I've been thinking about this innovation, that was highlighted by Carter's recent visit. The Hamas suggest a 20 year "truce" as part of a "deal" for "final" settlement.
I think Israel ought to seriously consider "accepting", if the truce is long enough, to intensify the political pressure on Hamas.
Why?
1. For one thing, Israel has never offered more than contingent agreements, de facto. Even Rabin, peacemaker extrodinaire, told Israelis that they'd just reverse it, if it didn't work out. (Sure it was "informal", but ...).
2. A verbal acceptance might be all that is required to keep pressure on Hamas.
3. It might be possible to reach a formal agreement via Abbas, and a "separate peace" with Hamas. Why not "work" all angles.
n.b. this is all different than the short-term hudna that is being talked about presently.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
The "long-term truce" with HAMAS
