Myth

"Palestinian terrorist groups agreed to a cease-fire to advance the peace process envisioned by the road map for peace."

Fact

In June 2003, Islamic Jihad and Hamas agreed to a hudna in response to demands from Palestinian Authority prime minister Mahmoud Abbas to stop their attacks on Israel so he could fulfill his obligations under the Middle East road map. The agreement was interpreted in the Western media as the declaration of a cease-fire, which was hailed as a step forward in the peace process. While any cessation of violence against Israeli civilians is to be welcomed, it is important to understand that the meaning of what the terrorist groups agreed to is very different in the Muslim context than the benign way it has been portrayed.

The media and some political leaders portray a hudna as a truce or a cease-fire designed to bring peace. Hudna actually refers to a temporary cession of hostilities in order to regroup and to trick an enemy into lowering its guard. When the hudna expires, the party that declared it is stronger and the enemy weaker. The term comes from the story of the Muslim conquest of Mecca. Instead of a rapid victory, Muhammad made a ten-year treaty with the Kuraysh tribe. In 628 AD, after only two years of the ten-year treaty, Muhammad and his forces concluded that the Kuraysh were too weak to resist. The Muslims broke the treaty and took over all of Mecca without opposition (Palestine Chronicle, July 6, 2003; Embassy of Israel [USA], June 27, 2003).

A modern-day hudna is not a form of compromise, rather it is a tactical tool to gain a military advantage. Hamas has used it no fewer than 10 times in 10 years (Washington Institute for Near East Policy, (June 2, 2003).

The current hudna with Islamic terrorist organizations is no different. The Hamas charter openly rejects the notion of a peaceful solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the group has given no indication it has changed its views. On the contrary, Hamas spokesmen have said they will not give up their weapons, that they will continue to resist "illegal occupation," and that they believe the "violent awakenening from a few weeks or months of quiet" will "reaffirm Palestinians' belief in the intifada as the only option for them" (Jerusalem Post, July 17, 2003; Ha'aretz, July 7 and 14, 2003; Israel Radio, July 10, 2003). Even the hudna declaration itself asserted "the legitimate right to resist the occupation as a strategic option until the end of the Zionist occupation of our homeland and until we achieve all our national rights." Hamas contends that all of Israel is occupied territory (IMRA). This is why Secretary of State Colin Powell called Hamas an "enemy of peace" just before the hudna was declared, and said "the entire international community must speak out strongly against the activities of Hamas" (The State Department, June 20, 2003).

Not all of the Palestinian terror groups agreed even to the hudna, and violence continued after the supposed cease-fire. Israeli intelligence already has found evidence the Palestinians are exploiting the cease-fire to reorganize their forces. They are recruiting suicide bombers, increasing the rate of production of Qassam rockets, and seeking to extennd their range.

Whether the Palestinian terrorist groups are sincere in their declaration of a cease-fire is not relevant to the fulfillment of their road map obligations. The road map explicitly calls on Abbas to do more than just achieve a cessation of hostilities; he is obligated to disarm and dismantle terrorists and terrorist infrastructure.

Source: Myths & Facts Online -- A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict by Mitchell G. Bard, http://www.JewishVirtualLibrary.org. To order a copy of the paperback edition of Myths and Facts, click HERE.

Dr. Bard is available for speaking engagements on this and other topics.You can help AICE continue this work by becoming a sponsor of the Jewish Virtual Library. Click here for more information.