Weekend long read

1) At the JCPA Dan Diker and Khaled Abu Toameh discuss ‘The Taliban’s Palestinian Partners: Implications for the Middle East Peace Process’.

“While the U.S. pullout from Afghanistan was good news for extremists, it was bad news for moderate Arabs amenable to the West. Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and their supporters have been vindicated in their longstanding ideological claims that negotiations with Israel are futile. Their conclusion is that patience pays off and that only mukawama or “resistance” can defeat the American-led Western alliance and dismantle the State of Israel.

It, therefore, comes as little surprise that Hamas was the first Islamist group to congratulate the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan publically, saying:

‘We congratulate the Muslim Afghan people for the defeat of the American occupation…and…the Taliban movement and its brave leadership in this victory, which culminated its long struggle over the past 20 years… [T]he demise of the American occupation and its allies prove that the resistance of the peoples, foremost of which is our struggling Palestinian people, will achieve victory.’”

2) At the INSS Udi Dekel analyses Hamas logic.

“Hamas’s motivation for escalation now is related to its distress at the worsening situation, once its alleged strategic successes in Operation Guardian of the Walls did not translate into achievements in terms of reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. In addition, the mechanism for transferring money from Qatar via the UN excluded the transfer of money to Hamas employees and its various institutions in the Gaza Strip. In Hamas’s view, the sole means of pressure available to it is its power to inflict damage through unpredictable behavior, such as the rocket fire at Jerusalem that ignited Operation Guardian of the Walls and the escalation in recent days.”

3) At the BESA Center Erfan Fard looks at ‘Iran and the Taliban’.

“The US invaded Afghanistan in 2001 to overthrow the Taliban regime and al-Qaeda after the 9/11 attacks. Iran opposed the US presence, as it strove (and continues to strive) for regional hegemony. Despite its distaste for the Sunni Taliban, Tehran constantly undermined US efforts to stabilize Afghanistan by collaborating with the extremist group.”

4) UKLFI presents a discussion on Proportionality in Armed Conflict with Professor Geoffrey Corn.

“The rule of proportionality in armed conflict is widely misunderstood and frequently misrepresented in criticisms of Israel. Some people wrongly assume that military actions are “disproportionate” if they result in more casualties than those suffered by the country whose army is conducting them. But the rule of customary international law is quite different: it is that an attack should not be launched if it may be expected to cause civilian casualties or damage to civilian objects which would be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage. In this webinar, Professor Geoffrey Corn, a leading expert on the subject, discusses the application of the rule and other pertinent issues of the law of armed conflict with UKLFI Charitable Trust’s Legal Director, Natasha Hausdorff.”

 

More from Hadar Sela
BBC WS tells listeners to go online for part of a story it didn’t tell
BBC WS listeners hear a discussion about a statement made by the...
Read More
One reply on “Weekend long read”
  1. says: Grimey

    2) If Hamas fires rockets at Jerusalem, the possibility is high that one will strike the Al Aqsa mosque. That, of course, will be Israel’s fault.

    4) As Hamas mounts its rocket launchers in or near schools and hospitals, civilian casualties will be proportionately excessive – which, of course, is what it wants.

Comments are closed.