The
Middle East from 1922 8th November 2023
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas
In 1987, after the outbreak of the First
Intifada against Israel, Hamas was founded by Palestinian imam and activist Ahmed Yassin. It emerged out of
his Mujama al-Islamiya (Islamic Centre), which had been established in Gaza in
1973 as an Islamic charity involved with the Egypt-based Muslim
Brotherhood.[21] Hamas became increasingly involved in
the Israeli–Palestinian conflict by the late 1990s;[61] it opposed the Israel–PLO Letters of Mutual Recognition as well as the Oslo Accords, which saw Fatah renounce
"the use of terrorism and other acts of violence" and recognize Israel in pursuit of a two-state
solution.
Hamas continued to advocate Palestinian armed resistance, won the 2006 Palestinian legislative election,[62] gaining a majority
in the Palestinian Legislative Council,[63] and took control
of the Gaza Strip from Fatah following a civil war in 2007.[64][65] Since then, it has
run Gaza as a de facto autocratic and one-party
state.[66][67][68]
While historically seeking an Islamic Palestinian state over the
combined territory of Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip (rejecting
the two-state solution),[69][70] Hamas began negotiating with Israel and the 1967 borders
in the agreements it signed with Fatah in 2005, 2006 and 2007.[71] In 2017, Hamas released a new charter that supported a
Palestinian state within the 1967 borders without recognizing Israel.[72][73][74][75] Hamas's repeated offers of a truce (for a period of
10–100 years[76]) based on the 1967 borders are seen by many as being consistent
with a two-state solution,[77][78][79][80] while others state that Hamas retains the long-term
objective of establishing one state in former Mandatory
Palestine.[81][82] Under the ideological principles of Islamism, Hamas promotes Palestinian nationalism in an Islamic
context;
it has pursued a policy of jihad (armed struggle) against Israel.[c] It has a social service wing, Dawah, and a military wing,
the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades.[d][e] Since the mid-1990s,[21] Hamas has gained widespread popularity
within Palestinian society for its anti-Israeli
stance.[86][87] The group's attacks,
including suicide bombings against civilian targets and indiscriminate rocket attacks, have led many countries
and academics[59] to designate Hamas a terrorist organization.[88][89][50] A 2018 attempt to condemn Hamas for "acts of
terror" at the United
Nations failed.[f]
The Gaza Strip is currently under blockade. Israel and Hamas have fought a number of wars there,
including in 2008–09, in 2012 and in 2014. In the 2023 war, Hamas launched "Operation Al-Aqsa Flood" and its fighters broke through
the Gaza barrier, attacked Israeli military bases, massacred civilians and took civilian and soldier hostages back to Gaza.[91][92][93] The attack has been described as the
biggest military setback for Israel since the 1973
Arab–Israeli War. In response, Israel intensified the existing Gaza blockade and began a
large-scale aerial bombardment campaign over the territory in preparation
for a ground assault, having announced its intention to destroy Hamas.[94] The European
Parliament and the US have also called for
the elimination of Hamas
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/01/hamas-new-charter-palestine-israel-1967-borders
n advance of the
publication, Netanyahu’s office said: “Hamas’s document is a smokescreen. We
see Hamas continuing to invest all of its resources not just in preparing for
war with Israel, but also in educating the children of Gaza to want to destroy
Israel.”
Hamas has
unveiled a new political programme softening its stance on Israel by accepting the idea of a
Palestinian state in territories occupied by Israel in the six-day war of 1967.
The
new document states the Islamist movement it is not seeking war with the Jewish
people – only with Zionism that drives the occupation of Palestine.
The new document also insists that Hamas is a not a revolutionary force
that seeks to intervene in other countries, a commitment that is likely to be
welcomed by other states such as Egypt.
The policy platform was announced by the
head of the movement’s political bureau, Khaled Meshal, at a press conference
in Doha. “Hamas advocates the liberation of all of Palestine but is ready to
support the state on 1967 borders without recognising Israel or ceding any rights,” he said.
