Juan Cole:
1. Hamas has foresworn attacks on the United States and other Western countries, presenting itself as a national liberation movement against Israeli military occupation (an occupation that has lasted since 1967 in Gaza). ISIL on the other hand has called on radicals to attack the US and Europe.
2. Hamas has joined a national unity government with the PLO. Some Hamas legislators hold that this step automatically results in an implicit Hamas recognition of Israel, insofar as Hamas delegates will be bound by PLO rules of discourse, and the latter recognize Israel. In contrast, no high-profile member of ISIL has done anything but attempt to foment more violence and to break all political deals.
3. Hamas has not concertedly attacked non-Muslims, and, in fact there has sometimes been good cooperation between it and the Eastern Orthodox church. In contrast, ISIL attempted to ethnically cleanse the Yazidis and has threatened Christians and other minorities.
4. Hamas has concluded ceasefires with Israel, however imperfect on both sides. ISIL was kicked out of al-Qaeda for declining ever to make a truce even with its own allies.
5. Hamas has a civilian wing that ran for elective office in 2006 and won the Palestine elections. That civilian wing represented itself as liberal and more secular. ISIL has no civil wing and is profoundly opposed to holding elections by party.
2 comments:
Say you were designing an insurgent presidential candidacy to get 30% of Iowa Democrats. You start with the issue of corruption, as Gene McCarthy did Vietnam. Then as you survey all issues, they are all a product of corruption. You run against everything and everyone, incuding Bernie Sanders and Netanyahu. Just a suggestion.
This nonsensical article tries to contrast groups which all dance to the Saudi's tune. It's irrational and ridiculous, the worst sort of wishful thinking.
Post a Comment