Consequences of the Palestinian Vote

Khalid Abu Toameh, a Palestinian journalist, recently described American policy toward the Palestinian elections: “If you don’t vote for the same thieves who have been stealing your money for ten years, we are going to punish you.” Fair point. And because we can’t deny the legitimacy of the election or the result, American and EU diplomacy since Hamas won a legislative majority has taken on an element of the parent-child relationship – a demand that Hamas behave and a threat to cut off its allowance.

Khalid Abu Toameh, a Palestinian journalist, recently described American policy toward the Palestinian elections: “If you don’t vote for the same thieves who have been stealing your money for ten years, we are going to punish you.” Fair point. And because we can’t deny the legitimacy of the election or the result, American and EU diplomacy since Hamas won a legislative majority has taken on an element of the parent-child relationship – a demand that Hamas behave and a threat to cut off its allowance.

Readers with children know that “demanding” is doomed, right? If you do it, you had better be prepared to exercise leverage if the demand isn’t met. Ditto governments demanding that others do something without the necessary leverage for enforcement. Here’s an idea. What if we just allow the natural consequences to flow?

President Bush in his landmark June 24, 2002 speech told the Palestinian people to “elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror” in order for the U.S. to “support the creation of a Palestinian state.” The Road Map calls for Palestinian leadership to issue an “unequivocal statement reiterating Israel’s right to exist in peace and security and calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire to end armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere.”

Neither the speech nor the Road Map indicate what would happen if the conditions are not met, but it seems reasonable that the U.S. and the Quartet would cease to support the establishment of an independent Palestine. That means:

• No Roadmap
• No more Quartet if Vladimir Putin follows through on his invitation for Hamas to visit Moscow – a natural consequence that accrues both to the Palestinians and the Russians.
• No treating Palestinian representatives as if they are diplomats of a sovereign state
• No support for committees of the UN dedicated to Palestinian independence – of which there are at least five, including “The Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People & Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories.”

This is not punishment of the Palestinian people, just the natural consequences of making American and EU policy internally and externally consistent. The underlying assumption here about Palestinian “democracy” is that this will not be the last legislative election they have. [If it is, we have other problems.] If, in some future election, the people choose “leadership not compromised by terror” we can reinstate our support for Palestinian independence. If they don’t, OK.

One of the lessons of democracy is that ideas, words and votes have consequences. The Palestinians have made their choice but nothing requires the rest of us to ignore the political ramifications of what they’ve chosen.