I disagree with assertions by David Ignatius in his June 6 op-ed, “Biden is right. We must seize this opportunity for peace.” His claim that “dictatorial rule by Hamas is finished” was wishful thinking. The threat Hamas presents to Israel matters just as much as its political power, and Hamas remains lethal, controlling weapons and tunnels. Hamas fighters’ use of RPGs against Israeli forces during the hostage rescue operation demonstrates the organization’s continued capacity to engage.
Mr. Ignatius argued that “the framework for [Palestinian governance] will be built by supporters of the Palestinian Authority.” But a recent survey from the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research found that more than 60 percent of respondents wanted to dissolve the Palestinian Authority. And 61 percent of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza wanted Hamas to run Gaza after the war, vs. just 6 percent who preferred the Palestinian Authority under its current leadership. Hamas won’t relinquish power peacefully, even if it means civil war as in 2007.
Mr. Ignatius said that “the United Nations, Egypt and Qatar would lead an international effort for comprehensive reconstruction” of Gaza. But those two Arab nations and the United Nations are complicit in militarizing and radicalizing Palestinians. Egypt has had to be pressured to address Hamas’s tunnel construction and arms smuggling. Qatar funds Hamas (and before Oct. 7 did so with encouragement from Israel) and shelters its leaders. For years, outside reports have documented evidence that U.N. schools teach anti-Jewish attitudes and sometimes outright Jew-hatred. Israel can’t trust these entities to rebuild Gaza.
Advertisem*nt
Mr. Ignatius wrote that he has “been urging Israel for months to finish its campaign,” a campaign that retired Gen. David H. Petraeus described in a conversation with Mr. Ignatius as “fiendishly difficult.” To reach “the day after,” Israel needs more time to decimate Hamas and destroy tunnels. This “opportunity for peace” is a phantasm.
Charles D. Eden, Atlanta
Who is ‘we’?
David Ignatius was right that, as the title of his June 6 op-ed put it, “We must seize this opportunity for peace.” But the question remains: Who should be included in that “we”?
Mr. Ignatius rightly asked that blunt question, but to my mind, he failed to go far enough. Let’s not forget that after Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, the assumption was that the governing authority would continue to be the corrupt and dysfunctional Palestine Authority. In the elections soon after, Hamas, campaigning as the Change and Reform Party, defeated the ruling Fatah party and then consolidated its hold over Gaza with force. Did Gazans know then that they were empowering an Islamist extremist government? Of course they did. Why are they not speaking up now? Some are. Others might feel they don’t have the power to do so, that Hamas will not let them or that they have to focus on surviving. It’s hard to blame them at this point.
The better blunt question is: Why is it that here in the United States, Palestinian American citizens, Muslim elected members of Congress, and leaders of large Muslim communities in the Midwest have not spoken up forcefully against Hamas and for peace with Israel? Their ability to speak up is unlimited. Supporting two states without recognizing Israel’s right to exist is meaningless. Because we hear nothing else, it’s too easy to interpret such silence as support for Hamas and Hamas’ goal of eliminating Israel. They are the “we” who should be seizing the opportunity for peace. Their silence is deafening.
Barry Leibowitz, Bethesda
Public opinion and opposition
Finally, David Ignatius hit the nail on the head. Why, indeed, aren’t the majority of Palestinians demanding that Hamas accept the most recently advanced peace initiative by the United States? Until now, too few commentators have asked that key question lest it appear that they are suggesting that Palestinian citizens themselves are the main obstacle to peace.
Advertisem*nt
Yet that continued support for armed struggle explains why Hamas has been empowered to reject generous peace initiatives propounded by the Israelis. The inability to confront that reality also explains why credulous demonstrators, many of them college students, are so enamored of the Palestinian cause. Poll after poll demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are not only supportive of Hamas but also wholeheartedly against a two-state solution.
David R. Solomon, Owings Mills
Leaders who don’t care
David Ignatius wrote that “surely, it’s in the interest of Palestinians civilians who have suffered so much in this conflict” for Hamas to accept a peace deal with Israel. But Hamas is not concerned with the welfare of the Palestinian people.
As the Wall Street Journal reported extensively this month, Hamas leader Yehiya Sinwar wants Palestinian casualties with which to demonize Israel. Hamas uses Palestinians civilians and civilian facilities as shields for its war efforts. Ordinary Gazans do not always receive the full ratio of food aid Hamas is supposed to deliver to them and end up relying on black markets.
Advertisem*nt
Hamas is all about Israel, not about Palestinian welfare. Regrettably, Palestinians living in areas governed by the Palestinian Authority seem to support Hamas’s Israel obsession. Two-thirds of Palestinians support the Hamas raid on Oct. 7 outright, and 80 percent see it as an effective tactic for elevating Palestinian concerns on the world stage. If permitted to vote, Palestinian voters would choose Hamas over the Palestinian Authority. It’s hard to imagine a scenario in which Palestinians would pressure Hamas en masse to stop the war.
Iran is the biggest beneficiary of all, masterminding the war against Israel without paying a price for its intervention.
Of all the international actors, only Israel is forthright about the necessity of deradicalizing all Palestinians. Only when this is accomplished can the Palestinians accept the legitimacy of the Jewish state and all can live in peace. This will never happen if the war is stopped prematurely, leaving Hamas capable of regaining control.
Advertisem*nt
Larry Shapiro, Calgary, Alberta
Generational suffering
David Ignatius has been a go-to for me regarding thoughtful insight on the Israel-Gaza war. To say I was disappointed in his June 6 op-ed would be a gross understatement. In writing that “Gaza could actually experience something of a postwar boom,” he unduly minimized not only the immensity of what innocent Palestinians have suffered but also what they face for decades to come.
To imply that a fragile deal that might or might not be reached will make it possible for Gaza to thrive anytime in the near future seems to ignore the tragic history of Middle East “peace deals.” Surely history has taught us that once the parties have signed on the dotted line, the truly difficult work begins. Those parties need to be held accountable to their promises until they are fully realized. If the United States and other nations are genuinely serious about a lasting resolution to this complex conflict, they will aid and support the peacekeeping and humanitarian nonpolitical agencies on the ground that will do just that.
Advertisem*nt
Even if by some miracle we do see a quick recovery of the infrastructure that Israeli forces have flattened, what about the millions of civilians who survive, especially the children? Their medical and mental trauma will last throughout their lifetimes and reverberate for generations. There will be no “postwar boom” for them.
Pam Kirby, Ashland, Va.
Mr. Ignatius responds:
The anguish of the Gaza war is evident in readers’ thoughtful responses to my recent columns. They pose questions I have been struggling with over nearly 45 years of covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: Why don’t Palestinians speak up against bad leaders who have squandered opportunities for peace, as Barry Leibowitz, David R. Solomon and Charles D. Eden ask? Why does Hamas use Palestinian civilians for cover and spend their blood as a currency of war, as Larry Shapiro says? And on the other side, why is the United States unable to curb Israeli operations in Gaza that President Biden and other officials have warned from the beginning are an overreaction akin to what the United States experienced after 9/11, as Pam Kirby implicitly asks?
Advertisem*nt
I try to remind myself of a promise I made decades ago to Israeli and Palestinian readers, when I was The Post’s foreign editor: that I would try to see this conflict “whole,” even when the pieces were so shattering to each side. Through these years, I’ve become more convinced than ever that Israelis can’t have enduring security unless Palestinians do, and vice versa. For combatants, there’s no middle in this conflict, but that’s the space that journalists must inhabit.