The
move comes just two days before a White House meeting between Donald Trump and
Mahmoud Abbas, whose Fatah movement remains at odds with Hamas.
But according to diplomatic sources, the
new document has been in preparation for years and has been the subject of
intense debate between the various Hamas factions in Gaza, in exile and in prison.
Although
it does not explicitly supplant the previous charter of the founding fathers,
seen by many as racist, it is being described by those seeking to help Hamas
toward a more peaceful path as the contemporary summary of Hamas beliefs and
aims.
Israel
rejected the document before its full publication, with a spokesman for the
prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, saying: “Hamas is attempting to fool the
world, but it will not succeed.”
Ed
Royce, the chair of the House foreign relations committee, said: “Until Hamas
recognises Israel’s right to exist, its words are meaningless. I will see to it
that Hamas remains designated a terrorist organisation as long as it continues
to launch rocket attacks against Israeli civilians, remains an Iranian proxy,
and engages in other acts that threaten the US and Israel.”
But
some influential diplomatic figures will seek to persuade Trump’s Middle East
advisers that the document at least shows there is the potential for a peace
settlement based on the recent regional push led by Egypt. It may also open the
way for international investors to start rebuilding basic services in Gaza, and
end the blockade.
In
the biggest concession, the new document states that Hamas “considers the
establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with
Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of 4 June 1967, with the return of the
refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be
a formula of national consensus”.
By
implication, the document accepts that there will be another state entity
outside these borders, even if it does not mention Israel.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/02/hamas-charter-antisemitism
Why now is the time to talk to Hamas
by Tareq Baconi 2nd
This article is more than 6 years old
|
|
May 2017
On Monday night, the head of Hamas’s political bureau,
Khaled Meshal, officially unveiled the organisation’s much-anticipated “Document of general principles and policies” during a press conference in Doha.
Compared to the movement’s
founding document, this new one is relatively nuanced and politically astute.
Although it falls short of many privately voiced hopes regarding anticipated
reforms within Hamas, it offers a fair representation of Hamas’s evolution as a
movement and governing entity in Gaza nearly 30 years after its founding.
Hamas unequivocally
supports the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state based on the 1967
borders, with Jerusalem as its capital. It does not recognise the state of
Israel or abandon the right of return of Palestinian refugees. Acquiescence to
intermediate statehood while maintaining a commitment to the eventual
liberation of Palestine is presented as a “formula of national consensus”. This
phrase underscores the nature of this document as a compromise between Hamas’s
various constituencies
The document explicitly
differentiates between Jews and Judaism on the one hand, and political Zionism
on the other, and notes that Hamas’s struggle is limited to the latter. It
stresses that the Jewish people’s struggle with antisemitism is not tied to Arabs
or Muslims but rather to Europe’s past.
his document is a
counterweight to claims that Hamas is an irrational, fanatical and bloodthirsty group intent on murdering all Jews. However, the notion that it
is a sign of absolute moderation or a volte face by Hamas is hype. The release
of the document should be understood as a balancing act, an effort to allow
pragmatism within Hamas to be presented publicly without undermining the
movement’s ideological base. It is a diplomatic tool that opens space for both
the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank and the international community to
engage with Hamas.
srael has systematically
acted in violation of international law for decades, killing
thousands of Palestinian civilians through its occupation and in warfare
conducted in densely populated areas. This is not to say that the two sides are
equivalent or to present a hierarchy of suffering. Rather it is to suggest that
the premise of engagement and diplomacy cannot be withheld from one party and
extended to another when both commit acts that violate international law.
Hamas’s political document
is closer to the two-state framework than the manifesto of Likud, Israeli prime
minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s own political party
Likud refuses to
recognise the right of Palestinians to self-determination. The racist views of
the Israeli political establishment have been met with a strengthening of
diplomatic ties with the US and the UK, while Hamas continues to face
marginalisation.
