So close, yet so far...

“I wonder why the issue of recognizing Israel is the key to everything?” Mr. Hamad said. “We are interested to end the siege, but not at any cost.”

He added: “We try to balance between our Palestinian national constants and our opening up to the international community. Israel is not ready to deal with any Palestinian side unless the Palestinians deal with the Israeli conditions.”
-NYTimes

Today, Fatah and Hamas have taken a huge step toward ending sectarian fighting that has been escalating since Hamas, the anti-Israel religious group voted into power because of promises to fix problems like education and health care in the Palestinian Territories, and recently came to a head with violent attacks between the parties. On one hand, this is a very positive step. Palestinian unity is important in the process that Palestinians hope will eventually lead to statehood. Both groups made political concessions today during the Saudi-initiated talks which ultimately show their commitment to the Palestinian people by ending pointless violence. Even the wording used in the new joint government resolution which says that the new leadership will "respect" Palestinian-Israeli agreements as opposed to "commit” to such agreements, can be viewed with a positive twist. Peace depends on the unification of the parties, and in reality, the difference between "respect" and "commit" is a semantic one, and hopefully, a steady peace between Israel and the Territories can be achieved out of the shaky wording as time goes by.

One major problem, however, cannot be glossed over with a coat of optimism: Hamad's public comments about not recognizing Israel. There can be no peace without recognizing that Israel is a legitimate state. Guys, NEWSFLASH: no one is packing up and leaving. Israel is a populous, thriving country with some of the best technology, the best defense and the best intelligence in the world. It is wealthy and organized; not to mention well-supported. Israel is there. Right now, "Palestine" is NOT a country. It is a series of disorganized, angry (albeit with good reason), poorly-backed, groups of people inside another country; Israel. There is absolutely no reason why Israel has to make any concessions for Palestinians. Israel is not going to give land to help create another hostile neighbor. Hamad may want to work for the Palestinian interests, but he can be pretty sure that Israel will justifiably act in its own best interest, and until Palestinians at least recognize Israel, they will not be given a chance to work for anything. Regardless of how embittered Palestinians are, nothing can be negotiated (or fought for---I think we've established that by now) regarding Israel, without Israel. This is how the conversation goes:

Palestinian Representative: Tell them we want to talk.
Russian/US/UN/Egyptian Rep: They want to talk
Israel: What do you want?
Russian/US/UN/Egyptian Rep: What do you want?
Palestinian Representative: We don't want Israel to exist. We want our own state.
Russian/US/UN/Egyptian Rep: They don't want Israel to exist. They want their own state.
Israel: No. Annnd No.
Russian/US/UN/Egyptian Rep: Well thanks for your time.

I grant that this is an obviously simplified version of peace talks, but stubbornness on both sides does not bode well for the immediate future of the conflict
.
It boggles my mind that Palestinian leadership "does not understand why everything revolves around recognizing Israel's right to exist." These are not uneducated peope, Palestinians, on the whole, are incredibly well educated, and their leadership is mostly foreign-educated, at the best universities in the world no less. Recognition is a threshold issue, and without recognition, the international community and Israel are justified in keeping statehood/autonomy talks at a stand-still. Why should Israel talk--all they will be doing is giving; giving land, loosening security measures, and for what? The idea is that all of this would be in exchange for peace and a halt to the terror attacks, but with the antagonism that anti-Israeli propaganda and statements like that of Hamad proppel, Israel should not, and frankly is not likely to, count on that peace. The only thing recognizing Israel would hurt is Palestinian pride (and perhaps the Israeli position). Strategically, not so smart move by the Palestinians.

Yes, respect should be mutual. Yes concessions will have to be mutual. Yes Israel should stop developing new settlements now (or by 2001…). However, incentive is everything, and if the new Palestinian representative government is hoping for a new start, "respect" for agreements can only take the process so far. Respect for Israel's right to exist? That, is the opportunity a unified Palestinian government could and should take in a time ripe for change within the territory. Peace talks cannot start unless you sit down at the table, and recognize that the one you are in conflict with exists and has a face. Pretending the person doesn’t exist, will not make them want to recognize you.

So much promise...so obviously not happening. While Palestinian unity is a step in the right direction, melding a flawed but semi-legit organization with a declared terrorist one and then making such pig-headed official comments about Israel and about the peace process, is several steps backward--not the way to lasting peace...perhaps it will be the way to cut even more government funding though...

Hopefully this is not characteristic of the initiatives the new government will take, and instead it can take affirmative steps in ending the suffering of its heavily burdened people.

Hamad doesn't understand why the process revolves around admitting legitimacy.
I don't understand what he doesn't understand.