN resolutions, the political and economic pressure we can bring to bear on Israel, the backdoor NGO funding to undermine the Israeli government, the continuous stream of propaganda from AFP and the BBC.

HAMAS FM: We will not sacrifice our principles. These benefits must continue with no change in our official policies.

SOLANA: OK, you drive a hard bargain but I'm sure I can pull some strings.

Nothing about cutting off the Jizyah -- not even a hint? - posted by Hugh

No. The strongest words uttered yet by the administration have been by Condi Rice (the "one foot in terror" remark). No specifics.

But fasten your seatbelts; I think they're "concerned!" ;)

Prior to making the above comment, however, Bush said that it was "healthy"--yes, that was his actual word--that the Palestinians voted in these elections because it was a sign of democracy in action. As if either Fatah or Hamas had any intention of doing anything more than paying lip service to the mechanisms of democracy while eschewing its spirit, its soul.

I wonder if the President would have used the word "healthy" in the context of this election had a party named "al Qaeda" appeared on the ballot.

What we have here is foreign policy crafted by social scientists. It's a nightmare.

Hamas has a history of targetting and slaughtering women, children, and infants, for the purpose of provoking maximum outrage and gaining maximum attention. They are proud of their record, taking full credit for their attacks on civilians. We know this.

Now, look at this phrasing: "Bush said Thursday that Hamas cannot be a partner for Middle East peacemaking without renouncing violence"

"Renouncing violence"? Why isn't the phrasing "renouncing slaughtering women, children, and infants"?

"Renouncing violence" makes Hamas seem like a bunch of neighborhood juveniles who are being scolded for play-fighting too aggressively on the street corner. Maybe it's time to publish a summary of Hamas' record of slaughter and their gleeful celebration thereof?

"foreign policy crafted by social scientists..."
-- from a posting by Rebecca above

A funny formulation. But is it possibly unfair to some social scientists, such as Erving Goffman? Or more than fair to some bona fide "foreign-policy" experts, graduates of Woodrow-Wilson, Fletcher-School, JohnsHopkinsAdvancedInternationalSomethingorother Programs in this or that, full of policy papers and positions, exhausting to write, impossible to read, who never learned about the world, present or past, by studying history, and literature, and getting degrees instead in current events? There are the total fools, whnohave made Arab-Israeli negotations their entire life's work (God, can you imagine sitting at a dinner party next to Dennis Ross?) without once studying the relevance of Islam (I think by now they are all running phony "Middle Eastern" think-tanks and assorted Mighty-Morph-Ranger-supported Saban Centers here and there), and are now Yesterday's Men, but refuse to go quietly, and in fact are as noisy as ever. Put them out to pasture. In Montana. Forever.

Exactly, Hugh. I see Zbigniew Brzezinski in a ten gallon hat.

There are many ways this can be played out.. Hammas should be careful what they wish for as they may get it! causing problems and being the bully is the easy part, working a government and providing essential services to their people will become a ball and chain for these terrorist types. l dont think the PA will give up power that easy. now Abbas will be sorry he did not dismantle Hammas is paying the price of defeat and worse! the main point is that Hammas is a known quantity, the enemy, and you dont deal with them. the West has always been apologic to the PA, and now Hammas will have to deliver for their people and will face the wrath later. and l know the begining of the end of Hammas has only just begun!

I hope western subventions to Palestine were stopped now. We need a steel wall.