Despite its shortcomings,
Hamas’s new document articulates political demands that have long been central
to the Palestinian struggle, and that are enshrined in numerous UN resolutions,
including the right of return.
Trenchant criticism of
Zionism and its political manifestations in Israel today is hardly limited to
Hamas or even to Palestinians. Israel has historically chosen to evade these
political demands,
Hamas’s new document must
be recognised as an opportunity to engage with a crucial interlocutor that
continues to enjoy some legitimacy among its constituents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Egypt
The Kingdom of Egypt (Arabic: المملكة المصرية, romanized: Al-Mamlaka Al-Miṣreyya, lit. 'The Egyptian Kingdom') was the legal form of the Egyptian
state during the latter period of the Muhammad Ali dynasty's reign, from
the United Kingdom's recognition of Egyptian independence in 1922
until the abolition of the monarchy of Egypt and Sudan in 1953 following
the Egyptian Revolution of 1952. Until the Anglo-Egyptian treaty of 1936, the Kingdom was
only nominally independent, as the United
Kingdom retained control of foreign relations, communications, the
military, and Sudan. Officially, Sudan was governed as a condominium of the two states,
however, in reality, true power in Sudan lay with the United Kingdom. Between
1936 and 1952, the United Kingdom continued to maintain its military presence,
and its political advisers, at a reduced level.
The
legal status of Egypt had been highly convoluted, due to its de facto breakaway from the Ottoman
Empire in
1805, its occupation by Britain in 1882, and the re-establishment of the Sultanate
of Egypt (destroyed
by the Ottomans in 1517) as a British protectorate in 1914. In line with the change in
status from sultanate to kingdom, the title of the reigning Sultan, Fuad
I, was
changed from Sultan of Egypt to King
of Egypt.
Throughout the Kingdom's existence, Sudan was formally united
with Egypt. However, actual Egyptian authority in Sudan was largely nominal due
to United Kingdom's role as the dominant power in Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. As had been the case during the Khedivate
of Egypt,
and the Sultanate of Egypt, the Egyptian monarch was styled as the sovereign of
"Egypt and Sudan".
During
the reign of King Fuad, the monarchy struggled with the Wafd Party, a broadly based
nationalist political organisation strongly opposed to British influence in
Egypt, and with the British themselves, who were determined to maintain their
control over the Suez Canal. Other political forces emerging in this period included
the Communist Party (1925), and the Muslim
Brotherhood (1928),
which eventually became a potent political and religious force.
King
Fuad died in 1936, and the throne passed to his 16-year-old son, Farouk. Rising nationalist
sentiment in Egypt and Sudan, and British concern following Fascist
Italy's recent invasion of Abyssinia led to the Anglo-Egyptian treaty of 1936, which required the
United Kingdom to withdraw all troops from Egypt proper (excluding Sudan),
except in the Suez
Canal Zone (agreed
to be evacuated by 1949), but permitted the return of British military
personnel in the event of war. The Kingdom was plagued by corruption, and its
subjects saw it as a puppet of the British, notwithstanding the bitter enmity
between King Farouk and the United Kingdom during the Second World War, as
evidenced by the Abdeen Palace incident of 1942. This, coupled with the
defeat in the Palestine War of 1948–1949, led to the 1952 Egyptian Revolution by the Free Officers Movement. Farouk abdicated in favour of his infant
son Ahmed Fuad, who became King Fuad
II. In
1953 the monarchy was abolished, and the Republic of Egypt was established. The
legal status of Sudan was only resolved in 1953, when Egypt and United Kingdom
agreed that it should be granted independence in 1956.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emigration_of_Jews_from_Nazi_Germany_and_German-occupied_Europe
In 1933, Hitler and the Jewish League agreed
to the Haavara Agreement in which, over time, German Jews and their finances could
and would settle in Mandatory Palestine. Furthermore, the Havaara Mark was used instead of the Deutschmark, because of its
lower interest rates, and it was seen as more favourable. By the end of 1933,
of the 600,000 German Jews, 100,000 had already emigrated to Palestine.[1] Following
