Commentary
The targeting of Damietta Port appears to be more than a mere security message.
Amr Hamzawy
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"Israel",
"Palestine"
],
"topics": []
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Press Release
Peace process cannot move forward without Palestinian unity government
Efforts to move the Israeli–Palestinian peace process forward will fail if the U.S. continues to marginalize or ignore Hamas. A national unity government—which would require a slower approach to the peace process and depends on difficult concessions—is the only promising solution.
Published on Jun 3, 2009
WASHINGTON, June 3—Efforts to move the Israeli–Palestinian peace process forward will fail if the United States continues to marginalize or ignore Hamas. A national unity government—which would require a slower approach to the peace process than the Obama administration would like and depends on difficult concessions—is the only promising solution, explains a new commentary by Nathan Brown.
Key Conclusions:
- The split between the Palestinian factions—Hamas in Gaza and Fatah in Ramallah—has no easy solution.
- Elections will likely be an outcome of reconciliation, rather than the means to achieve it. Elections face almost insurmountable logistical and legal challenges, and even if Fatah and Hamas were to agree on the conditions, Israeli cooperation would be required.
- There is little hope for removing Hamas from power in Gaza. Previous policies aimed at doing so—an economic blockade, U.S. security assistance to Fatah, and Israeli military action—have failed.
- Neither Hamas nor Fatah are anxious for a national unity government. A sustained and coordinated effort by international actors—particularly the United States, Europe, and Egypt—is needed to break the stalemate.
Brown concludes:
“The new leadership in Washington is refreshingly bold in its tactics but far more conventional in its strategies. Its new approach (especially on settlements) has already attracted attention in the region. But thus far its public policy toward Gaza remains unrealistic: demanding that Hamas change and treating the movement as if it does not exist until it does so. It is difficult to envision how the Obama administration’s initiatives can gain full traction until it develops more realistic ideas on Gaza."
###
NOTES
- Nathan J. Brown is director of the Institute for Middle East Studies at George Washington University, a nonresident senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment, and a distinguished scholar and author of four well-received books on Arab politics.
- The Carnegie Middle East Program combines in-depth local knowledge with incisive comparative analysis to examine economic, socio-political, and strategic interests in the Arab world to provide analysis and recommendations in both English and Arabic that are deeply informed by knowledge and views from the region.
- The Carnegie Middle East Center based in Beirut, Lebanon, aims to better inform the process of political change in the Middle East.
- Carnegie's Arab Reform Bulletin offers a monthly analysis of political and economic developments in Arab countries.
- Press Contact: Jessica Jennings, 202/939-2265, jjennings@ceip.org
Carnegie 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 Endowment for International Peace
- The Drone Attack on Egypt and the Widening Middle East War
- The Channels of China’s Currency Promotion in Gulf MarketsCommentary
Is the Gulf moving beyond the dollar? This article examines how China is expanding the renminbi's role across Gulf markets, what that means for regional finance, and why the future of global currencies is more complex than the de-dollarization debate suggests.
Andrew Bonney
- The Board of Peace Plan for GazaArticle
The Trump-led board has laid out blueprints for “voluntary emigration” and land confiscation.
Zaha Hassan
- In the War with Iran, Targeting Energy Infrastructure Has Outsized Impact on CiviliansCommentary
Acknowledging these harms strengthens the case for ethical limits on the weaponization of critical infrastructure.
Alia Sajjadian, Andrew Leber
- What We Know About the U.S.-Saudi Nuclear DealCommentary
Despite the agreement’s uncertainty, it’s still a significant development in regional and nuclear policy.
Andrew Leber, Jane Darby Menton
