Column for February 3, 2006

Morris J. Amitay

What Surprise?

Why does it happen so often that whenever we seem to have it all figured out, we turn out to have gotten it wrong – to our surprise and dismay. There are, of course, certain events that truly cannot be predicted – natural disasters such as the Asian tsunami or Katrina’s devastation readily come to mind. Ariel Sharon’s removal from Israel’s political scene came as a shock, but was a reminder of human frailty. But there are two events which should really not have come as such surprises which have dominated the news recently.

 Here in Washington, the ripple effect of lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s outrageous behavior has created its own mini-tsunami in Congress, the lobbying community, and nation-wide. But the fact that Abramoff’s excesses created such a furor came as no big surprise to those of us in Washington who were aware of his over the top activities and sleazy reputation. What is surprising is that he didn’t crash and burn earlier. Now that he is receiving his comeuppance and one Congressmen or more could be directly implicated, we have the danger of overreaction. There is now talk of the imposition of onerous restrictions on legitimate and worthwhile activities which are not related to specific legislation. For the pro-Israel community, restrictions on the sponsorship by educational or charitable organizations of lawmakers’ visits to Israel would be most unfortunate. To put it simply, Israel “sells itself”, as the overwhelming majority of visitors come away with positive feelings. This tracks with the generally favorable attitudes most Americans have toward the Jewish State and solidifies Congressional support for Israel in the Congress. It is hoped that a distinction will be made between genuine “fact finding” missions, and lavish golf outings. With all its many charms, Israel’s lone 18-hole golf course in Caesaria has ungenerously been described as having “sand fairways and grass traps”.

 On a more serious and immediate note, there was the “surprise” victory of the terrorist Hamas organization in the Palestinian elections. While common sense would have dictated that Palestinian voters would have wanted change after the inept, corrupt rule of Fatah, everyone apparently relied on the pollsters who predicted a win by Fatah. The only problem with relying on polls in this particular instance is that while poll results indeed may indeed be “cooked” by selective sampling and the phrasing of the questions, here in the U.S. there are independent, reputable polls which can give a fairly accurate picture of voter sentiment. In the case of the Palestinian polling, in addition to the questionable sampling involved, one must also assume that a large percentage of those voters polled simply lied. Lying in some cultures is not considered that much of a big deal, and telling a questioner what you think he wants to hear is not uncommon. A potential Hamas voter, suspicious and conspiratorial minded to begin with, might not want to identify himself with an organization whose leadership has been hunted down by Israel. It may also be assumed that the pollsters themselves were PLO supporters, and were not waving Korans and kalashnikovs while seeking to determine one’s political affiliation. The question then is why everyone relied on these polls? Actually, the margin in the vote for the two competing lists was only 44% to 41% in favor of Hamas. Where Hamas gained its huge edge of 74 seats versus 45 for Fatah in the parliament was in the voting for the representatives from geographic districts.

 In any event, what would really be more of a miracle than a surprise is Hamas changing its hatred of Jews and its ultimate goal of the destruction of Israel. Those who assert that with its new responsibilities Hamas will invariably moderate its views toward Israel are not living in the real world. And those who credit Fatah with having had more peaceful intentions are also not dealing with reality. Fatah was just as willing to reach the same goal as Hamas but in small steps, and with greater obfuscation. Hamas is more direct in stating its ultimate intentions. What would also really be shocking is that after the experience of the past dozen years, any responsible leaders in Israel would delude themselves into thinking they can (using Kofi Annan’s phrase relating to Saddam) “do business” with Hamas. By now, bitter experience should have taught that you  don’t negotiate with terrorists – you must defeat them decisively. Similarly, it is futile to try to negotiate away Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons – you must prevent them from acquiring them by whatever means necessary. So no one should be greatly surprised, if after diplomacy and empty threats fail, that Israel, in order to ensure its survival, will be forced to do the civilized world’s dirty work.

 Morrie Amitay, a Washington attorney, is a former Executive Director of AIPAC and founder of the pro-Israel Washington PAC (www.washingtonpac.com).