this, they discouraged emigration by restricting the amount of money Jews could
take from German banks and imposed high emigrations taxes. The German government forbade emigration from the Greater Germanic Reich after October 1941. The German Jews who remained, about
163,000 in Germany and less than 57,000 from annexed Austria, were mostly elderly who were murdered in ghettos or taken
to Nazi concentration
camps, where most were murdered.[2] Jews were
able to leave Vichy France until the fall of 1942.[3]
Although
Jews could initially leave Nazi Germany with ease, it was difficult to find
countries that would take them, particularly after the initial wave of
immigrants in Europe, Britain, and the United States had been accepted.[2] One
of the reasons that emigration was so difficult was that it began during
the Great
Depression.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission
The 1936 UK Lord Peel
Commission found that "though the Arabs have benefited by the development
of the country owing to Jewish immigration, this has had no conciliatory
effect. On the contrary, improvement in the economic situation in Palestine has
meant the deterioration of the political situation".[17] Addressing the "Arab charge that the
Jews have obtained too large a proportion of good land cannot be
maintained", the Commission noted that "Much of the land now carrying
orange groves was sand dunes or swamp and uncultivated when it was
purchased."[18] They write that "The shortage of land
is, we consider, due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the
increase in the Arab population".[18] "Endeavours to control the alienation
of land by Arabs to Jews have not been successful. In the hills there is no
more room for further close settlement by Jews; in the plains it should only be
allowed under certain restrictions."[15]
The Commission stated that
Government have attempted to discharge the contradictory obligations of the
Mandatory under conditions of great difficulty by "holding the
balance" between Jews and Arabs. Repeated attempts to conciliate either
race have only increased the trouble. The situation in Palestine has reached a
deadlock.[15] Development of local autonomy and
self-governing institutions, this also has been hampered.[15]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Egypt_under_Gamal_Abdel_Nasser
The history of Egypt under Gamal Abdel
Nasser covers the period of Egyptian history from the Egyptian Revolution of 1952, of which Gamal
Abdel Nasser was
one of the two principal leaders, spanning Nasser's presidency of Egypt from 1956 to his
death in 1970. Nasser's tenure as Egypt's leader heralded a new period of
modernisation and socialist reform in Egypt, along with a staunch advocacy
of pan-Arab nationalism (including a short-lived union with Syria), and developing
world solidarity.
His prestige in Egypt and throughout the Arab World soared in the wake
of his nationalisation of the Suez
Canal Company in
1956, and Egypt's political victory in the subsequent Tripartite Aggression, but was damaged badly
by Israel's successful invasion and occupation of Jordanian, Egyptian, Palestinian, and Syrian
territory in
the Six-Day War of 1967.
The era witnessed a rapid increase in living standards
unparalleled in Egypt's millennia of history, and is regarded as a time when
ordinary Egyptian citizens enjoyed unprecedented access to housing, education,
employment, healthcare, and nourishment, as well as other forms of social
welfare,
while the influence of the former aristocracy waned, as did that of the Western
governments that had hitherto dominated Egyptian affairs.[1][2] The national economy grew significantly through agrarian
reform,
major modernisation projects, such as the Helwan steel works, and
the Aswan High Dam, and the nationalisation of key parts of the economy, notably
the Suez Canal Company.[1][2] At its economic peak, Nasser's Egypt was capable of not
only offering free education and healthcare to its own citizens but also to the
citizens of other Arab and African countries, who were offered full
scholarships and living allowances to undertake higher education in Egypt
before returning to their home countries. However, the substantial economic
growth that marked the early 1960s took a downturn later in the decade,
particularly as Egypt's military quagmire in the North Yemen Civil War deepened, only recovering in the late
1970s.[3] During Nasser's time in office, Egypt experienced a golden
