Guardian scoops: Obama will talk to Hamas


by Sunder Katwala    
January 9, 2009 at 3:42 am

The Guardian’s front page story – headlined Obama camp ‘prepared to talk to Hamas’ - certainly heralds a significant shift in US foreign policy, but the report itself makes clear this is rather less dramatic than it at first sounds.

There is no talk of Obama approving direct diplomatic negotiations with Hamas early on in his administration, but he is being urged by advisers to initiate low-level or clandestine approaches, and there is growing recognition in Washington that the policy of ostracising Hamas is counter-productive.

That this would be the likely direction of travel will not surprise foreign policy analysts. However, the move is much less a reaction to current events in Gaza than something which is likely to be complicated (and delayed) by them.

This is essentially a report where the incoming administration broadly agrees with the emerging consensus about both what a Democrat administration should and will try to do, among the most senior Democrat and centrist (including some non-neocon Republicans) foreign policy experts in the main Washington think-tanks.

The ‘smoking gun’ for a peace push is not top secret. The Guardian report notes that Richard Haass, reported as likely to be the Middle East envoy and current president of the Council on Foreign Relations, has publicly made the argument in a co-authored piece for Foreign Affairs, published online on Wednesday, on a new US Middle East strategy for the Obama administration. (Though note again the conditions around what is needed for engagement with Hamas, in a journal article which clearly went to print before the current crisis).

The United States should encourage such developments but leave it to Egypt, Israel, and the PA to handle their relationships with Hamas. If the cease-fire between Israel and Hamas continues to hold and a Hamas-PA reconciliation emerges, the Obama administration should deal with the joint Palestinian leadership and authorize low-level contact between U.S. officials and Hamas in Gaza.

If the cease-fire breaks down irreparably and the Israeli army reenters Gaza, the United States should then work with others to create and insert an Arab-led international force to restore PA control and bring about Israel’s withdrawal. Obviously, it would be highly desirable to avoid such a scenario. One way to do this would be to ensure the kind of progress in the negotiations that would create a dynamic in which Hamas feels pressured by Gazans not to miss the peace train that is beginning to move in the West Bank.

Beyond the merits of the foreign policy issues, the Guardian report highlights two interesting issues about reporting on the next administration.

1. The Obama campaign was the most leak proof Presidential campaign in recent memory. The transition has tried to be equally tight-lipped, particularly on foreign policy, and with a good deal of success. But that is going to be much more difficult, probably impossible, after January 20th.

2. The story also highlights a difference in British and US media cultures. The Guardian story sets out what it is and is not claiming and the nature of its (triple but anonymous and somewhat vague) sourcing, but I doubt the New York Times or Washington Post would run a news report on this basis, while all of the UK broadsheets would do so.

So The Guardian can now claim to have had the two biggest foreign policy scoops of the transition period, having reported that Hilary Clinton would be offered, and would accept, the job of Secretary of State back on November 17th – a report greeted with much scepticism and sniffiness by American outlets at the time.

Cross-posted over from Next Left


---------------------------
  Tweet    


About the author
Sunder Katwala is a regular contributor to Liberal Conspiracy. He is secretary-general of the Fabian Society. Also at: Next Left
· Other posts by
Filed under
Blog ,Foreign affairs ,Middle East ,United States


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


1. Letters From A Tory

I saw in the Guardian that Obama’s silence on the problems in Gaza is beginning to draw criticism.

I wonder if that criticism will increase or decrease now that he’s made it clear he wants to open communication channels to Hamas…..

Obamah is in the happy position of being to present his isolationism as a moral withdrawal. The US looks likely to emerge form the recession first but it is still hard up and will be delighted to lose responsibilities in this and other regions under cover of a “softer line “. That’s what this is really all about .

Well, its the right position to take. There won’t be peace in the region unless the US talks to Hamas, whether officially or unofficially.

4. Mike Killingworth

Why wouldn’t Obama use informal channels first? Apart from anything else, it’s important that the US – or any other country – isn’t seen to be taking sides in Palestinian politics, and informal contact is an appropriate way to establish this ground-rule.

5. Conor Foley

It was politically smart, given that he obviously feels in a difficult position. I like politicians that I agree with to be politically astute, it makes them more effective. The Obama team’s media operation is reminiscent of the early days of Blair – although, from what I hear, they are not so nasty.

It is also interesting to see how they seem to have decided that the Guardian is an important outlet for sending signals to their activist base.

6. Mike Killingworth

[5]

It is also interesting to see how they seem to have decided that the Guardian is an important outlet for sending signals to their activist base.

The Grauniad sees its on-line edition as very much a player in the US market.

3. Sunny . Peace in the Middle East. There are plenty of other conflicts. The Sunni /Shia conflict is just a warm up for Saudi Arabia/Iran. Saudi Arabia are as probaly as concerned as Israel at Iran
obtaining nuclear weapons. Iran has been the clear winner since 2003. There is potential for conflcit between Hamas and Islamic Jihad . The Salaafi/Shia conflcit in Iraq is a foreTASTE tASTE

3. Sunny . The Salaafi/Shia conflict in Iraq could be a forestate of what could happen in Gaza. The danger for Israel and Palestine is that Islamic Jihad could take over from Hamas . Is Obama talking to Hamas going to appear as a sell out by Islamic Jihad? Or will talking to Hamas help to strengthen it’s ability to resist Islamic Jihad and is this a lesser of a problem . If Hamas have been damaged by the Israel could they, lose out to Islamic Jihad in a fight.

Apart from anything else, it’s important that the US – or any other country – isn’t seen to be taking sides in Palestinian politics,

Tell me Mike, who is the Palestinian Authority’s elected government?

Fox News headline:
Obama Hamas Member!!!


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. The Fabian Society

    Liberal Conspiracy: Guardian scoops: Obama will talk to Hamas: http://bit.ly/17zo2C

  2. Leon Green

    RT @thefabians Liberal Conspiracy: Guardian scoops: Obama will talk to Hamas: http://bit.ly/17zo2C

  3. The Fabian Society

    Liberal Conspiracy: Guardian scoops: Obama will talk to Hamas: http://bit.ly/17zo2C





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
Liberal Conspiracy is the UK's most popular left-of-centre politics blog. Our aim is to re-vitalise the liberal-left through discussion and action. More about us here.

You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed. You can also get them by email and through our Facebook group.
RECENT OPINION ARTICLES




21 Comments



57 Comments



67 Comments



18 Comments



28 Comments



44 Comments



32 Comments



45 Comments



29 Comments



14 Comments



LATEST COMMENTS
» tommy5d posted on The 50p tax will raise more than £6billion according to HMRC itself

» Shatterface posted on You just can't be a Monarchist and believe in meritocracy

» Jeevan posted on The 50p tax will raise more than £6billion according to HMRC itself

» ex-Labour voter posted on The 50p tax will raise more than £6billion according to HMRC itself

» cjcjc posted on Ken Livingstone and recent controversies - a defence

» dizzy posted on Ken Livingstone and recent controversies - a defence

» hobson posted on Ken Livingstone and recent controversies - a defence

» Bob B posted on You just can't be a Monarchist and believe in meritocracy

» Sally posted on You just can't be a Monarchist and believe in meritocracy

» Sunny Hundal posted on Ken Livingstone and recent controversies - a defence

» Sunny Hundal posted on Ken Livingstone and recent controversies - a defence

» elena posted on The #stopKony campaign was genius - but did it really backfire?

» Sally posted on Ken Livingstone and recent controversies - a defence

» steveb posted on You just can't be a Monarchist and believe in meritocracy

» Vicus Scurra posted on You just can't be a Monarchist and believe in meritocracy