Commentary
Amr Hamzawy
{
"authors": [
"Amr Hamzawy"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Palestine",
"Levant"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Formula for Engaging Hamas
The United States should establish direct talks with Hamas on how it can play a productive role in the peace process and gradually integrate into Palestinian political and security institutions.
By Amr Hamzawy
Published on Aug 16, 2009
Source: New York Times
With Hamas willing to accept a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, when will President Obama abandon the Bush doctrine of isolating Hamas? We usually hear Hamas’s resistance voice, which calls for the destruction of Israel. But we cannot ignore Hamas’s diplomatic voice, which has, over the years, voiced support for coexisting with Israel.
In 2003, Hamas stated it would renounce violence if the Israelis were “willing to fully withdraw from the 1967 occupied territories and they present a timetable for doing so.” In 2007, Hamas acknowledged that it is a “reality” that Israel exists and “a matter of fact” that it will continue to exist.
Till now, the U.S. has demanded that Hamas renounce violence, honor past agreements and recognize Israel’s right to exist — that is, give up all of its leverage before negotiations actually begin. That policy has failed.
The U.S. should put Hamas’s diplomatic voice to the test. Domestically, it may be too early for Mr. Obama to pursue direct talks in a public forum. Internationally, however, it may be too late for the more gradualist approach of indirect talks: Mr. Obama will squander a good deal of his prestige in the Arab world if he doesn’t make a departure from Bush administration policy soon.
Thus, the U.S. should establish direct talks on substantive issues in a public, multilateral forum. It could build off the two forums currently fostering talks with Hamas, one of European countries and another of Arab states. The talks should focus on how Hamas can play a productive role in the peace process and gradually integrate into Palestinian political and security institutions.
Otherwise, the U.S. must explain how further exclusion of Hamas could possibly advance the peace process.
About the Author
Amr Hamzawy
Director, Middle East Program
Amr Hamzawy is a senior fellow and the director of the Carnegie Middle East Program. His research and writings focus on Egypt’s and other middle powers’ involvement in regional security in the Middle East, particularly through collective diplomacy and multilateral conflict resolution
- The Drone Attack on Egypt and the Widening Middle East War
- In the Middle East and North Africa, America and China Converge More Than They DivergeArticle
Amr Hamzawy, Kathryn Selfe
Recent Work
Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie India
- Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with ChinaPaper
After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.
Saheb Singh Chadha
- Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026Article
This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai
- India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible PathwaysArticle
A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.
Rajiv Bhatia
- Emerging From the “Zombie State” of Trade Agreements: The India-EU FTACommentary
The India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is shaping up to be one of the most consequential trade negotiations, both economically and strategically. But, what’s in the agreement, what’s missing, and what will determine its success in the years ahead
Vrinda Sahai, Nicolas Köhler-Suzuki
- India’s Oil Security Strategy: Structural Vulnerabilities and Strategic ChoicesArticle
This piece argues that the present Indian strategy, based on opportunistic diversification and utilization of limited strategic reserves, remains inadequate when confronting supply disruptions. It evaluates India’s options in the short, medium, and long terms.
Vrinda Sahai
