To: Bayourant......"The only people from the region who stood up for them was Israeli interests"......
Sharon believed that peace was dependant on Hamas. Following are references to articles which I believe support Sharon's belief and possibility for reason Israel stood up for UAE (my opinion) and also thoughts well publicised that Israel could hit Iran easily and US wouldn't need to use their air fields in UAE. Who knows whats going on in Bush's mind. For sure, he wanted the Dubai to own those ports and now he's backed down?? Figure he has a (secret) plan.
www.Mediamonitors.net excerpt dated June 05, 2002 by Ray Hanania, entitled "How Sharon and Likud Party Nurtured Rise of Hamas" ......extremist responses to one another
www.WashingtonPost.com dated Feb.27, 2006 Excerpt entitled "What's Needed from Hamas" written by Henry A. Kissinger..."Whatever happens, whoever governs Israel and the Palestinian Authority, the parties will be impelled by their closeness to one another to interact on a range of issues including crossing points, work permits and water usage. These de facto relationships might be shaped into some agreed international framework, in the process testing Hamas's claims of a willingness to discuss a truce. A possible outcome of such an effort could be an interim agreement of indefinite duration. Both sides would suspend some of their most intractable claims on permanent borders, on refugees and perhaps on the final status of the Arab part of Jerusalem. Israel would withdraw to lines based on the various formulas evolved since Camp David and endorsed by American presidents. It would dismantle settlements beyond the established dividing line. The Hamas-controlled government would be obliged to renounce violence. It would also need to agree to adhere to agreements previously reached by the PLO. A security system limiting military forces on the soil of the emerging Palestinian state would be established. State-sponsored propaganda to undermine the adversary would cease.
Such a long-term interim understanding would build on the precedent of the Israeli-Syrian disengagement agreement, which has regulated the deployment of forces in the Golan Heights since 1974 amid disputes on a variety of other issues and Syria's failure to recognize Israel.
***NOTE:Whether Hamas can be brought to such an outcome or any negotiated outcome depends on unity among the quartet and, crucially, on the moderate Arab world.***End NOTE It also remains to be seen whether the Israeli government emerging from the March 28 elections will have Sharon's prestige and authority to preserve Sharon's strategy, to which the acting prime minister, Ehud Olmert, has committed himself. A diplomatic framework is needed within which Israel can carry out those parts of the road map capable of unilateral implementation, and the world community can strive for an international status that ends violence while leaving open the prospect of further progress toward permanent peace."
NOTE: My belief is most important reason Israel backed UAE.
Good post alot to chew on there. I was not familar with Sharon and his views of Hamas and hoe they might be used in a end game. He was a pretty shrewd operator. THere is something def going on behind the scenes here. It seemed that alot of taditional Jewish voices here were silent when the conservatives here were talking about the UAE and Hammas. Perhaps they were told to back off by Israel. Interesting.