Hamas has been around for a long time, they're not some Islamic list thrown together last week. They've done an effective job of building themselves up, step by step. I'm confident that they realize the need to modify their positions, in fact if not in theory, to conform to the realities of power.

dear l,

fatah deconstructed itself. many palestinians did not vote FOR hamas but AGAINST fatah. my biggest gripe about hamas in power has less to do with its impact on the "peace process" but more with the islamicization of daily life in the west bank along the gaza model. i am not a big fan of non-conformist palestinians abadoning the west bank to the islamists as well.

re: the "palestine conflict" - israel now has all the excuses it could dream of to continue complete unilateralism. the wall is the border.

--raf*

Raf Bey

Well aware of the electoral dynamics, they rather are similar to what I have seen elsewhere. The "secular" parties in their corrupt self-serving games have long undermined their own legitimacy.

The islamicisation of daily life is a price to pay. Life the secularisation before it. It will run its course, or not.

Re the wall is the border, perhaps. Perhaps not. Depends on how clever Hamas is. That does not inspire hope, but I would not close the door either.

Hamas' heavy involvement in daily life in Gaza/Palestine, coupled with their high public profile (and what looks like high esteem) in the eyes of many people there, suggests that they might be a more credible negotiating partner than Fatah for a while.

At least they won't be tied down trying to suppress Hamas violence. Though, Loun, any idea how much of a thorn in Hamas' side Islamic Jihad might persist in remaining?

Unless Hamas changes its tune, publicly or otherwise, I don't see why Israel wouldn't act unilaterally; it's not really an excuse. "Destroy Israel" may be rhetoric or literal desire, the effect is damaging enough that it doesn't matter.

However, Hamas will change; it just a matter of how fast and how consistently. If they're too slow, they might get replaced eventually and revert to their old structure. Hopefully they'll see that if they're the actual government, attacks on Israel take on a whole new (worse)meaning. There's easy ways around that of course: Hamas goes "legit" and lets a "new" terrorist organization continue with the attacks. (Or Islamic Jihad takes over that duty.) Basically, the same situation as before. Maybe they'll have the foresight and control to avoid that. Assuming they want to.

Unless Hamas changes its tune, publicly or otherwise, I don't see why Israel wouldn't act unilaterally; it's not really an excuse.

Because the gain is non-existent.

Acting unilaterely buys Israel nothing new, could very well open up an outright guerilla war.

"Destroy Israel" may be rhetoric or literal desire, the effect is damaging enough that it doesn't matter.

It is both, however damaging or not, it's hardly news. What they do is another matter. Palestinians were forced to deal with the Butcher of Shabra and Shatilla, unsavoury interlocutors is not a reason to piss one's pants.

Acting unilaterely buys Israel nothing new, could very well open up an outright guerilla war.

I agree, if Israel starts taking unilateral action right out of the gate. However, if nothing changes on the Palestinian end after some time, then there's nothing to gain from not acting unilaterally. But here's hoping that waiting works.

It is both, however damaging or not, it's hardly news.

Of course it's hardly news, and depending on the individual it means one or both. But it never becomes unimportant, regardless of how used to it or blase people are about it. Most countries at full-out war with each other can at least grant each other the right to simply exist, defeated or otherwise, as a starting point for negotiation. If terrorists stick to the declaration on principle, or to keep popular support, then the same can be said of Israel's attitude towards it. Both sides have to bend a little.

>Though, Loun, any idea how much of a thorn in Hamas' side Islamic Jihad might persist in remaining?

While the PIJ might present a problem for the Hamas government if Hamas were to actually buy into the peace process, I rather doubt Hamas will actually do so in any serious fashion. It is possible they will mouth a few homilies and talk about "truces", but in practice I suspect they would be well-pleased if PIJ continued to launch attacks for which they will have plausible deniability .

This of course only as long as PIJ can't use the issue as a springboard to weaken Hamas politically. But given the PIJ's philosophy and structure to date, I doubt that will be that much of a problem for Hamas - they have too much of a headstart.

I would hope I'm wrong, but even given the constraints of now having to act as the majority, I can't see Hamas abandoning their core ideology.