Hamas and Peace

The essence of the issue remains exactly as it has been since the issue first arose: the gap between what we see and what we wish for. The former is the catastrophe; the latter is us—the collective “we.”

All our countries are threatened, targeted, and subjected to aggression as though it were a foregone conclusion or a moral obligation. Iran has placed all the Gulf states and countries across the region in a state of perpetual fear after treating soldiers and civilians, institutions and oil wells, as equally legitimate targets. Even more alarming than the missiles were the statements accompanying them—the language was something the region had never known, neither during the imperial era nor in the Qalyubian era.

The essence of the matter does not lie in the Strait of Hormuz, despite the constant positioning of tanker convoys there, but rather in the arenas Iran has chosen as targets for its bombardment: a civilian airport in Kuwait, another airport in Najran, and a public park in Bahrain.

Iran has transformed its war with America into a war with the Arabs, whether they wanted it or not. The conflict with America is amenable to resolution, mediation, and bargaining. But the confrontation with the Arabs is a matter of identities, maps, and obstinacy—a kind of arrogance for which there seems to be no cure. Did a prominent Iranian cleric not once threaten to drown the Arab world in seven minutes, then add another twenty seconds?

What is this historical predicament that has a thousand tunnels and only one strait? A branch in Iraq, a branch in Syria, a branch in Lebanon, an organization in Gaza, and Lebanese-Israeli negotiations in Rome? No one knows from where it will erupt this time. Hamas has announced its entry into the circle of peace, just like the Palestinian Authority and the sages of Ramallah.

The new approach is being led by Khalil al-Hayya.

Go back to the beginning: what you see and what you wish for.