The Latest from Gaza/Palestine (22 January)

Latest Post: The Gaza Conflict Reaches Home - Demonstrations at the University of Birmingham

11:40 p.m. And is that an Obama pre-emptive strike in the US approach to Iran? He declares that all external support for "terrorist organizations in the Middle East" must be halted.

11:35 p.m. But George Mitchell, I fear, may already be boxed in by his President. After declaring to applause that "the US will not torture", Obama firmly declared that Hamas must not re-arm and recognise Israel's right to exist.

The question is whether the US Government will discreetly talk to Hamas in advance of such a statement, hoping to move the organisation towards recognition of Tel Aviv, or set recognition as a pre-condition for any discussions. If the latter, the Mitchell mission is a non-starter.

11:30 p.m. George Mitchell's opening statement was professional and suitably non-committal. He said there was no conflict that could not be resolved and promised a sustained effort by the Obama Administration towards Middle Eastern peace.

A reader notes, "The word Palestinians was used twice, the word Ireland I lost count. Good to know they're sending a clear message."



10:45 p.m. Confirmation that George Mitchell will be Barack Obama's envoy to the Middle East. The former Senator and experienced negotiator, who helped broker the 1998 Northern Ireland agreement and served as Bill Clinton's envoy in 2000 to Israel and Palestine, is of Lebanese descent. Officials and Administration contacts are keen to play up Mitchell as an honest broker: ""He's neither pro-Israeli nor pro-Palestinian. He's, in a sense, neutral."

10 p.m. Ha'aretz reports that Hamas is pledging to distribute a total of $37 million to the Gazan population from Sunday. It's a shrewd political as well as economic move, if it can be pulled off, as the Palestinian Authority has been prevented by Israel from distributing $60 million in Gaza since the war began on 27 December.

5:30 p.m. We've just posted on the significance of an extended comment by Moussa Abu Marzook, the deputy political director of Hamas, in The Guardian of London.

1:55 p.m. Speaking to Al Jazeera's Ayman Moyheldin, European Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner not only rebuffs Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal's approach for talks but presses "inter-Palestinian reconcilation": "There is a President elected by all the Palestinians: that is Mahmoud Abbas." European Commissioner will not talk to Hamas until it "renounces violence and recognises Israel".

(Note: Technically, Abbas' term as President ended on 9 January.)

1:50 p.m. Important development: Egypt is hosting meeting with Palestinian factions under the umbrella of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, which includes Fatah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Hamas is still "forming its delegation" to go to Cairo. Topics will include reconstruction.

This is not quite a "reconciliation" meeting, but it at least gets Hamas in the same location as the groups in the PLO.

1:30 p.m. Al Jazeera reporting at least 100,000 Gazans homeless.



12:30 p.m. The United Nations has released photographs of the Israeli assault on its compound, including what appear to be white phosphorous "wedges" falling upon the buildings.

11:30 a.m. Stephen Erlanger's analysis in today's New York Times of the Israel/Palestine situation opens with a howler:

The new Obama administration faces an immediate policy choice: support a Palestinian unity government, as Egypt and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, want, or continue to isolate Hamas and concentrate on building up the West Bank as a political alternative to radical Islam.

This, of course, is not a choice. The support of Abbas and the Palestinian Authority is part of the strategy to isolate Hamas. Erlanger apparently doesn't fathom that the political coding of "Palestinian unity government", as long as no one will speak with Hamas, means the support of one Palestinian faction over another.

11:10 a.m. Meanwhile, in the Symbolic but Largely Irrelevant Department: UN Security Council unanimously adopts statement, drafted by Britain and France, welcoming "ceasefires", expressing "grave concern" over humanitarian situation, and calling on member states to step up efforts to stop arms trafficking and ensure the reopening of all crossings in the territory.

It's largely irrelevant because the statement puts no pressure on Israel to relinquish its grip on Gazan economy and infrastructure, let alone reopen the crossings. Conversely, the reference to an end to arms trafficking will be seen as support of the US-Europe-Israel initiative to police the sea-lanes and tunnels of Gaza.

11:00 a.m. Juan Cole has an excellent review of the situation in Gaza, asking --- among other questions --- where Israel's military attempt to break Hamas has actually strengthened the organisation.

Morning update (10:30 a.m. Israel/Gaza time): The Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization issued a statement from Ramallah on Wednesday that "any resumption of peace talks with Israel would require the Jewish state to commit to withdraw from land occupied in 1967 and freeze all settlement activity".

This can be read as an attempt by the Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas to regain some initiative after the Gaza conflict, with the PA trying to shape an agenda ahead of President Obama's appointment of George Mitchell as Middle Eastern envoy later today. It will be intriguing to see if the US and Israel accept the PA's placing of these issues on the table; if they don't, then the PA is in a very difficult, almost subservient, position.

Of course, this does nothing to approach the Gaza situation but is in effect an attempt to work around it.

A Gaza Settlement? Hamas' Signals in The Guardian of London

The Guardian of London runs an extended comment by Moussa Abu Marzook, the deputy political director of Hamas.

The first section is the defiance you would expect, with Marzook claiming that "Israel lost, and lost decisively", as Palestinian resistance was not broken. Marzook, however, then leaves a couple of important political signals and leaves a question answered.



Marzook's first signal is that Hamas clearly sees a wider goal in the Israeli invasion and is looking to counter-act that through diplomatic manoeuvres: "Europe must accept that bringing back Abbas on an Israeli tank is not an option." As we noted earlier today, the European Commission has rebuffed the approach of Khaled Meshaal, Marzook's boss, but Hamas could well be pressing its case, especially in light of the clear weaknesses of the Palestinian Authority.

Marzook's second signal is a brief but direct challenge to the new US Administration to engage with Hamas: "To President Obama we say: the wave of hope that met your election was heavily dampened by your silence on the Gaza massacre."

And the hanging question? Consider Marzook's final sentence, directed to President Obama: "Only if you decide to fairly address the issue of the 6 million Palestinian refugees and the ending of occupation of Palestinian lands, including Jerusalem, will you be able to start a new relationship with the Muslim world."

Do "Palestianian lands" refer to all of pre-1948 Palestine, effectively removing Israel as a political entity, or do "Palestinian lands" refer to the post-1948 territories of the West Bank and Gaza? In the answer to that question, in effect the possibility of a settlement in which Israel returns to its borders before 1967, may be an eventual agreement.

But only if Hamas is inside, not outside, the negotiations.