& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

The regional dimension in the aftermath of Obama victory

Khaled Khalefeh
EGIONALLY it seems that everyone expects a lot from President-Elect Barak Obama, mainly in terms of changing the strategic environment in favor of each party. What Israel wants from Obama is to continue his verbal commitment to the security of the state made during his campaign. Israel also expects to get the same political, strategic and financial support of the US for its policy. Israel's main concerns are that due to domestic economic reasons, the US might reduce its financial, security and civilian aid in the amount of 3 billion US dollars. Israel also wants the US to continue with its agenda of containing Iran. Hamas and Hezbollah. If Obama continues that policy, Israel will continue its policy as well.
The US, however, may not continue to adopt the same policy toward Israel concerning Iran. Hamas and others. President-Elect Obama may decide to adopt a new overall policy of conducting a dialogue with Iran rather than containment, or to make a shift in his policy toward the Middle East, which will include mutual recognition between Israel and a real and authentic representative of the Palestinians.
We also have to consider other aspects that might affect the priorities of President-Elect Obama. First and foremost is the real economic crisis in the US. Second would be any deterioration in the Iraq or Afghanistan arenas. In that sense, Israel can earn time by waiting until Obama will be ready to conduct any real and comprehensive policy toward the region or Israel. Israel, meanwhile, is holding elections in the upcoming months. It will also take time until the new Israeli government will settle down, whether it is formed by the chairperson of Kadima or Likud.
Concerning the Palestinian camp, Chairman Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, who is known as Abu Mazen, has not any real policy options according to the current political map, both internationally and regionally. He is still waiting for the commitment of the previous admin-iSK^tioOvof George Bush, which, was
given in Annapolis, to come to fruition. Abu Mazen and his advisors expect President-Elect Obama to put pressure on Israel in order to create a Palestinian State However, his close interaction and the American relationship with Israel prevents him from putting pressure on Israel. The Palestinian State that Obama is talking about is divided into cantons and surrounded by by-pass roads and a huge wall. Israel changes the facts on the ground while Abu Mazen talks about "effective sovereignty", an expression he uses that has no meaning in the West Bank.
Chairman Abu Mazen is conducting a policy of stable and peaceful relations with Israel. Both Israel and the US are maintaining his security forces and his police in the Palestinian cities. General Keith Dayton and General William Fraser are applying the same method of constructing a police force and security patrols, similar to Anbar, Iraq.
Abu Mazen and the Fatah Movement are mainly aiming to maintain their security regime and the regime of Abu Mazen. It is a typical Arab leader style regime, similar to Egypt, Jordan and Syria. The Fatah Movement has co-opted this Arab environment, which was quite obvious in observing the behavior of Chairman Abu Mazen toward the Egyptian initiative concerning reconciliation with Hamas and adopting reforms in the PLO. Although Hamas was tough from the beginning, not returning to the status before the coup d'etat, Abu Mazen was tougher when he asked for total surrender before accepting the Egyptian dialogue and starting dia-logyc ,with . Ham^S under Afie
umbrella of Egypt and General Omar Suleiman, Head of Egyptian Intelligence. Abu Mazen went to the dialogue with Hamas and to the Egyptian initiative without any will to reach an agreement. He realized that he has American, Israeli and partial Egyptian support and expected that Hamas would give him real concessions in terms of controlling the entrances of Rafiah, recognition by Hamas of another year of his regime (until January 2010) and recognition of the PLO as the comprehensive authority of Palestinian rule. Hamas rejected all of his demands, even though it included Egyptian threats. This rejection neutralized the Egyptian initiative. Now neither party has a real plan to conduct any dialogue.
Abu Mazen, who cannot really read the political and international strategic environment, will wait until Obama settles down and then will start to tell his own people that he needs more pressure from the US. At the same time he will continue to cooperate with Israeli security forces in order to maintain his own security regime and to prevent any possible strong and comprehensive opposition in the West Bank.
In Gaza, humanitarian conditions are deteriorating. There are daily closings of the entrances from the Israeli side. Ehud Barak is using this policy as a tool for punishment if any Qassam rockets are launched into Israel. The Egyptians are also using the Rafiah entrances for punishment by generally keeping them closed. The Palestinians in Gaza are trying to encourage ships to come from abroad. It has worked to some extent Howeyef, .these ships 'aim to boost.
morale more than transfer goods that the Palestinians need desperately.
The human condition, mainly the economy, is totally disrupted and deteriorating. It is quite certain that Hamas is not going to give any concessions to Israel or Abu Mazen. In that sense, the siege will continue to be effective in Gaza. The real question is whether Egypt will be convinced to change its entrances policy and will open the Rafiah passage. This is the "$64,000 question".
Hamas perceives Abu Mazen as a leader who talks in two languages, domestically on the one hand and with the Israelis and the Americans on the other. Hamas will hardly go and make any real agreement with Abu Mazen. In that case, Abu Mazen will lose his legitimacy during 2009. If we consider that Israel will have a strong government only by the middle of 2009 and that the same thing will take place in the US, we can say that an anarchic situation will be established in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Israel's government is not going to make any concession by offering only economic peace, as Benjamin Netanyahu promises. The concept of the Palestinian problem will continue to exist along with the occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Israeli threat to destroy any hegemony of Iran. The big question, then, is whether Obama will do something in the Middle East or will conduct an isolationist policy of first correcting the domestic economy and only later dealing with international politics.
The author is a journalist and member of The Arab Counpl.for Foreign Relations. He has contributed this article to The DaHy Star,