age of culture, particularly in theatre, film, poetry, television, radio,
literature, fine arts, comedy, and music.[2][4] Egypt under Nasser dominated the Arab World in these
fields, with Egyptian musical artists such as Abdel
Halim Hafez,[4] Umm Kulthum, and Mohammed Abdel Wahab, literary figures such as Naguib
Mahfouz,
and Tawfiq el-Hakim,[2] actors such as Faten
Hamama, Salah
Zulfikar, Soad Hosny and Rushdi
Abaza,[4] and the release of over 100 films yearly, compared to the
production of just more than a dozen annually during Hosni
Mubarak's presidency
(1981–2011).[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis
The Suez Crisis (also
called the Second Arab–Israeli war,[8][9][10] the Tripartite
Aggression[a] in the Arab world[11] and the Sinai
War[b] in Israel)[c] was an invasion of Egypt and the Gaza Strip in late 1956 by
Israel, followed by the United
Kingdom and France. The aims were to regain control of the Suez Canal for the Western
powers and to remove Egyptian president Gamal
Abdel Nasser,
who had just[12] nationalised the
foreign-owned Suez
Canal Company,
which administered the canal. Israel's primary objective was to re-open the
blocked Straits of Tiran.[13] After the fighting had started, political pressure from
the United States, the Soviet
Union,
and the United Nations led to a withdrawal by the three invaders. The episode
humiliated the United Kingdom and France and strengthened Nasser.[14][15][16]
On 26 July 1956, Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal Company,
which prior to that was owned primarily by British and French shareholders. On
29 October, Israel invaded the Gaza Strip and the
Egyptian Sinai. Britain and France issued a joint ultimatum to cease fire,
which was ignored. On 5 November, Britain and France landed paratroopers along the Suez
Canal. The Egyptian forces, before they were defeated, blocked all ship traffic
by sinking 40 ships in the canal. It later became clear that Israel, France and
Britain had conspired to plan the invasion. The three allies had attained a
number of their military objectives, but the canal was useless. Heavy political
pressure from the United States and the USSR led to a withdrawal. U.S.
president Dwight D. Eisenhower had strongly warned Britain not to
invade; he threatened serious damage to the British financial system by selling
the U.S. government's pound
sterling bonds.
Historians conclude the crisis "signified the end of Great Britain's role
as one of the world's major powers".[17][18][19][20][page needed]
The Suez Canal was closed from October 1956 until March 1957. Israel fulfilled some of
its objectives, such as attaining freedom of navigation through the Straits
of Tiran,
which Egypt had blocked to Israeli shipping since 1948–1950.[21][22]
As a result of the conflict, the United Nations created
the UNEF Peacekeepers to police the Egyptian–Israeli border, British prime minister Anthony
Eden resigned,
Canadian external affairs minister Lester
Pearson won
the Nobel Peace Prize, and the USSR may have been emboldened to invade Hungary.[23][24]
Nasser's response was the nationalisation of the Suez Canal. On 26 July, in a speech
in Alexandria, Nasser gave a riposte to Dulles. During his speech he
deliberately pronounced the name of Ferdinand de Lesseps, the builder of the canal, a code-word for
Egyptian forces to seize control of the canal and implement its
nationalisation.[108] He announced that the Nationalization Law had been
published, that all assets of the Suez Canal Company had been frozen, and that
stockholders would be paid the price of their shares according to the day's
closing price on the Paris Stock Exchange.[109] That same day, Egypt closed the canal to Israeli shipping.[110] Egypt also closed
the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, and blockaded the Gulf
of Aqaba,
in contravention of the Constantinople Convention of 1888. Many argued that this
was also a violation of the 1949 Armistice Agreements.[111][112]
According to the Egyptian historian Abd al-Azim Ramadan, the
events leading up to the nationalisation of the Suez Canal Company, as well as
other events during Nasser's rule, showed Nasser to be far from a rational,
responsible leader. Ramadan notes Nasser's decision to nationalise the Suez
Canal without political consultation as an example of his predilection for
solitary decision-making.[113]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1956%E2%80%931957_exodus_and_expulsions_from_Egypt
.jpg)
