Israel's needs and perspectives have guided peace proposals by western negotiators. The biased direction impedes Middle East peace. An example of this bias is British Prime Minister (PM) Tony Blair categorization of Hamas' refusal to recognize Israel. The British PM emphasized his difficulties with Hamas' position at his December 7 meeting with President George W. Bush.

"You cannot have a government that everyone can deal with - and you can then negotiate a peace with between Israel and Palestine - unless it is on the basis that everyone accepts the others' right to exist.  That is the difficulty. It is not a kind of technical point. It is absolutely at the heart of it."

Tony Blair and other western leaders have refused to examine the historical record that prompted the remarks by Hamas leadership and have misled the public in their interpretations of Hamas' stance.
 
It has been well known, but only recently revealed by the conventional media, that Israel's maps, textbooks and declarations to its people show all of the West Bank as part of a "greater Israel." Peace Now, an Israeli advocacy group has also revealed to all, what has been previously known by many, that 39% (only 39%) of Israel's settlements in the West Bank have been constructed on privately held Palestinian lands. Add to these inciting reports, the Israeli occupation, the daily killings of Palestinians, destruction of their trees and crops, interference in their daily life and construction of the separation wall that strangles the Palestinian economy, and then have Tony Blair, who should know all of these particulars, ask himself the questions:

Why would Hamas recognize a nation that already claims Hamas' lands? Wouldn't Hamas feel that recognition of Israel would be a concession that Israel's polices towards the Palestinians have been correct? Why would Hamas legitimize Israel's policies?

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh has not said 'Hamas will not recognize Israel's right to exist." He has said that his "Hamas-led government will never recognize Israel and will continue to fight for the liberation of Jerusalem." The more exact quote creates a different prospect for negotiations than Blair's outlook proposes: 

1. Although a Hamas-led government will not recognize Israel, if negotiations successfully proceed, the Hamas government could eventually be replaced by a Palestinian government that recognizes an Israel which addresses the legitimate grievances and rights of the Palestinian people.
2. Hamas will not recognize a government of Israel (not Israel's right to exist) that it believes is unfairly constituted. Hamas might recognize an Israel state it considers a legal expression of all of its population, including its Palestinian minority, and which recognizes its obligations to the Palestinian people.

Although Israel has never recognized the rights of the Palestinians; their right to have refugees return to their lands, their right to protest occupation, their right to have their territory inviolate, their right to arm themselves against murderous incursions by the Israel military and settlers, their right to defend against expropriation of their properties, their right to protect their water supplies, their right to prevent destruction of their vineyards and olive trees and their right to live in peace and pursue their own economic and social interests, the western community demands that Hamas must recognize Israel.

The United States does not recognize the nation of North Korea. Nevertheless, North Korea has negotiated with the U.S. The U.S. would recognize the Pyongyang government if it changed its operations and became less nationalistic, less militaristic and less threatening. Hamas' attitude towards Israel is prompted by a view similar to that of the U.S. towards North Korea. Hamas might move towards recognizing Israel if Israel changed its operations and became less nationalistic, less militaristic, less threatening and more conciliatory.

It has become obvious that Israel's concept of peace negotiations is to solicit increasing compromises from the Palestinian Authority and eventually have it utter the words "surrender."  Israeli governments continually provide excuses for why they cannot negotiate. Even after the Palestinians satisfy an excuse, the Israelis originate other challenges. Israel has proceeded from "the PLO must agree to Resolution 242," which they did, to "they must stop terrorism," "nobody to negotiate with," "Palestinians don't realize a good deal," "the Taba negotiations aren't proceeding well," and now "they want to destroy us."

Western observers have not realized that their approach to Middle East peace has been conditioned by one of the most sophisticated propaganda machines in history, from prejudice to Middle East peoples, from western media biased to Israel and from a distorted history of Middle East events. PM Blair's mission can serve a purpose if he changes his perspective. Instead of applying pressure to force Hamas' recognition of Israel, (which is probably the only reason for his mission) he should apply pressure to force Israel to stop oppressing the Palestinians, behave as a constructive and peaceful state and enter the world community. He might also learn that by understanding Hamas' position he could start a more successful journey to Middle East peace.

Dan Lieberman is editor of Alternative Insight, a monthly web-based newsletter.

� Copyright 2006 by AxisofLogic.com