Democracy is fine as long as it produces the right result
The first seriously contested election in Palestine has produced a shock which no pundits predicted, and which astounded even the winners, Hamas, themselves. The European Union (EU), whose funding has kept the putative Palestinian state alive is faced with a radical reassessment of what is now proven to have been a failed policy. The EU has exerted no decisive influence to curb graft nor nurture good governance.
The joke has always been that the USA makes the peace and the EU pays for it. The biggest single issue influencing the voters last week was the corruption of the Fatah regime, and it is EU moneys that have been squandered in a largey unsuccessful attempt by the EU to buy influence over events.
The financial scrutiny constantly demanded by the European Parliament since the mid-1990s has been woefully lacking and by continuing to pour tax payers money into the bottomless pit of Fatah corruption, the EU has facilitated the rise of Hamas. The EU has been unable to exert any influence over Israel, whose continued intransigence as an illegal occupying force has also contributed to the rise of Hamas.
I spent ten days as an election observer for the EU in Jenin, the scene of bitter fighting in 2002, when the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) launched a brutal strike against the town and district which produces a high quota of suicide bombers and is the unofficial headquarters of the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade. The cross border violence remains; one night we heard the gunfire from a raid by an IDF snatch-squad which seized some alleged terrorists.
In the small villages right up against the Wall, there were as many posters showing local suicide martyrs as there were for election candidates.
The electioneering itself was lively and on polling day boisterous, but we witnessed nothing untoward. I attended the count at a polling station on the edge of the Jenin refugee camp, a hotbed of militant activity. Though excited, the atmosphere was orderly and keenly competitive. I must add that throughout the campaign we as observers in Jenin were always greeted pleasantly and encountered no suspicion, nor hostility.
The new legislative council is based on 50% members elected by proportional representation on a national list and 50% from multi-member constituencies ( in the case of Jenin, 4 members). It was clear in Jenin, and throughout the West Bank, that Hamas had succeeded because it had been able to educate its supporters to vote in a disciplined manner; on the member ballot form many voters had opted for four Hamas candidates, whereas Fatah voters failed to show such discipline and often split their vote. This was also a reflection of the in-fighting within Fatah between the Young and Old Guard which had only reached a dubious compromise list of candidates at the last moment.
The election was no different than elections anywhere else: it was the ruling party, Fatah, which lost the election as much as the opposition, Hamas, which won. Fatah has disastrously squandered the enormous good will it encountered when it returned from exile in the mid 1990s, mainly through unbridled corruption and administrative imcompetence. Much of this blame must laid at the feet of Yasser Arafat, who certainly had the prestige to bring stability but chose to posture as the revolutionary leader to his very end.
Under his leadership, Fatah failed to make the historically necessary transition from exile to competent administration.
The post-mortem of defeat will not be pretty inside Fatah and could well be bloody.
For Hamas, power has certainly come sooner than expected. Hamas strategists had planned for a period of elected opposition to enhance their profile and facilitate their delicate transition into mainstream politics. Their strategy of the "bullet and the ballot" has worked so far. They have won their chance to provide the PA with the competent and honest administration it so desperately needs and its people fervently desire.
The concessions frankly must come from Hamas’ critics abroad. The hardline tactic of the EU and Israel demanding unilateral concessions from Hamas in advance of negotiations will not work. Hamas have logic on their side in refusing to denounce violence as long as Israel occupies Palestinian land. Moreover, by participating in the ballot, Hamas have tacitly acknowledge the Oslo Agreements they previously renounced. Since the Hamas victories in the local elections last autumn, both Hamas and Israel have indeed cooperated on a day to day basis in many areas - again a tacit recognition by both sides of the other’s existence.
It is fatally premature by the EU Ministers and others to demand concessions at this stage from Hamas. A period of practical cooperation with all sides agreeing to postpone the larger issues is what is needed.
Hamas decision to participate in elections does not represent a threat, indeed it represents the most hopeful emerging sign in the Middle East that the Islamists can and should be brought into the wider tent of democratic politics. The West cannot impose its version of democracy on the region and then refuse to deal with the practical consequences of free elections.
Michael Hindley
This article first appeared in "Frontline" newsmagazine, Chennai. India. February 2006