the pause that refreshes Hamas

It’s known as the hudna, and Ahmed Yousef, an adviser to Palestinian “prime minster” (of resistance until the destruction of Israel) Haniyeh, is the author of the op-ed in today’s New York Times, in which he lays down what sounds like such a reasonable course of action—a temporary “truce” with Israel, which Hamas seeks to destroy:

A truce is referred to in Arabic as a “hudna.” Typically covering 10 years, a hudna is recognized in Islamic jurisprudence as a legitimate and binding contract. A hudna extends beyond the Western concept of a cease-fire and obliges the parties to use the period to seek a permanent, nonviolent resolution to their differences. The Koran finds great merit in such efforts at promoting understanding among different people. Whereas war dehumanizes the enemy and makes it easier to kill, a hudna affords the opportunity to humanize one’s opponents and understand their position with the goal of resolving the intertribal or international dispute.

Here’s the proposal:

We Palestinians are prepared to enter into a hudna to bring about an immediate end to the occupation and to initiate a period of peaceful coexistence during which both sides would refrain from any form of military aggression or provocation.

The “occupation” Yousef refers to, of course, is the “occupation” of the land of Israel by Jews, because Hamas doesn’t recognize the State of Israel.

Such a concept — a period of nonwar but only partial resolution of a conflict — is foreign to the West and has been greeted with much suspicion.

Gee, I wonder why. It can’t be because of Hamas’s circular reasoning, can it?

Norm Geras has his own take:

But what about there being no support for recognition, and what about ending up like Michael Collins? It wouldna (with the hudna) happen? How come? I guess, because even though the hudna would be a kind of recognition, it also simultaneously wouldna be that - not, anyway, in the Michael Collins sense. What, even though this Palestinian delegation have said publicly that it would be? For difference within identity, for dialectical thinking, you couldna do better than a hudna?