CNN's Image Fetish--Mark Perry

Tweet CNN's Suzanne Malveaux on Hamas' "image" problem, as assessed by Mark Perry at the Conflicts forum. Portion below. Read it all here: http://conflictsforum.org/2007/cnns-image-fetish/

"But Suzanne, haven’t we already established that Hamas had not held Johnston? They couldn’t have released him 114 days earlier if they didn’t actually hold him. Or weren’t you listening? Didn’t you get that part? Or was it the “image” part that tripped you up? Or perhaps it’s their “sincerity” that you’re worried about. Okay, okay, sure Hamas released this guy Johnston, and maybe sure, they want law and order and all that other claptrap, but the real question is (and it’s one we all hang on and want to know the answer to) are they “sincere?” And then too, we need to know about what Haniyeh and Khalid Meshaal and all the rest of those fellas think about “the image beyond the image.” Gerges did his best, as if explaining it all once again: Hamas is a highly complex social movement he said (Suzanne began to drift, you could see it in her eyes), but they are highly disciplined. The movement, he said, may even be willing to make a historic compromise. “The challenge facing the international community particularly the United States and Israel [is] are they willing to engage the moderate and the mainstream political elements within Hamas?” Gerges said. “This is really the critical question.”

'This was the payoff — and a question that keeps being asked, and not just by Gerges, but by nearly every thinking Middle East analyst. But it seemed lost somehow on the single-minded can-we-get-back-to-the-image-bit Malveaux. She was in her it’s-a-wrap mode: “And surely Professor, another critical question is Hamas willing to recognize Israel as part of that image change, if you will? What do you think?” What did he think? You could almost read his mind: sure they would recognize Israel. Sure. But inside what borders? But that question would only confuse her. And by now, and you could see it, he was nearly ready to surrender. Ah, but not quite. “I agree 100 percent,” he said, but then he added, throwing his verbal grenade,“and this is why I believe that engagement rather than exclusion is the way to go. Let’s engage Hamas and see whether Hamas is willing to really make a historic compromise. And I think as you know the Bush administration and Israel and even the international community after last year elections they took the decision and boycotted Hamas and look where we are today.”

"Yes, look at where we are today — in which eleven Palestinians died in a “routine operation” in Gaza, in which two Americans were indicted for murdering innocent Iraqis, in which seventeen Iraqis were killed by a car bomb, and in which a leading anchor on “the world news leader” thinks that a movement that represents a people that are being regularly pulverized, butchered, eviscerated, crushed, manacled, hacked, gashed, shot, slashed, killed — and who are fighting every single day just to stay alive — should be concerned about their image. My God.

"Maybe Malveaux has a point.

"Maybe Hamas should hire Israel’s firm.

Found on Palestinian Pundit