Recently, a BBC reporter interviewed Palestinian teenagers in a West Bank town. These kids had an interesting take on the situation. Their anger was not directed so much at Israel (though they did complain about the checkpoints) as it was at Hamas and Fatah, whom they said were killing Palestinians in their quest for power.
This leads to the question, "Who Stands for the Palestinians," as posed by this interesting editorial from the San Francisco Chronicle.
Excerpt:
The Palestinian people are newly helpless in the face of sudden sustained fighting between supporters of the Hamas-led government and president Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah Party...Frustrated by the lack of Western aid and their own inability to form a coalition government, Hamas and Fatah have turned on each other in street-level gun battles that belie their stated concern for the people they are supposed to represent.
The article complains that very few countries are taking the necessary action and/or utilizing the diplomacy needed to alleviate the situation, with the following three exceptions:
But the Egyptian government has repeatedly pulled both parties to the bargaining table, even if it hasn't been able to make a cease-fire stick. Jordan, as always, is trying to mediate. Even Israel -- contrary to Arab claims that it's enjoying this -- is making moves in Jordan, trying to suss out the chance of peace talks.
The editorial points out that the U.S. has offered platitudes rather than solutions and that Iran, Syria, et all, have "stood aside when faced with the chance to engage with the Palestinians on anything other than a rhetorical opportunity."
The article does not address the money issues -- who is donating, who is blocking -- so I am keeping that out of the scope of this diary's point, which is specific to the diplomatic efforts taking place (or not) to alleviate the in-fighting between Hamas and Fatah.
(For the record: I think it's obvious that the lack of funds helps to fuel the fighting and is causing great suffering to the people, so I believe a resolution on that is needed asap and hope that is part of the negotiations going on in Jordan. But that is not addressed in the editorial and this diary is about the specific point that the editorial makes -- who is or is not engaging in diplomacy to solve the conflict).
The article reaches the conclusion that while Britain's Blair had made an effort (though they temper that with the Western position toward Hamas), it is, according to the editorial, Egypt, Jordan and, to a lesser extent, Israel -- three countries with no love for Hamas and who, either openly or behind the scenes, back Fatah -- who were at least are trying to get both Hamas and Fatah to talk to each other, which is more than can be said for anyone else.
One last excerpt:
At least these countries are striving to offer a way forward. The United States, so far, is not.
Again, here is the link to the editorial.