Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Attack Brings Renewed Strength for Hamas

An Israeli assault on Gaza has fortified the previously dwindling Palestinian support for Hamas … again.

Inter Press Service

The Islamist party Hamas had been losing support as a result of economic difficulties and factional fighting. Today Hamas is popular again, heralded for its retaliation in Israel’s latest military assault on the Gaza Strip.

Forty-year-old Ahmed Al Biltaji says his sympathy with Hamas after its election in 2006 had waned of late. Now he says he is ready to “gift” any of his five sons to join the resistance against Israel.

Umm Ala’a was more worried about high prices, scarcities and heavy taxation than pleased by Hamas’s strict interpretation of Islam. Her sons were loyal to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah movement in the West Bank and not to Hamas in Gaza where she lives.

She had vowed she would “never change her mind.” She has, about Hamas and about Fatah.

When a crude homemade rocket launched from Gaza Strip landed near the home she and her family were forced to flee at gunpoint in Jerusalem in 1948, for the first time in decades she says she didn’t feel helpless. Hamas had fought back.

Al Biltaji says the more Israel hits Hamas, the more popular the Hamas government becomes. “Air strikes by Israel will unite Palestinians until differences are replaced by unity between Fatah and Hamas.”

More than 1,000 rockets were fired from Gaza through the eight-day Israeli assault. Most were destroyed mid-air, or landed in open fields. Eight Israelis died in these attacks. In Gaza 178 Palestinian people were killed, and 1,399 injured.

The Israeli population suffered a measure of what Gazans live with all the time. But in Gaza there are no warning sirens. There are no shelters and there is no escape. Gaza doesn’t have an army, a navy or air force. It doesn’t have a missile defence system that could blow up targeted missiles before they crash into a family’s home. And Gaza doesn’t have anti-aircraft guns to prevent F-16s and helicopters from firing on its people.

Gaza has small arms, slingshots, rocks and homemade rockets. It has now developed a capacity to deliver these rockets into Israel’s major cities, even if they are homemade and without live charges in the shells.

People now see that there is a cost to Israel for attacking Gaza. The effect this has had on the people of Gaza cannot be underestimated.

A Khan Younis bus driver who disliked Hamas for “increasing taxes on my bus, spare parts, oil and gas” says he is happy if taxes help the resistance. “If they take away my buses I won’t complain. If they ask me for my sons, I am not going to decline.”

Many former Fatah members, once bitter rivals to Hamas, are now rallying for all Palestinians to stand united against the occupation. “What concerns me is that we were acting as collaborators with Israelis. This indirectly marketed a culture of defeat among our people,” a former colonel with the Palestinian Authority tells IPS. “One wishes to be part of the glory that this resistance has achieved,” he says. “Not only by Hamas, but also other political factions.”

Al Biltaji believes Hamas learnt from its mistakes through Operation Cast Lead in 2008-2009, and developed different strategies. During Operation Cast Lead several Hamas uniformed members were killed. During Israel’s recent missile attacks on Gaza, many Gazans noticed there were few casualties in uniforms. “The time for us feeling like scapegoats is over. It’s time is for victory and liberation,” Al Biltaji says.

Hatem Selmi, a 27-year-old cameraman believes Hamas has sharpened its image during this last ‘victory’. Selmi carries painful memories of Hamas after his father and brother were arrested and punished for loyalty to Fatah. “That hurt me deeply, and I carried a grudge.” Now, he says, “Hamas has a better image in my mind for being able to hit back at Israel and protect Palestinians.”

Hamas political leader Dr. Mahmoud Al-Zahar has told journalists his movement would go on smuggling in resistance weapons by all means possible.

“This is perhaps the beginning of the end of Israel’s occupation,” says Khafaja, another new Hamas supporter.

Mohammed Omer is a contributor to Inter Press Service.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks, and one of the prime vacillators among Republicans between objecting to and supporting Donald Trump.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and has deep connections to the Republican Party and the neoconservative movement.


The Washington-based American Enterprise Institute is a rightist think tank with a broad mandate covering a range of foreign and domestic policy issues that is known for its strong connections to neoconservatism and overseas debacles like the Iraq War.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and an evangelical pastor, is a far-right pundit known for his hawkish policies and opposition to an Israeli peace deal with the Palestinians.


Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and considered by some to be a future presidential candidate.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

The Trumpian new regional order in the Middle East is predicated on strongman rule, disregard for human rights, Sunni primacy over Iran and other Shia centers of power, continued military support for pro-American warring parties regardless of the unlawfulness of such wars, and Israeli hegemony.


A comparison of U.S. nuclear diplomacy with Iran and the current version with North Korea puts the former in a good light and makes the latter look disappointing. Those with an interest in curbing the dangers of proliferating nuclear weapons should hope that the North Korea picture will improve with time. But whether it does or not, the process has put into perspective how badly mistaken was the Trump administration’s trashing of the Iran nuclear agreement.


Numerous high profile Trump administration officials maintain close ties with anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists. In today’s America, disparaging Islam is acceptable in ways that disparaging other religions is not. Given the continuing well-funded campaigns by the Islamophobes and continuing support from their enablers in the Trump administration, starting with the president himself, it seems unlikely that this trend will be reversed any time soon.


The Trump administration’s nuclear proliferation policy is now in meltdown, one which no threat of “steely resolve”—in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s words—will easily contain. It is hemorrhaging in part because the administration has yet to forge a strategy that consistently and credibly signals a feasible bottom line that includes living with—rather than destroying—regimes it despises or fears. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle must call for a new model that has some reasonable hope of restraining America’s foes and bringing security to its Middle East allies.


Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: “Enough! Stop this madness!” Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation’s gratitude and the support of the electorate. Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.


To bolster the president’s arguments for cutting back immigration, the administration recently released a fear-mongering report about future terrorist threats. Among the potential threats: a Sudanese national who, in 2016, “pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to ISIS”; an Uzbek who “posted a threat on an Uzbek-language website to kill President Obama in an act of martyrdom on behalf of ISIS”; a Syrian who, in a plea agreement, “admitted that he knew a member of ISIS and that while in Syria he participated in a battle against the Syrian regime, including shooting at others, in coordination with Al Nusrah,” an al-Qaeda offshoot.


The recent appointment of purveyors of anti-Muslim rhetoric to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom exposes the cynical approach Republicans have taken in promoting religious freedom.


RightWeb
share