Hudna or No Hudna…That is the Question

There are contradicting reports about the so-called truce or "hudna" between Hamas and Israel, whether the negotiations for such a truce have been direct or indirect through a third party.

Though the two sides vehemently deny any efforts to reach a cease-fire, what might be concluded from the statements issued by Hamas and the Islamic Jihad’s spokespeople is that there is a "conditioned willingness" for accepting a package, under which Israel should end its military campaign, which fatally targeted some prominent military commanders of the Jihad, and a substantial number of Hamas fighters as well.

In return, Israel would get an end to the homemade Qassam rockets and mortar barrage on the Northern Negev communities, especially Sderot – a goal that has been persistently sought by successive Israeli governments, which have virtually used all the military means to achieve this goal.

It seems now that Israel is about to reach its aim.

The Islamic factions in the Gaza Strip announced they would never think of a hudna, while Israeli military operations are still ongoing.

The other side of these statements, however, could logically mean that if these aerial and artillery operations were to be halted, then it would be possible for a new hudna to be reached – or to revive the old one which was merely air bubbles and never amounted even to "ink on paper".

The absent and yet dominant party in these assumed contacts are the Gaza population who are placed between the Israeli hammer and the Hamas anvil – living a state of fear and anticipation. Children, women and elderly suffer the horrors of Israeli raids on the one hand, and the consequences of the Qassam barrage on the Israeli towns on the other.

These innocent citizens pay the heavy price with their blood, freedom and welfare, as the current catastrophic situation relentlessly drags on in Gaza.

Putting an end to the violence and counter-violence in Gaza should be the first priority of the international community. Gazans must be rescued from their suffering between the warring sides, from siege and collective punishments of all shapes and kinds.

The planned goals of the present Israeli campaign would never be achieved. What would emerge is a terrible human tragedy that should be avoided by opening the crossing borders to the Gaza Strip, and a hudna that would calm the borders between Gaza and Israel.

******

[Editor’s Note:  The term "hudna" is normally mis-stated in western media as "ceasefire."  The following is the backgrounder The Media Line provides on "What is a Hudna?"]

The meaning of the word hudna is “calm” or “peace” and its general meaning in Islam is abstention of the relevant parties from hostilities against each other.

According to the Encyclopedia of Islam, hudna is equivalent to “international treaty” in modern terminology. The holy book of the Muslims, the Quran, states that Muslims are obligated to observe the terms of agreement of a hudna to the end of its specified period.

The Imam, a Muslim spiritual leader, had the power to make the treaty but this power could be given to commanders who were empowered to negotiate with the enemy, providing the enemy was prepared to come to terms with Islam. Yet the Imam had the right to repudiate the agreement if he felt it contradicted the interests of Muslims, provided he gave prior notice to the enemy.

One of the better-known peace hudnas in Islamic history is Hudaybiyya, a treaty that prophet Muhammad made with the unbelievers of Mecca in 628 A.D. (C.E.). The treaty was originally meant to last for ten years but was violated after three, thus setting a precedent for subsequent treaties the prophet’s successors made with non-Muslims.

In general, there are certain characteristics of peace treaties that can be summed up as follows: the treaties are brief with no details as to their application, they are temporary agreements and in most of them the duration is specified, sometimes with an option of renewal.