Hamas is once again raising the possibility of a two-state compromise. Israel and its allies are not convinced

The Palestinian militant group Hamas has said for more than 15 years that it could agree to a two-state compromise with Israel – at least temporarily. But Hamas also refused to say it would recognize Israel or renounce its armed struggle against it.

For Israel and many others, especially in the wake of the October 7 Hamas attack that sparked the latest war in Gaza, it is proof that Hamas is still irrevocably determined to destroy Israel. The United States and European countries have joined Israel in shunning the militant group they have labeled a terrorist organization.

To some observers, Hamas has signaled a potential pragmatism that could pave the way for a solution. But the group’s vagueness as it attempts to square the circle of its own positions has fueled suspicion.

Hamas is proposing long-term “truces” instead of outright peace. He has given up openly committing to destroying Israel but supports “armed resistance” – and says he will fight for the liberation of the entire “land of Palestine”.

In the latest version of his position, senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya told The Associated Press in an interview Wednesday that the group would lay down its arms and transform into a political party if an independent Palestinian state was established in West Bank and West Bank. Gaza Strip along pre-1967 borders.

Although he again spoke of a truce, it was also a rare suggestion that Hamas might disband its armed wing.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to destroy Hamas after the October 7 attack on southern Israel. Netanyahu has repeatedly rejected the creation of a Palestinian state and, critics say, has worked to seriously undermine the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority that recognized Israel.

Here’s a look at some of the nuances of Hamas’s positions, past and present:

UNITY TALKS

In 2006, after Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections, he began talks with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas about forming a unity government. Amid the negotiations, Ismail Haniyeh – who is now Hamas’s top political leader – said the group supported a Palestinian state along 1967 lines “at this point, but in exchange for a ceasefire.” fire, and not recognition.”

The two sides eventually reached an agreement that the unity government, including Hamas, would “respect” the Palestinian Authority’s peace agreements with Israel. It was a formula that allowed Hamas to avoid accepting the accords and recognizing Israel.

Israel and the United States refused to recognize the unity government and imposed economic sanctions. The government quickly collapsed amid fighting between Hamas and Abbas’s Fatah faction – which ended with Hamas taking control of Gaza in 2007.

In 2008, Khaled Mashaal, then political leader of Hamas, said he would accept statehood in the West Bank and Gaza as well as a 10-year truce with Israel. He rejected recognition of Israel, but suggested that Hamas would adhere to a permanent peace deal with Israel if the Palestinians accepted it in a referendum.

Since then, Hamas and Abbas’ Palestinian Authority have held several rounds of unity talks, often emerging with variations in the phrasing of Hamas’ position. Each time, efforts at unity were undone by bitter factional rivalry for power and the West’s refusal to accept any government that included Hamas unless it expressly recognized Israel.

THE NEW “CHARTER” 2017

After years of internal discussions, Hamas presented a new political platform in 2017 that presented a radical change in tone from its original charter, published in 1988.

The 1988 charter presented the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in harsh religious terms. He spoke of “our struggle against the Jews,” insisted that the land belonged to Muslims, and declared that jihad, or holy war, was the only way to resolve the Palestinian question.

The 2017 document abandoned much of this religious and anti-Semitic rhetoric and instead presented its case in terms of human rights, including refugees’ right to return and the right to resist occupation. He said his fight was not against Jews but against Zionism, which he called a “colonial” project that had taken land from Palestinians and suppressed their freedoms.

The document confirms Hamas’s virtual acceptance of a state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. He said such a state, with Jerusalem as its capital and the return of Palestinian refugees, was a “national consensus.”

Nevertheless, he declared that he rejected “any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea.” This area includes what is now Israel and, in the context of Hamas’ agenda, such language is seen by Israel as a call for its destruction.

___

Follow AP’s coverage of the war at https://apnews.com/hub/israel-hamas-war